Do you ever wonder where they will go next then that 5/10% are tapped out?

Watch for it....

Here it comes...............

IT's YOU!

Healthcare should be paid for with a payroll tax like Social Security. Everyone pays only in this case there is no limit, no matter how much you make, you pay your taxes. No free ride. Everyone pays.

To each according to his need and to each according to his means.

Every dollar government gets is one less dollar that goes into creating jobs in the private sector.

I believe that under Roosevelt, the top tax rate was 90%. Forget about an economic recovery.

Who benefits more from universal health care, the individual who otherwise could not afford care or the wealthy who profit from a healthy work force?

How days of work are missed each year by the uninsured that could have been avoided with proper care?

Should be how many days of work are missed

I'm just taking all Obama's "change" in stride & am doing very well - thank you

1) re; Obama fixing Chrysler - - I went to bed one night as a Dodge pick-up owner . . .
woke up the next morning as the proud owner of an "Italian Motorcar"? (aka Fiat)

2) I've always been a hard worker - middle class, I thought . . .
now come to find that because I have a job I'm officially classified by Obama as "the RICH"?

yippeeee!!

"Healthcare should be paid for with a payroll tax like Social Security. Everyone pays only in this case there is no limit, no matter how much you make, you pay your taxes. No free ride. Everyone pays."

My sentiments exactly. Medicare for all. It would be the mose efficient use of our health care dollars and let me ask this question: Are we interested in having a health care system based on the most efficient use of our health care dollars??
If we are then Medicare is the proven model so why are we even discussing all these rediculously complicated, convoluted shams of reform????

"I went to bed one night as a Dodge pick-up owner . . .
woke up the next morning as the proud owner of an "Italian Motorcar"? (aka Fiat)"

When you could have woken up to be the owner of a product of a bankrupt corporation. No warranty. No recourse. If you ever take advantage of the warranty then you will be a hypocrit if you don't acknowledge Barack Obama's involvement.

Medicare has an annual growth rate this is about half that of a public company, meaning if public companies want to stay in business, they will have to honor the pledges on savings they have made recently, because they are going to have to compete with a public option.

The top rate under Eisenhower was 90 %. Still lots of rich people around even then, and they didn't whine like little bitches---and business did fine. The rich already had millions upon millions--they didn't really need millions upon millions more. Think Oprah needs more money? How about Tiger Woods? How about Bill Gates, think he needs millions and millions more? The rich won't be standing on street corners.

I've heard the rich pay 95% of all taxes, and us poor peons only pay 5%. Great--the rich won't miss the last 5%, and we won't have to pay any taxes. That would stimulate the economy.

) I've always been a hard worker - middle class, I thought . . .
now come to find that because I have a job I'm officially classified by Obama as "the RICH"?

yippeeee!!

#7 | Posted by markh at 2009-06-07 09:44 PM | Reply | Flag

Yes---if you make more than $4000.00 a week, you are rich. How much do you think most people make week? Do you think $4000.00 a week is average?

Think Oprah needs more money? How about Tiger Woods? How about Bill Gates, think he needs millions and millions more? The rich won't be standing on street corners.

You bring up an interesting point, Bob.

Have you ever noticed that Oprah, Tiger and Bill aren't sending the extra money they "don't need" into the government to allow them to figure out what to do with it?

And how do you suppose that you can judge what they "don't need"? Maybe it's not a matter of need. Maybe they stuff all that money into their charitable organizations because they know the government would just blow it on stupid shit like...

When you could have woken up to be the owner of a product of a bankrupt corporation. No warranty. No recourse. If you ever take advantage of the warranty then you will be a hypocrit if you don't acknowledge Barack Obama's involvement.

That's some fine fiscal policy, Lou.

Have you ever noticed that Oprah, Tiger and Bill aren't sending the extra money they "don't need" into the government to allow them to figure out what to do with it?

Why should they? I don't need an old pair of shoes I have---should I send them in to the government? Just because you don't need something, should it be sent to the government?

And how do you suppose that you can judge what they "don't need"? Maybe it's not a matter of need. Maybe they stuff all that money into their charitable organizations because they know the government would just blow it on stupid shit like...

