Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

    [/QUOTE]

    "I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured."

    Blindingly stupid.  Read Samuelson on this, a LIBERAL economist.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-the-folly-of-obamacare/2012/06/17/gJQAf5o1jV_story.html?hpid=z6

     

    "somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction."

    The forking up, as you call it, is largely in two areas:  The impact of having 32% of citizens on some form of government care already, all of it "forked up" as you say, is not a reason to double down and have the government control MORE of the health care system.  If anything, the government should realize it can't manage people's health care, and disinvest itself of health care to the largest extent possible.

    The second is improved medical procedures which are, well, expensive.  Now, this type of care is gettign more expensive, as Obama has put a huge tax burden on the GROSS income of medical device manufacturers, whihc means the users of these medical devices wil  pay more.

    The problem with the left is noth their "heart" on this issue, that is commendable.  the problem is the left has no clue on how to acheive their heart issue, and have pushed distributing cost through the government, removing risk from the equation (i.e. everyone covered for everything), and "fairnesss" as the solution to the problem.  Funny as the arbiter of "fairness", government, has gotten more involved things have gotten worse.  now, for the grand finale, total government control, that ought to work out just fine.

    " I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more."

    right.  Because taking from the makers and giving to the takers stops with the 1%.  $50 Billion?  you think it is stopping there?  Heck, even Obama talked about how the costs were back loaded, i.e. you will pay disproportionately more in out years.  So, your idea that 4% growth is some sort of miracle, ignoring that you are paying for the increase elsewhere, is just BS.  Obama shifted the cost to out years, so you will pay even more as you get older.

    "Where are you getting your simple math figures? Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  "

    Well, the CBO, and other places.  Not depending on one list. 

    those who look at this indicate that the costs are being way underestimated, and the cost will in a few short years top ONE TRILLION per year.  but, I guess you will argue that this is the ON program that actually doesn't rise exponentially in cost.  BTW:  An article on the doubling of the CBO estimate to %1.7 Trillion.  Expect that number to double each year if Obamacare follows most government programs.  You blind faith that somehow this program will be the one that works is stunnign.  Blind faith in liberal solutions, I imagine.

    OK.  Enough of this.  Answer the question you, and no one else on the left seems to be able to answer:

    Where do all the taxes, regardless of the amount, raised by Obamacare go?  Come on.  despite your liberal dribble about best practicies this and that, where do all the taxes raised by Obamacare go?

    I you pay a premium, and an assortment of taxes, then your premium percentage is not reflectingthe true cost of your healthcare.  Simple, really.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

    [/QUOTE]

    "I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured."

    Blindingly stupid.  Read Samuelson on this, a LIBERAL economist.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-the-folly-of-obamacare/2012/06/17/gJQAf5o1jV_story.html?hpid=z6

     

    "somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction."

    The forking up, as you call it, is largely in two areas:  The impact of having 32% of citizens on some form of government care already, all of it "forked up" as you say, is not a reason to double down and have the government control MORE of the health care system.  If anything, the government should realize it can't manage people's health care, and disinvest itself of health care to the largest extent possible.

    The second is improved medical procedures which are, well, expensive.  Now, this type of care is gettign more expensive, as Obama has put a huge tax burden on the GROSS income of medical device manufacturers, whihc means the users of these medical devices wil  pay more.

    The problem with the left is noth their "heart" on this issue, that is commendable.  the problem is the left has no clue on how to acheive their heart issue, and have pushed distributing cost through the government, removing risk from the equation (i.e. everyone covered for everything), and "fairnesss" as the solution to the problem.  Funny as the arbiter of "fairness", government, has gotten more involved things have gotten worse.  now, for the grand finale, total government control, that ought to work out just fine.

    " I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more."

    right.  Because taking from the makers and giving to the takers stops with the 1%.  $50 Billion?  you think it is stopping there?  Heck, even Obama talked about how the costs were back loaded, i.e. you will pay disproportionately more in out years.  So, your idea that 4% growth is some sort of miracle, ignoring that you are paying for the increase elsewhere, is just BS.  Obama shifted the cost to out years, so you will pay even more as you get older.

