1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Is Your Insurance Going Up Because of ObamaCare?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by dscurlock, Nov 14, 2013.

  1. #1
    Just found out today that my health insurance is going up by $200/mo come jan; I guess it is not enough for the govt to rape hard working americans; when the tax cuts were eliminated last year, my taxes went up by $200/mo, and what does that mean? it means i took home $200/mo less, now a year later my health ins will go up $200/mo, so within just one year, my loss of income between tax increase and insurance hikes will be $400/mo out of my check. I have two home steads to pay for, and $400 income loss per month within one year is a lot; sorry to say there is no damn way I am taking another financial hit as a result of the unaffordable care act, because If I have to axe my health insurance, then I will, and it looks like I am going that direction of having no insurance; You only can take so much of any financial burden, until something has to get cut...

    According to Obama, we would see more in our paychecks...
    all I have ever seen from Obama is less, and less....

    Thanks Obama!

    Obama is the biggest failed president of mankind;
    Obama is nothing more then a liar and failure.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2013
    dscurlock, Nov 14, 2013 IP
  2. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #2
    The only policy available to my family on the exchange is 700$ a month more than the policy that just got cancelled, thanks to the ACA. Kids used to be 75$/month per, now over 200. Why the hell would a 6 year old cost $210 a month to insure?

    We too are seriously considering going without insurance as of Jan 1. We were paying $6600/year, the exchange would have us $12,600/year, so rather than eat a 6k increase, we can save $6600 and surf the preexisting condition clause if something changes. One would have to have a taxable 1.2 million/year income to make the penalty for going uninsured look threatening. I suspect most people in this situation are thinking the exact same thing.

    Right now, any self employed self insured family under 55 is probably experiencing the same thing, and the younger you are, the bigger the sticker shock. As of 2015 when the employer mandate kicks in, the Obama administration's own numbers predict 93 million people who are currently insured through their employers will share our pain.

    The ACA was supposed to get 35 million more people health insurance. It is looking more like it will add 35 million people to the ranks of the uninsured.
     
    Obamanation, Nov 15, 2013 IP
  3. dscurlock

    dscurlock Prominent Member

    Messages:
    4,564
    Likes Received:
    260
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #3
    From what I see on CNN, ObamaCare is in turmoil; I think at some point that obamacare can
    not stand by itself, and one day obamacare will just fall apart. Obama has lied from day 1 regardless
    if he knew about the facts or not. He said people could keep their plans, and obviously millions are
    being dropped from their plans; I think obama also said that people that had insurance would not
    see premium hikes because it would be paid for by those that do not have insurance, again, false..

    ObamaCare is nothing more then one giant tax increase - They want to force those that do not have
    insurance to jump on Obama Care (and the system would be paid for) then they turn around and
    jump up rates for those that already have good/decent insurance; in essence, the govt is taking
    food off my table so they can give it to the poor, or those that do not want to work hard in life......
    This is called a transfer of wealth, because the govt feels if you have enough to take care of
    yourself, and family, then you must have enough to take care of other people also.

    I can understand paying simple taxes because we need roads, schools, etc...but to increase
    my taxes to help take care of other people should be unconstitutional, and I remember times
    when I have been out of work, and the govt never gave me welfare, or anything....

    and this is how i feel:

    ObamaCare = New/Higher Taxes
    ObamaCare = Dictator Insurance Plan
    ObamaCare = Unconstitutional
    ObamaCare = Ponzi Scheme

    This is my old plan:
    $1000 Deductible

    new plan would be:
    $2500 deductible

    So the deductible will go up 2.5 times
    and why does that not make me feel better?
    If i am not taxed upfront then I am taxed on the
    backend. I realize if I run into a $50k hosp bill, but its
    not like i have $2,500 in the bank at any give time. I would
    have to make monthly payments like I do with all other
    bills, and to pay off $2,500 co-pay, it could take 2-3 years.....