Yeah, I'm sure Mike Tyson spent all his money on charitable orgs, along with all the rappers and golfers and basketball players and every other rich person.

Maybe cutting back on the empire building would help. Maybe cutting back on the billions in the military spending would help.

#13 | Posted by Axiom at 2009-06-08 05:25 AM | Reply | Flag

Why should they?

That's the question you should answer, Bob. It's your premise that they don't "need" the extra money so they shouldn't be so bummed about having it taxed.

I don't need an old pair of shoes I have---should I send them in to the government? Just because you don't need something, should it be sent to the government?

Uh. Bob, do you even pay attention to your posts from one to the other?

I've heard the rich pay 95% of all taxes, and us poor peons only pay 5%. Great--the rich won't miss the last 5%, and we won't have to pay any taxes. That would stimulate the economy.

Maybe cutting back on the empire building would help. Maybe cutting back on the billions in the military spending would help.

While we're at it, stop sending money to countries that don't do dick for the United States of America, pull all of our military out of the hundreds of countries their involved in and maybe we don't need to raise taxes to pay for medical care for all Americans.

yet another straw man thrown to the ground.

Yes---if you make more than $4000.00 a week, you are rich. How much do you think most people make week? Do you think $4000.00 a week is average?

#12 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

first they came for the millionaires . . . not enough $

then they came for the 1/4 millionaires . . . still not enough $

now the RICH are "anyone who has a job or seizable assets" (even dead folks)

btw, the CBO #'s say U.S. is now lagging BEHIND THEIR PROJECTIONS for where the economy would be with NO STIMULUS spending (??????????) wtf???

you will be a hypocrit if you don't acknowledge Barack Obama's involvement.

#9 | Posted by danni

I've heard the rich pay 95% of all taxes, and us poor peons only pay 5%. Great--the rich won't miss the last 5%, and we won't have to pay any taxes. That would stimulate the economy.

#11 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Somebody has been getting something for nothing his whole pathetic life.

Healthcare should be paid for with a payroll tax like Social Security. Everyone pays only in this case there is no limit, no matter how much you make, you pay your taxes. No free ride. Everyone pays.

If people were able/willing to do this then they could just pay their premiums instead.

Great--the rich won't miss the last 5%, and we won't have to pay any taxes
#11 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Or maybe you could get off your lazy ass and pay your fair share.

Medicare for all.

Medicare has a 3% administration cost.

For profit, 14%.

If people were able/willing to do this then they could just pay their premiums instead.

#18 | Posted by eberly

Yep, they could just give up frivolities like housing, light, heat and food to do so.

-Which is more efficient?

Which is exactly why private companies don't want to compete with a public option.... they'll have to cut their costs and improve their services if they want to stay in bidness.

wonder how many jobs this will DEcreate?

-wonder how many jobs this will DEcreate?

If small bidnesses, who create the most jobs, don't have to pay for employee health care, there won't be a gross loss of jobs.

Yep, they could just give up frivolities like housing, light, heat and food to do so.

#21 | Posted by 726

I was responding to the notion of "everybody pays".

My comment was a natural extention of the argument. We didn't need you to wring out the urine in your depends onto the argument.

I don't think there is anybody here who doesn't already realize that affording premiums is a problem.

Which is more efficient?

#20 | Posted by 726

apples and oranges. I'm not saying that medicare isn't more efficient but these are 2 totally separate programs.

wonder how many jobs this will DEcreate?

#23 | Posted by nanc at 2009-06-08 09:41 AM

There goes Nanc crying over all them CEO's that will be out of work.

2 totally separate programs.

Support your arguement.

I don't think there is anybody here who doesn't already realize that affording premiums is a problem.

Then what is your solution to the affordability problem?

they are 2 separate programs.

One collects premiums from the actual insureds and try to underwrite their way to a profit.

One collects premiums from everyone and provides services to a few and they cost 1,000 times a much as they pay. you can't even attempt to underwrite that group (elderly).

and they are using admin costs as a % of dollars paid out not premiums collected.

they are just different. thats all.

Then what is your solution to the affordability problem?

this solution appears to at least save 10% in admin costs.

good start. but I have doubts about applying that to everyone.