    "Where are you getting your simple math figures? Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  "

    Well, the CBO, and other places.  Not depending on one list. 

    those who look at this indicate that the costs are being way underestimated, and the cost will in a few short years top ONE TRILLION per year.  but, I guess you will argue that this is the ON program that actually doesn't rise exponentially in cost.  BTW:  An article on the doubling of the CBO estimate to %1.7 Trillion.  Expect that number to double each year if Obamacare follows most government programs.  You blind faith that somehow this program will be the one that works is stunnign.  Blind faith in liberal solutions, I imagine.

    OK.  Enough of this.  Answer the question you, and no one else on the left seems to be able to answer:

    Where do all the taxes, regardless of the amount, raised by Obamacare go?  Come on.  despite your liberal dribble about best practicies this and that, where do all the taxes raised by Obamacare go?

    I you pay a premium, and an assortment of taxes, then your premium percentage is not reflectingthe true cost of your healthcare.  Simple, really.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't I answer your question?  Taxes in Obamacare are going toward Medicare expansion for the states, building insurance exchanges, and subsidizing families making less than 4x the poverty line.  If that's a makers vs takers argument, BTW, then there about 75% of the US population are takers.  When it comes to health care, the real makers are private businesses, who can't afford to keep paying rising health care costs, Obamacare or not.  Your nightmare scenario of your company dropping coverage was a lot more likely without Obamacare than it is now.

    I read Samuelson's article - here's what he says re: cost-cutting.

    As for the ACA’s cost-control provisions, even the government’s own actuaries don’t believe they will do much. By their latest projection, total health spending — government and private — rises from 17.9 percent of the economy (gross domestic product) in 2010 to 19.6 percent in 2021. In 1980, health care was 9 percent of GDP.

    So, according to Samuelson, Obamacare will cut the rate of health care cost increases in half.  Without Obamacare, health care costs would be at 21.3 percent of GDP in 2021.  1.7 percent of GDP in 2016 is about $300 billion. or $3 trillion over ten years, or six times the amount of taxes your last link was complaining about.

    We're talking about trying to stop the horrors that are occurring right now, right under our noses, in increased health care costs, and you're protesting because of what you might think will the government will take from you down the road.  It has nothing to do with faith - the articles you are trying to use to prove your point are making mine - if Obamacare does nothing but cut the rate of premium growth in half, we're far, far better off than we would be without it. 

    And if you think your premiums are indicative of the real cost of your service now, you're out of your mind.  Some if it is as you say - because of federal government money.  But there are also state and local contracts that are effectively working with health care providers as they would a private business, but without monopoly protections a consumer would otherwise enjoy.  Check with your town or county to see how much paramedic service contracts have increased - in my county, a five minute ambulance trip has increased 500% since 2002.  Oh, and by the way - if you are not conscious, and somebody calls an ambulance for you, you are stuck with the bill, even though you have not made a decision to call the ambulance - the free market works great in regards to health care, doesn't it?

    But I digress - even more of the expense has to do with the cost of processing insurance claims, and the bureaucracy of getting a claim paid - doctors and hospitals have so much overhead fighting insurance claims, they have to grossly over-inflate every cost, knowing a) they have to pay the administrative costs to work with the various companies and b) they will likely receive reduced compensation when the bills are eventually paid.

    So please, please tell me again about how horrible the taxes will be in the "out years", because from where I stand, we've been hip deep in the out years for more than a decade, and finally somebody has been willing to do something about it.  Not enough, obviously, but something, which is a heck of a lot better than standing on a soap box b1tching about taxes you don't even have to pay.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

    [/QUOTE]

    "I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured."

    Blindingly stupid.  Read Samuelson on this, a LIBERAL economist.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-the-folly-of-obamacare/2012/06/17/gJQAf5o1jV_story.html?hpid=z6

     

    "somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction."

    The forking up, as you call it, is largely in two areas:  The impact of having 32% of citizens on some form of government care already, all of it "forked up" as you say, is not a reason to double down and have the government control MORE of the health care system.  If anything, the government should realize it can't manage people's health care, and disinvest itself of health care to the largest extent possible.

    The second is improved medical procedures which are, well, expensive.  Now, this type of care is gettign more expensive, as Obama has put a huge tax burden on the GROSS income of medical device manufacturers, whihc means the users of these medical devices wil  pay more.