    I feel like just dropping it all, and join the millions that have no insurance,
    at least in the short term I could save $300-400/mo, not sure what you
    could do with $300/400/mo but for me could be groceries for a month.

    There will come a day that it will not matter, because deductibles will be so
    high that it will not be a second thought to even bother with insurance.
    If the co-pay goes up another 2.5x then it would be $5,000 and for an
    avg family it could take years to pay back assuming no job less or other disasters.

    I have been in the hosp 1 time in the last 20 years, and it just so happens
    it was recently. My co-pay was $5000; One year later, I still owe $3k to the hosp.
    So if i accept the 2014 plan, and i happen to go to the hospital of the same magnitude, then my co-pay could easily be $10k+. a person could just as likely
    to go bankrupt on a high co-pay compared to having no insurance and a $50,000 bill from the hospital. I guess it just doesnt matter to the government.

    I think the govt could easily pay for ObamaCare if they downsize the
    government. Everything the govt does has to be huge, and lots of
    wasteful spending. I think if the govt would cut a lot of crap out that
    we really dont need, and never asked for, then obamacare would be
    paid for without having to taxes for everyone for their failures.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2013
    dscurlock, Nov 15, 2013 IP
  4. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #4
    Americans have themselves to blame. You are so scared of "socialism" and "communism" and how they are going to take your tax money and give it to the poor that you are screwed by every insurance company and con man that comes along. Universal health care is in all the civilized countries for decades and without so much fuss or problems but the Americans had to take a good idea and make it into money making machine which f*cks average American. You don´t even need to come to Europe to see how stupid your system is because most Americans don´t have passports and think the world ends on the boundary of their state but at least look at Canada that you don´t even need a passport to go to.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada
     
    gworld, Nov 15, 2013 IP
    PhiladelphiaIM likes this.
  5. dscurlock

    dscurlock Prominent Member

    Messages:
    4,564
    Likes Received:
    260
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #5
    You are 1000% right...

    The us govt is always trying to re-invent something that is already a success in other counties....
    They are always trying to think ahead and see how they can capture more money while screwing
    up whatever project they are working on; rather then the us govt cloning a successful plan from
    other countries; they try to re-invent a wheel by using a block, then charge you to roll the block....

    up in washington, it is only about greed and power....
    they are greedy, and they want to stay in power...

    if the rest of the world went up in flames, it would not
    matter one bit, they would just charge more for water....

    If you cant fire one damn crack major in Canada, then
    how will anyone possibly replace all of the diseased US politicians?

    I guess greed and power is everywhere, after all, I have never had a millionaire
    call me up and say hey, would you like to have some of my fortune. I have
    never had a phone call from someone that won $100m lottery and say,
    hey, would you like some of my fortune so you can have a better life....


     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2013
    dscurlock, Nov 16, 2013 IP
  6. makeit easy

    makeit easy Active Member

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #6
    If your living costs increased, why don't you expect an increase in your income or why don't you expect a possible inflation that will compensate the loss in your purchasing power?
     
    makeit easy, Nov 16, 2013 IP
  7. dscurlock

    dscurlock Prominent Member

    Messages:
    4,564
    Likes Received:
    260
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #7
    I hate to say this, but the govt cant force any company to give you a raise, just because they take more money from
    your paycheck; I have not had a raise in two years now, and employers do not have to give any raises if they choose not too....

    and no, just because you are screwed by the govt
    concerning ObamaCare or anything for that matter;
    Your employer is not obligated to make up for it....

     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013
    dscurlock, Nov 17, 2013 IP
  8. makeit easy

    makeit easy Active Member

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #8
    You got me wrong. I am talking about free market economy where the prices are determined freely by supply and demand. If your living costs increased, it will be for everyone, countrywide. Isn't it? So I will assume that less people will be happy with working for the old wages. Less supply from the workforce should increase the wages.

    Another possibility is inflation or the opposite, deflation. All the prices may go up (inflation) or down (deflation). In deflation, everything is cheaper while your wage is constant or decreased less than the overall prices. Deflation can let you buy more with less USD.