Our elderly are a separate pool of risk.

"Our elderly are a separate pool of risk."

That makes no sense except for for profit insurance companies who love the present system of Medicare for the elderly and private insurance for the rest of us. It allows them to insure the younger healthier people and earn profits while leaving the government stuck with the high risk, expensive elederly and disabled.
Combine it all into one risk pool and the cost of insuring the elderly is spread among all of us, as it is already anyway, and the increase in amount we pay to insure ourselves would be less than that premiums we pay to private insurers.

That makes no sense except for for profit insurance companies who love the present system of Medicare for the elderly and private insurance for the rest of us. It allows them to insure the younger healthier people and earn profits while leaving the government stuck with the high risk, expensive elederly and disabled.

Danni, there is absolutely no way for a private insurance company to insure the elderly for major medical. You make it sound like insurance companies should insure the elderly as well.

Combine it all into one risk pool and the cost of insuring the elderly is spread among all of us, as it is already anyway, and the increase in amount we pay to insure ourselves would be less than that premiums we pay to private insurers.

Posted by danni

How much less? The big assumption here is that the cost of admin is less so it will be less for the rest of us. Perhaps but I don't know if it will be very significant and thus a real solution.

EBERLY wrote:

they are 2 separate programs.

One collects premiums from the actual insureds and try to underwrite their way to a profit.

One collects premiums from everyone and provides services to a few and they cost 1,000 times a much as they pay. you can't even attempt to underwrite that group (elderly).

and they are using admin costs as a % of dollars paid out not premiums collected.

they are just different. thats all.
------------------------------
-

Excellent point EBERLY, also Medicare does not pay the full cost of services; example if a doctor charges 2 dollars for a service Medicare only pays a portion of that cost.

EBERLY I missed 1000 times, so you did mention that they don't pay the full cost of services.

Sorry

Do you ever wonder where they will go next then that 5/10% are tapped out?
Watch for it....
Here it comes...............
IT's YOU!

#1 | Posted by MSgt at 2009

this tax the rich is also about to hurt new york state from articles I have reas. or maybe it was new york city...anyway...there are rich people there pulling out almost every month and I believe even one of them is trump....unless he has changed his mind or it was a publicity thing.

and do you remember those good old days when you libs here trashed the bush economy even though is grew and grew and grew with only a few little slowdowns and it was all just terrible and we had to have change..WELL YOU GOT what YOU wanted anyway..

and remember all those times you smart sunsabitches could NEVER TALK ABOUT Unemployment without LECTURING us about how that figure was a lot higher because of how they counted the unemployed
ANY WONDER THAT NOW WE NEVER READ OR HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THAT NOW that the official per centage is 9.4

typical bullshit

AND OH YEAH....check out the death rate of breast cancer in the US and the rate in great britain...check it out as soon as I link it to you but the difference is tragic....but of course that doesnt matter now does it?

AND OH YEAH

gas prices up over half a dollar since DECEMBER
and its because...AS I READ HERE AT THE TIME>.that it is the devaluation of the dollar thats doing it

god damn obama

it has to be HIS FAULT because I read here all the time how it was bush's fault when THE SAME THING happened then...

WELL...what bullshit excuse now..kanrie..

another analogy perhaps?? lol

GOP senators warn Obama on health care

President Barack Obama is making a mistake on health care by insisting on a government insurance option for the middle class, influential Republicans said in a letter to the White House released Monday.

It could cost him chances for broad support across the political divide, the nine lawmakers, all members of the Senate Finance Committee, warned.

(AS IF he were going to get their help anyway)

"Obama says his plan would allow Americans to keep private coverage. But many Republicans say that once a government insurance program is created, it will eventually dominate the market, and drive private insurers out of business.

Most Democrats support creating a public plan to compete with private insurers, but even they are divided over critical details. In the House, a rift has opened between conservative and liberal Democrats over a government plan.

The one Finance Republican who did not sign the letter was Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. Snowe has been trying to find a compromise through which a government plan would be available as a last resort, if health insurance remains unaffordable for many families even after Congress overhauls the system.