    The problem with the left is noth their "heart" on this issue, that is commendable.  the problem is the left has no clue on how to acheive their heart issue, and have pushed distributing cost through the government, removing risk from the equation (i.e. everyone covered for everything), and "fairnesss" as the solution to the problem.  Funny as the arbiter of "fairness", government, has gotten more involved things have gotten worse.  now, for the grand finale, total government control, that ought to work out just fine.

    " I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more."

    right.  Because taking from the makers and giving to the takers stops with the 1%.  $50 Billion?  you think it is stopping there?  Heck, even Obama talked about how the costs were back loaded, i.e. you will pay disproportionately more in out years.  So, your idea that 4% growth is some sort of miracle, ignoring that you are paying for the increase elsewhere, is just BS.  Obama shifted the cost to out years, so you will pay even more as you get older.

    "Where are you getting your simple math figures? Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  "

    Well, the CBO, and other places.  Not depending on one list. 

    those who look at this indicate that the costs are being way underestimated, and the cost will in a few short years top ONE TRILLION per year.  but, I guess you will argue that this is the ON program that actually doesn't rise exponentially in cost.  BTW:  An article on the doubling of the CBO estimate to %1.7 Trillion.  Expect that number to double each year if Obamacare follows most government programs.  You blind faith that somehow this program will be the one that works is stunnign.  Blind faith in liberal solutions, I imagine.

    OK.  Enough of this.  Answer the question you, and no one else on the left seems to be able to answer:

    Where do all the taxes, regardless of the amount, raised by Obamacare go?  Come on.  despite your liberal dribble about best practicies this and that, where do all the taxes raised by Obamacare go?

    I you pay a premium, and an assortment of taxes, then your premium percentage is not reflectingthe true cost of your healthcare.  Simple, really.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't I answer your question?  Taxes in Obamacare are going toward Medicare expansion for the states, building insurance exchanges, and subsidizing families making less than 4x the poverty line.  If that's a makers vs takers argument, BTW, then there about 75% of the US population are takers.  When it comes to health care, the real makers are private businesses, who can't afford to keep paying rising health care costs, Obamacare or not.  Your nightmare scenario of your company dropping coverage was a lot more likely without Obamacare than it is now.

    I read Samuelson's article - here's what he says re: cost-cutting.

    As for the ACA’s cost-control provisions, even the government’s own actuaries don’t believe they will do much. By their latest projection, total health spending — government and private — rises from 17.9 percent of the economy (gross domestic product) in 2010 to 19.6 percent in 2021. In 1980, health care was 9 percent of GDP.

    So, according to Samuelson, Obamacare will cut the rate of health care cost increases in half.  Without Obamacare, health care costs would be at 21.3 percent of GDP in 2021.  1.7 percent of GDP in 2016 is about $300 billion. or $3 trillion over ten years, or six times the amount of taxes your last link was complaining about.

    We're talking about trying to stop the horrors that are occurring right now, right under our noses, in increased health care costs, and you're protesting because of what you might think will the government will take from you down the road.  It has nothing to do with faith - the articles you are trying to use to prove your point are making mine - if Obamacare does nothing but cut the rate of premium growth in half, we're far, far better off than we would be without it. 

    And if you think your premiums are indicative of the real cost of your service now, you're out of your mind.  Some if it is as you say - because of federal government money.  But there are also state and local contracts that are effectively working with health care providers as they would a private business, but without monopoly protections a consumer would otherwise enjoy.  Check with your town or county to see how much paramedic service contracts have increased - in my county, a five minute ambulance trip has increased 500% since 2002.  Oh, and by the way - if you are not conscious, and somebody calls an ambulance for you, you are stuck with the bill, even though you have not made a decision to call the ambulance - the free market works great in regards to health care, doesn't it?

    But I digress - even more of the expense has to do with the cost of processing insurance claims, and the bureaucracy of getting a claim paid - doctors and hospitals have so much overhead fighting insurance claims, they have to grossly over-inflate every cost, knowing a) they have to pay the administrative costs to work with the various companies and b) they will likely receive reduced compensation when the bills are eventually paid.

    So please, please tell me again about how horrible the taxes will be in the "out years", because from where I stand, we've been hip deep in the out years for more than a decade, and finally somebody has been willing to do something about it.  Not enough, obviously, but something, which is a heck of a lot better than standing on a soap box b1tching about taxes you don't even have to pay.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, don't beleive me.  Who cares.  You are whistling past the "bending the cost curve" graveyard.