    Inflation can increase all the prices. But if wages increase more (since there are already many persons who don't want to work for the current wages) than the overall prices, you can buy more amount of products&services more than before with more USD you will earn.

    Those are the possibilities I could think of. Because the government takes more for the same service, it should affect overall prices in any economy. At the end, people should get back some or full of their losses in their purchasing power because the possible general price changes.
    Market should get a new balance point at another price level if government takes more money from the market for the same service with the same cost. It should generate inflation usually. But it might generate deflation since US has debts and financial issues. If those money doesn't come back to the market, if used for paying back the old debts or if deposited to earn interest, those extra money taken from the market may generate a possible deflation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2013
    makeit easy, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  9. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #9
    If we were talking about a domestic economy, sure. In our global economy, however, corporate giants offshore most of their labor including manufacturing and import their own products with almost no import duties. Meanwhile, US manufacturing sector has to pay extremely high VAT fees to sell into aggressively expanding(and protectionist) markets like China. We keep the work and the profits overseas, yet expect wage and consumption growth domestically. That type of economic policy never pencils out.

    Of course that doesn't stop leaders of both parties from taking campaign contributions from the very same anti-competitive corporate (and labor) giants who are screwing over American small business. Pure comedy to watch the Chamber of Commerce team up with the Obama administration, seeking to push through amnesty legislation in contravention of US immigration law. Democrats love the votes, Big Business loves the cheap labor, and middle class America suffers. Yay!
     
    Obamanation, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  10. makeit easy

    makeit easy Active Member

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #10
    I think I got your point. Yes, I agree, if there are unequal foreign trade rules, you might be suffering economically and that may cause your domestic companies seeking for cheaper labors abroad and moving their labor-intensive production units to other countries where cheaper labor is available. Thus, the loss in purchasing power may not be compensated as expected or as much as expected.

    However as far as I know, democrats are more friendly with labors than republicans and they are similar with social democrat parties in Europe. Is that true? If democrats are really labor friendly, they should try to find a different way to protect labors. Isn't it?
     
    makeit easy, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  11. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #11
    It depends on what you mean by "labor friendly". Democrats are more "labor friendly" in terms of raising the minimum wage as well as continuously legislating new regulations to "protect" employees which companies must spend money and effort to comply with. The labor unions are also a primary source of funding for the Democratic party, and in exchange, the Democrats protect the labor unions as a special interest.

    Unfortunately for America's middle class and social mobility, most of the employee protection legislation created by the Democrats adversely effects small businesses who cannot afford to comply with it. For big businesses, it is merely a nuisance fee. The result is elimination of small businesses, normally the mainstay of the middle class in America, in favor of corporate monsters which often border on monopolies. Those businesses then employ union labor, effectively putting Big Business and Big Labor on the same side when drafting new legislation around business regulation. Just a few years ago, just after the peak of the recession, I saw SEIU (Union) workers out picketing for the rights of illegal aliens. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

    The public sector unions have made such strong allies in the Democratic party, states like California are going broke paying outrageous defined benefit pensions negotiated through political favors, while delivering nothing in exchange. California schools, run by those same unions, rank 50th in the Union.

    Mind you, establishment Republicans aren't much better. They are some of the strongest voices pushing for ridiculously bad trade agreements at the behest of their fortune 500 donors and the Chamber of Commerce. It seems both the establishment Republicans and the Democrats would have every American both eating and working at McDonalds. Those mom and pop businesses are the enemy.

    If you have any doubts about how anti-competition, anti-labor, anti-small business the Democrats are, look no farther than the fallout from the recent economic crisis, where all the politicians disparaged the too big to fail institutions that brought us to the brink. Now, today, after five years of purely Democratic rule, those same institutions are far bigger than they ever were prior to 2009, with much of their competition being eliminated by the very Democrat created Dodd-Frank legislation that was supposedly created to bring them under control.
     