"If individuals are not offered affordable choices, the use of a fallback public plan as a last resort plays a critical role," said Snowe.

About two-thirds of Americans now have private insurance coverage, the vast majority through job-based plans. But there is one government health program that enjoys widespread political support.

Medicare, created for seniors more than 40 years ago, has defied the predictions of critics that it would usher in an era of socialized medicine. Though the government controls every aspect of the plan, Medicare recipients enjoy a wide choice of doctors and hospitals.

Some Democrats want to set up a Medicare-like plan that would, for the first time, offer government coverage to middle-class workers and their families." more at link

Most Democrats support creating a public plan to compete with private insurers, but even they are divided over critical details. In the House, a rift has opened between conservative and liberal Democrats over a government plan.

Before I chastise an idea like this I would like to see hard numbers on where they play to get funding.

How much will the premiums be, benefits of the policy, choices etc....??

play = plan

Eb,
I think "play" was the better term considering the last few decades of politics.

As bad as the government is supposed to be at administering programs, one would think that companies who really believed that would be laughing at the idea of a public option instead of running scared.

As bad as the government is supposed to be at administering programs, one would think that companies who really believed that would be laughing at the idea of a public option instead of running scared.

Certainly they could be afraid of the fact that their administrative inefficiencies would be exposed however they have to disclose much of this already.

They might be concerned that there would be a problem with a level playing field.

Consider:

America Health Choices Act Consequences

1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice about it, then not do it.

2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource.

3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after this bill passes.

4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop.

5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits.

6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in states with poor demographics.

7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt insurers and/or cause rationing of services.

8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be among the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to start worrying about their jobs.

9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear the brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza Hut.

10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not to expand further.

11) It will encourage the employment of illegal aliens under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter transactions that also will not be taxed.

Excellent point EBERLY, also Medicare does not pay the full cost of services; example if a doctor charges 2 dollars for a service Medicare only pays a portion of that cost.

#34 | Posted by 90c2cab at 2009-06-08 01:02 PM

As bad as the government is supposed to be at administering programs, one would think that companies who really believed that would be laughing at the idea of a public option instead of running scared.
-------------------------

Corky the Feds are running a huge debt, if private insurance ran up debt like that they would go bankrupt.

So they are not competing a level playing field.

The Debt has nothing to do with Medicare having one half the annual cost growth percentage of private insurers.

The Debt has nothing to do with Medicare having one half the annual cost growth percentage of private insurers.

Are you saying that private insurance companies, if they wanted to, could match the lower cost growth?

And what would the poor insurance companies do if they didn't have "Harry and Louise and Ray" to pimp for them?

Are you saying that private insurance companies, if they wanted to, could match the lower cost growth?

#49 | Posted by eberly

They will have to if they want to compete. They had a big show of a meeting last month with Obama where they promised to reduce their costs.

A public health option, like the one that all the Senators that are against this proposal already have for themselves, is a guarantor that they do.

I'm sure any industry this large has it's problems that need fixing but are unwilling.

The auto industry is a great example.

What I am getting at is that private insurers have marketing people. People who have to sell their benefits and know the competition's benefits and be able to work directly with doctors and groups to negotiate best prices for themselves as a competitive edge against other carriers. This is a cost.

I also see carriers write business at a loss to maintain market share and come back strong in other years. They have to tolerate very difficult cycles and it can be very cutthroat at times. this is a cost.

There is good and bad in this but I am having troube believing the govt is going to throw their hat in this arena and expect to keep their admin costs that much lower than everybody else.

Every time a Government program runs out of money they just get money from the TaxPayers, case in point the Post Office does all the time. Private Insures won't be able to do that; they have to operate in the black.

Just print more money or borrow it from China.

murphy - just like if you have checks in the box, you must have money in the bank! our govs writing checks the rest of u.s. cannot cash.

*** Your Potus Seeks Tax on Wealthy to Pay for Health Care ***

.....good......

#56 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-06-09 09:40 AM | Reply | Flag: POOR

It is going to put a huge strain on small businesses...especially start ups.

Jobs lost and jobs not created.

I don't have a problem with the robinhood paradigm.