     

    Read the WSJ editorial on this from this morning.

     

    Who am I going to beleive?  an ideolouge like you, or the WSJ??

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

    [/QUOTE]

    "I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured."

    Blindingly stupid.  Read Samuelson on this, a LIBERAL economist.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-the-folly-of-obamacare/2012/06/17/gJQAf5o1jV_story.html?hpid=z6

     

    "somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction."

    The forking up, as you call it, is largely in two areas:  The impact of having 32% of citizens on some form of government care already, all of it "forked up" as you say, is not a reason to double down and have the government control MORE of the health care system.  If anything, the government should realize it can't manage people's health care, and disinvest itself of health care to the largest extent possible.

    The second is improved medical procedures which are, well, expensive.  Now, this type of care is gettign more expensive, as Obama has put a huge tax burden on the GROSS income of medical device manufacturers, whihc means the users of these medical devices wil  pay more.

    The problem with the left is noth their "heart" on this issue, that is commendable.  the problem is the left has no clue on how to acheive their heart issue, and have pushed distributing cost through the government, removing risk from the equation (i.e. everyone covered for everything), and "fairnesss" as the solution to the problem.  Funny as the arbiter of "fairness", government, has gotten more involved things have gotten worse.  now, for the grand finale, total government control, that ought to work out just fine.

    " I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more."

    right.  Because taking from the makers and giving to the takers stops with the 1%.  $50 Billion?  you think it is stopping there?  Heck, even Obama talked about how the costs were back loaded, i.e. you will pay disproportionately more in out years.  So, your idea that 4% growth is some sort of miracle, ignoring that you are paying for the increase elsewhere, is just BS.  Obama shifted the cost to out years, so you will pay even more as you get older.

    "Where are you getting your simple math figures? Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  "

    Well, the CBO, and other places.  Not depending on one list. 

    those who look at this indicate that the costs are being way underestimated, and the cost will in a few short years top ONE TRILLION per year.  but, I guess you will argue that this is the ON program that actually doesn't rise exponentially in cost.  BTW:  An article on the doubling of the CBO estimate to %1.7 Trillion.  Expect that number to double each year if Obamacare follows most government programs.  You blind faith that somehow this program will be the one that works is stunnign.  Blind faith in liberal solutions, I imagine.

    OK.  Enough of this.  Answer the question you, and no one else on the left seems to be able to answer:

    Where do all the taxes, regardless of the amount, raised by Obamacare go?  Come on.  despite your liberal dribble about best practicies this and that, where do all the taxes raised by Obamacare go?

    I you pay a premium, and an assortment of taxes, then your premium percentage is not reflectingthe true cost of your healthcare.  Simple, really.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't I answer your question?  Taxes in Obamacare are going toward Medicare expansion for the states, building insurance exchanges, and subsidizing families making less than 4x the poverty line.  If that's a makers vs takers argument, BTW, then there about 75% of the US population are takers.  When it comes to health care, the real makers are private businesses, who can't afford to keep paying rising health care costs, Obamacare or not.  Your nightmare scenario of your company dropping coverage was a lot more likely without Obamacare than it is now.

    I read Samuelson's article - here's what he says re: cost-cutting.

    As for the ACA’s cost-control provisions, even the government’s own actuaries don’t believe they will do much. By their latest projection, total health spending — government and private — rises from 17.9 percent of the economy (gross domestic product) in 2010 to 19.6 percent in 2021. In 1980, health care was 9 percent of GDP.

    So, according to Samuelson, Obamacare will cut the rate of health care cost increases in half.  Without Obamacare, health care costs would be at 21.3 percent of GDP in 2021.  1.7 percent of GDP in 2016 is about $300 billion. or $3 trillion over ten years, or six times the amount of taxes your last link was complaining about.

    We're talking about trying to stop the horrors that are occurring right now, right under our noses, in increased health care costs, and you're protesting because of what you might think will the government will take from you down the road.  It has nothing to do with faith - the articles you are trying to use to prove your point are making mine - if Obamacare does nothing but cut the rate of premium growth in half, we're far, far better off than we would be without it. 