    Obamanation, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  12. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #12
    Every time the minimum wage is raised, unemployment goes up, every time. That's why the Dems like raising the minimum wage when the President is a Republican. That's why Dems haven't dared raise the minimum wage in over four years.
     
    Corwin, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  13. makeit easy

    makeit easy Active Member

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    62
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #13
    That was what I mean by labor friendly. Socialist and social democrat parties in Europe have the similar politics for labors and middle&lower classes. They take more from upper class to give more to middle and lower classes. In fact, politics is a decision on how to distribute Gross National Product ($15 Trillions for USA) between the social classes. Their close relations with unions, increasing minimum wages show to me they want to give more share from GNP to middle&lower classes.

    I believe they will do some good things in favor of small business owners since they are middle class. For example, maybe small businesses can be exempted from paying something while giant corporates have to pay it to government.

    As far as I know, recent economic crisis was the result of previous republican administration. That was the main reason of why they lost the election. Current democrat administration is trying to resolve those issues that happened because of the wrong economic decisions of the last republican administration. Don't you agree? Current democrat administration may not be perfect. But I think the economic situation they took over was also not perfect to manage. They may be trying to do their best in a very big economic crisis.
     
    makeit easy, Nov 18, 2013 IP
  14. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #14
    Say no more. That statement is wrong on so many levels, I won't take the time to go through them all. Even if it were the purpose of government (not politics) to redistribute wealth, which it is not, the GNP would not be what was redistributed.

    Regarding the rest of your post, it reads as though you have only a very superficial understanding of American politics, and almost no knowledge of the events of the last two decades. Might I inquire as to what sources of information you use to come to those conclusions?

    You might want to acquaint yourself with some history books, some current news items, and some statistics. Here are some Google keywords for some specific areas of reading:

    • Senators defend loose lending practices
    • Bill Clinton repeals Glass-Steagal
    • Percent of wealth held by top 1% under Obama
    • Size of middle class under Obama
    • Small business share of economy
    • Employment participation rate

    I could provide you specific links, but I think its better you find them on your own so you don't think I am feeding you my own opinion.

    Spoiler alert:
    • Democrats are as responsible, if not more responsible for the financial meltdown
    • Things are getting worse, not better under the current administration, by liberal standards, and conservative ones
     
    Obamanation, Nov 19, 2013 IP
  15. grpaul

    grpaul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    221
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #15
    If Obama told them to do it, they would do it!

    Well said. :)
     
    grpaul, Nov 19, 2013 IP
  16. Mia

    Mia R.I.P. STEVE JOBS

    Messages:
    23,694
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    440
    #16
    So says the guy with one tooth and no choice. ;)
     
    Mia, Nov 19, 2013 IP
  17. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #17
    Do you remember you were complaining about the cost of your sex change operation? If you moved to Iran, they would have done it for you free of charge. ;):)
     
    gworld, Nov 19, 2013 IP
  18. Mia

    Mia R.I.P. STEVE JOBS

    Messages:
    23,694
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    440
    #18
    Julie, will you ever grow up?
     
    Mia, Nov 20, 2013 IP
  19. dscurlock

    dscurlock Prominent Member

    Messages:
    4,564
    Likes Received:
    260
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #19
    The voters are solely at fault! I already knew before the end of obamas first term
    that he would turn out to be worthless. If a president does not do anything worth while
    during his first term, then what is his last term going to look like? Obama is nothing more
    then a vacation president, he has never gotten anything done, and every time I turn
    around, I hear that Obama is either on vacation, or on the golf course. We are the people
    are responsible for have kept him office; his cute smile got him into office, and thats it....
    and now the US will pay for Obama mistakes for years, maybe even decades to come, and since this is obama's last term, I do not expect him to do anything other then just sit back and wait for his term to expire; His own corrupt agenda was ObamaCare, and to force it on the rest of americans.

    Obama = Epic Fail!

     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    dscurlock, Nov 20, 2013 IP