    And if you think your premiums are indicative of the real cost of your service now, you're out of your mind.  Some if it is as you say - because of federal government money.  But there are also state and local contracts that are effectively working with health care providers as they would a private business, but without monopoly protections a consumer would otherwise enjoy.  Check with your town or county to see how much paramedic service contracts have increased - in my county, a five minute ambulance trip has increased 500% since 2002.  Oh, and by the way - if you are not conscious, and somebody calls an ambulance for you, you are stuck with the bill, even though you have not made a decision to call the ambulance - the free market works great in regards to health care, doesn't it?

    But I digress - even more of the expense has to do with the cost of processing insurance claims, and the bureaucracy of getting a claim paid - doctors and hospitals have so much overhead fighting insurance claims, they have to grossly over-inflate every cost, knowing a) they have to pay the administrative costs to work with the various companies and b) they will likely receive reduced compensation when the bills are eventually paid.

    So please, please tell me again about how horrible the taxes will be in the "out years", because from where I stand, we've been hip deep in the out years for more than a decade, and finally somebody has been willing to do something about it.  Not enough, obviously, but something, which is a heck of a lot better than standing on a soap box b1tching about taxes you don't even have to pay.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, don't beleive me.  Who cares.  You are whistling past the "bending the cost curve" graveyard.

     

    Read the WSJ editorial on this from this morning.

     

    Who am I going to beleive?  an ideolouge like you, or the WSJ??

    [/QUOTE]

    I'll see your editorial in the WSJ (by two people I've never heard of) and raise you the opinions of a nobel prize-winning economist, the CBO & the Heritage Foundation.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Slowest three-year health care spending growth in 52 years

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    These taxes don't effect premiums?  Then where is the money going?


    Here are a $1 trillion of them:

    http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

    In summary:

    Medical device tax

    Flex account tax

    Surtax on investment income

    Medicare payroll tax hike

    So, where is this TRILLION going?  Do you expect me to beleive this isn't going to pay for healthcare?  If not, then WHY THE HECK ARE WE PAYING IT????

    You liberals are in deep denial.  Obamacare is making healthcare MORE expensive for all, well, except those that don't pay.  Hard to top paying $0.

    [/QUOTE]

    First, the medical device excise tax is on receipts in excess of $5M and mainly affects devices used in acute care settings.  There are several exemptions.

    While I understand that some larger medical device companies will take a hit, the influx of new enrollees into the overall insurance risk pool will mean millions of new healthcare consumers.

    There is no "flex account tax"; the maximum allowance was simply standardized and capped at $2,500.  A married couple can still contribute $2,500 each for a total of $5,000, if they choose.  Before this, employers could set the cap however they wanted.  Also now, the cap will be pegged to inflation.  (Do you contribute the max to your FSA?  Really?!?  How sick are you?)

    The income investment surtax has nothing to do with healthcare premiums, and the payroll tax cut was always intended to be temporary.

     

    I understand you don't like taxes, but you still haven't successfully argued how any of this translates into higher premiums.  Again, the rise in health care costs has slowed relative to the previous decade, in part due to increased efficiencies mandated by the ACA.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Not enough time to argue all your points, which sail right past my question:

    All the taxes collected i.e. the Obamacare taxes:  Where does the money go? 

    The money goes somewhere.  Tell me where, if it isn't going into subsidizing premiums.

     

    Last chance to answer this simple question you and people on the left don't want to answer.

    Look, I know I'm playing chess and you can only play checkers, but let me try this on you:

    You pay your premium. you sell your house, you take a capital gain on a stock sale, you buy a medical device, YOU HAVE PAID MORE FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

    Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the additional cost is not there.

    Oh, BTW.  Wait until your company cans health coverage, and realize you are paying with post tax dollars in these benevolent exchanges, unless you earn under $88K a year as a family.

    [/QUOTE]

    And I asked you which taxes you're talking about.  The examples you gave don't amount to jack.

    Ask a vague question, and you'll get a vague answer.

    I still maintain you don't know a damm thing of how premiums are calculated.  And you still can't explain how healthcare costs are gleaned from the sale of a home.

    If you're "playing chess", there must be only 4 squares, because you're lost.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    3.8% on capital gains doesn't amount to jack? What planet are you on? Obamacare is expected to cost over a trillion dollars a year.  Other than the obvious question of where the money is going to come from, the real question is where is it going?

     

    I see you can't answer it either, or you won't.

     

    just admit I'm right so we all can move along.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean 3.8% on investment income above $200,000.  Seriously - are you in this category?  If Obamacare brings down premiums, even if you're paying the tax, you're coming out ahead, rather than paying the 10-15% annual increase that had been status quo. 

    Why aren't you righties worked up about insurance premiums?  They increase every year, and they're effectively a life tax.  But you'd rather pay a thousand dollars in premiums than one dollar in taxes. If we had a Norquist pledge to keep premiums down, we'd all be better off.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Keep sputtering away at the talking points. If Obama says it's lowering cost, who are you going to beleive?  Him, or the tax man?

    Obama has hidden the increase in taxation.  Out of your pocket.  Here's the full list, not just the one you cherry picked:

    http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes

    Yet you still hammer away at the old talking points, that Obamacare lowers premiums, and IT HASN'T.  And, it won't.  It can't it is simple math.  $200 billion in taxes this year alone, with the rate and burden rising to about a trillion per year by 2016.  and those are the CONSERVATIVE estimates.

     

    So, I give you the same challenge:  If Obamacare is lowering costs, where does the trillion dollars in taxes go?  No one on the left seems to know the answer.  Maybe you do.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured.  I think a global best-practices can help reduce costs, and I think that the regulations capping what insurance companies can spend on marketing will help.  How much this will all help, I don't know, but I know that a family of four spends nearly 20K on health insurance costs, and that number was going up 10 - 15 percent every year.  It was unsustainable, so if a President finally has the balls to tackle this issue, I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more.

    Where are you getting your simple math figures?  Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  

    But I don't have any problem telling you I think the biggest costs in Obamacare are the medicare expansion and the subsidies to families making less than four times the poverty line.  Are you going to look at my statement and declare "AHA! Socialism!"?  Because I don't really care what you call it - somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction.  Hospital pillows aren't stuffed with dodo feathers, and antibiotics aren't made of crushed rhino horn - we shouldn't be taking out second mortgage for an overnight stay in a hospital.  Giving birh to a child should not cost an American woman $10 - $15K.  $25K with a c-section.

    Poor people didn't fork up the medical system.  Middle-income americans didn't do it.  Insurance companies, politicians and lobbyists did - so until or unless things come back to earth, I'm just fine with a little trickle-down human decency.

    [/QUOTE]

    "I think it makes sense that premiums will drop if insurance companies suddenly get 50 million new customers, and no longer have to factor in costs of care for the uninsured."

    Blindingly stupid.  Read Samuelson on this, a LIBERAL economist.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-the-folly-of-obamacare/2012/06/17/gJQAf5o1jV_story.html?hpid=z6

     

    "somehow we've forked up the health care industry to the point where costs are in the realm of science fiction."

    The forking up, as you call it, is largely in two areas:  The impact of having 32% of citizens on some form of government care already, all of it "forked up" as you say, is not a reason to double down and have the government control MORE of the health care system.  If anything, the government should realize it can't manage people's health care, and disinvest itself of health care to the largest extent possible.

    The second is improved medical procedures which are, well, expensive.  Now, this type of care is gettign more expensive, as Obama has put a huge tax burden on the GROSS income of medical device manufacturers, whihc means the users of these medical devices wil  pay more.

    The problem with the left is noth their "heart" on this issue, that is commendable.  the problem is the left has no clue on how to acheive their heart issue, and have pushed distributing cost through the government, removing risk from the equation (i.e. everyone covered for everything), and "fairnesss" as the solution to the problem.  Funny as the arbiter of "fairness", government, has gotten more involved things have gotten worse.  now, for the grand finale, total government control, that ought to work out just fine.

    " I'm not going to squabble over $50 billion / year in taxes that hit insurance companies and people making a quarter million dollars a year or more."

    right.  Because taking from the makers and giving to the takers stops with the 1%.  $50 Billion?  you think it is stopping there?  Heck, even Obama talked about how the costs were back loaded, i.e. you will pay disproportionately more in out years.  So, your idea that 4% growth is some sort of miracle, ignoring that you are paying for the increase elsewhere, is just BS.  Obama shifted the cost to out years, so you will pay even more as you get older.

    "Where are you getting your simple math figures? Your full list - the very link you posted - calculates $500 billion in taxes OVER TEN YEARS.  "

    Well, the CBO, and other places.  Not depending on one list. 

    those who look at this indicate that the costs are being way underestimated, and the cost will in a few short years top ONE TRILLION per year.  but, I guess you will argue that this is the ON program that actually doesn't rise exponentially in cost.  BTW:  An article on the doubling of the CBO estimate to %1.7 Trillion.  Expect that number to double each year if Obamacare follows most government programs.  You blind faith that somehow this program will be the one that works is stunnign.  Blind faith in liberal solutions, I imagine.

    OK.  Enough of this.  Answer the question you, and no one else on the left seems to be able to answer:

    Where do all the taxes, regardless of the amount, raised by Obamacare go?  Come on.  despite your liberal dribble about best practicies this and that, where do all the taxes raised by Obamacare go?

    I you pay a premium, and an assortment of taxes, then your premium percentage is not reflectingthe true cost of your healthcare.  Simple, really.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't I answer your question?  Taxes in Obamacare are going toward Medicare expansion for the states, building insurance exchanges, and subsidizing families making less than 4x the poverty line.  If that's a makers vs takers argument, BTW, then there about 75% of the US population are takers.  When it comes to health care, the real makers are private businesses, who can't afford to keep paying rising health care costs, Obamacare or not.  Your nightmare scenario of your company dropping coverage was a lot more likely without Obamacare than it is now.

    I read Samuelson's article - here's what he says re: cost-cutting.

    As for the ACA’s cost-control provisions, even the government’s own actuaries don’t believe they will do much. By their latest projection, total health spending — government and private — rises from 17.9 percent of the economy (gross domestic product) in 2010 to 19.6 percent in 2021. In 1980, health care was 9 percent of GDP.

    So, according to Samuelson, Obamacare will cut the rate of health care cost increases in half.  Without Obamacare, health care costs would be at 21.3 percent of GDP in 2021.  1.7 percent of GDP in 2016 is about $300 billion. or $3 trillion over ten years, or six times the amount of taxes your last link was complaining about.

    We're talking about trying to stop the horrors that are occurring right now, right under our noses, in increased health care costs, and you're protesting because of what you might think will the government will take from you down the road.  It has nothing to do with faith - the articles you are trying to use to prove your point are making mine - if Obamacare does nothing but cut the rate of premium growth in half, we're far, far better off than we would be without it. 

    And if you think your premiums are indicative of the real cost of your service now, you're out of your mind.  Some if it is as you say - because of federal government money.  But there are also state and local contracts that are effectively working with health care providers as they would a private business, but without monopoly protections a consumer would otherwise enjoy.  Check with your town or county to see how much paramedic service contracts have increased - in my county, a five minute ambulance trip has increased 500% since 2002.  Oh, and by the way - if you are not conscious, and somebody calls an ambulance for you, you are stuck with the bill, even though you have not made a decision to call the ambulance - the free market works great in regards to health care, doesn't it?

    But I digress - even more of the expense has to do with the cost of processing insurance claims, and the bureaucracy of getting a claim paid - doctors and hospitals have so much overhead fighting insurance claims, they have to grossly over-inflate every cost, knowing a) they have to pay the administrative costs to work with the various companies and b) they will likely receive reduced compensation when the bills are eventually paid.

    So please, please tell me again about how horrible the taxes will be in the "out years", because from where I stand, we've been hip deep in the out years for more than a decade, and finally somebody has been willing to do something about it.  Not enough, obviously, but something, which is a heck of a lot better than standing on a soap box b1tching about taxes you don't even have to pay.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, don't beleive me.  Who cares.  You are whistling past the "bending the cost curve" graveyard.

     

    Read the WSJ editorial on this from this morning.

     

    Who am I going to beleive?  an ideolouge like you, or the WSJ??

    [/QUOTE]

    I'll see your editorial in the WSJ (by two people I've never heard of) and raise you the opinions of a nobel prize-winning economist, the CBO & the Heritage Foundation.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Why do you blindly beleive the government, having already broken the healht care system with past incursions (30% on government health care before Obama care), that, given its negative effect over the past 30-40 years, that the solution is total control.

    Or the absolute highest level abstract:  Government fails at nearly everything it does, yet you blindly believe governemnt will be successful at this?

     

Share