There is a difference between car insurance and healthcare. Buying car insurance is only if you have a car you can always opt out of having a car and not have to pay insurance because you don't have a car. Health insurance mandate is different because it isn't the insurance of an object you can choose to not possess. Forcing people to insure their person or face a tax is basically taxing you on living.
As much as I like the idea of healthcare for all, I don't like the idea of the state running it. Whenever the state gets involved things become inefficient and inflation occurs. People should be allowed to opt out
Not Having a Car would not really be an Option Especially in the USA you dont really have that Choice as the Ways are quite Far Being without a Car is Impossible for 80% of the Population So Honestly said you cant really opt out as opting out in this case would mean giving up your job your mobility and depending on your home even that because walking 30 miles to the next Supermarket aint really that easy More Importandly tough The Idea of Universal Healthcare is not about Profit You point out that its Unprofitable and will cause losses instead of winnings But you see Everyone knows that Universal Healthcare is something that will Cost Money Of course there wont be any Gain of Money in this The Gain you get is that Majority of People are allowed for Healthcare and thus Populace Health and Life Standart is Increased Of course this Costs Money Sozial State Laws usually cost Money Because they are not meant to gain profit or to compete against others They are meant to do something for the Populace Greetz
.... it's free in the sense we don't use our credit card for every visit, it's paid by the population taxes...
Quote from CaspianX2 from his Reddit post (which includes links to the article and is easier to read due to formatting, plus a common question and answer section not included in my post): Okay, explained like you're a five year-old (well, okay, maybe a bit older), without too much oversimplification, and (hopefully) without sounding too biased: What people call "Obamacare" is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, people were calling it "Obamacare" before everyone even hammered out what it would be. It's a term mostly used by people who don't like the PPACA, and it's become popularized in part because PPACA is a really long and awkward name, even when you turn it into an acronym like that. Anyway, the PPACA made a bunch of new rules regarding health care, with the purpose of making health care more affordable for everyone. Opponents of the PPACA, on the other hand, feel that the rules it makes take away too many freedoms and force people (both individuals and businesses) to do things they shouldn't have to. So what does it do? Well, here is everything, in the order of when it goes into effect (because some of it happens later than other parts of it): Already in effect: It allows the Food and Drug Administration to approve more generic drugs (making for more competition in the market to drive down prices) It increases the rebates on drugs people get through Medicare (so drugs cost less) It establishes a non-profit group, that the government doesn't directly control, [1] PCORI, to study different kinds of treatments to see what works better and is the best use of money. ( [2] Citation: Page 665, sec. 1181 ) It makes chain restaurants like McDonalds display how many calories are in all of their foods, so people can have an easier time making choices to eat healthy. ( [3] Citation: Page 499, sec. 4205 ) It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them. It renews some old policies, and calls for the appointment of various positions. It creates a new 10% tax on indoor tanning booths. ( [4] Citation: Page 923, sec. 5000B ) It says that health insurance companies can no longer tell customers that they won't get any more coverage because they have hit a "lifetime limit". Basically, if someone has paid for health insurance, that company can't tell that person that he's used that insurance too much throughout his life so they won't cover him any more. They can't do this for lifetime spending, and they're limited in how much they can do this for yearly spending. ( [5] Citation: Page 14, sec. 2711 ) Kids can continue to be covered by their parents' health insurance until they're 26. No more "pre-existing conditions" for kids under the age of 19. Insurers have less ability to change the amount customers have to pay for their plans. People in a "Medicare Gap" get a rebate to make up for the extra money they would otherwise have to spend. Insurers can't just drop customers once they get sick. ( [6] Citation: Page 14, sec. 2712 ) Insurers have to tell customers what they're spending money on. (Instead of just "administrative fee", they have to be more specific). Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down. New ways to stop fraud are created. Medicare extends to smaller hospitals. Medicare patients with chronic illnesses must be monitored more thoroughly. Reduces the costs for some companies that handle benefits for the elderly. A new website is made to give people insurance and health information. (I think this is it: [7] http://www.healthcare.gov/ ). A credit program is made that will make it easier for business to invest in new ways to treat illness. A limit is placed on just how much of a percentage of the money an insurer makes can be profit, to make sure they're not price-gouging customers. A limit is placed on what type of insurance accounts can be used to pay for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. Basically, your insurer isn't paying for the Aspirin you bought for that hangover. Employers need to list the benefits they provided to employees on their tax forms. 8/1/2012 Any health plans sold after this date must provide preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.) without requiring any sort of co-pay or charge. 1/1/2013 If you make over $200,000 a year, your taxes go up a tiny bit (0.9%). Edit: To address those who take issue with the word "tiny", a change of 0.9% is relatively tiny. Any look at how taxes have fluctuated over the years will reveal that a change of less than one percent is miniscule, especially when we're talking about people in the top 5% of earners. 1/1/2014 This is when a lot of the really big changes happen. No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history. If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it. Insurers now can't do annual spending caps. Their customers can get as much health care in a given year as they need. ( [8] Citation: Page 14, sec. 2711 ) Make it so more poor people can get Medicaid by making the low-income cut-off higher. Small businesses get some tax credits for two years. Businesses with over 50 employees must offer health insurance to full-time employees, or pay a penalty. Limits how high of an annual deductible insurers can charge customers. Cut some Medicare spending Place a $2500 limit on tax-free spending on FSAs (accounts for medical spending). Basically, people using these accounts now have to pay taxes on any money over $2500 they put into them. Establish health insurance exchanges and rebates for the lower and middle-class, basically making it so they have an easier time getting affordable medical coverage. Congress and Congressional staff will only be offered the same insurance offered to people in the insurance exchanges, rather than Federal Insurance. Basically, we won't be footing their health care bills any more than any other American citizen. A new tax on pharmaceutical companies. A new tax on the purchase of medical devices. A new tax on insurance companies based on their market share. Basically, the more of the market they control, the more they'll get taxed. The amount you can deduct from your taxes for medical expenses increases. 1/1/2015 Doctors' pay will be determined by the quality of their care, not how many people they treat. Edit: a_real_MD addresses questions regarding this one in far more detail and with far more expertise than I can offer in [9] this post. If you're looking for a more in-depth explanation of this one (as many of you are), I highly recommend you give his post a read. 1/1/2017 If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers). 2018 All health care plans must now cover preventative care (not just the new ones). A new tax on "Cadillac" health care plans (more expensive plans for rich people who want fancier coverage). 2020 The elimination of the "Medicare gap".
This is the part that most people don't like. How they try and justify it is irrelevant. if I don't want healthcare, or cant afford it I shouldn't get taxed for not having it. We have expensive corporate healthcare in America so I am basically stuck with whatever healthcare my job offers and how affordable it is depends on how much my employer pays. If I refuse healthcare offered by my job because it is too expensive I am stuck with very limited and even more expensive options. If I outright don't want healthcare or want to use alternative medicine then I will be taxed for not using their healthcare. If I say fuck you and don't pay the taxes I have to answer to the IRS. I've said this before but I live in MA and we have the same healthcare mandate on the state level and while I have healthcare from my job anyways I don't like the idea that they can/will fine me for not having it. The mandate took it too far.
there is a border between personal freedom and personal stupidity which leads to self-destruction. the same reason behind the government trying to enforce healthcare to its citizens is the same behind the fact that is illegal to attempt suicide.
There must be a reason that they are making everyone pay for it. If you want to get sick/injured and die, it should be your own choice. I doubt it was a moral reason. It must make sense somehow. Maybe it helps pay for your single hospital visit when your neighbor finds you lying on your floor half dead and then the death announcement by the doctor and state-issued coffin if no family steps forward.
Maybe the government is overreaching and trying to tax people on living. It would be more logical to have the fine only if you try to get healthcare and haven't had any for x amount of time just add it to the first year of their premiums. it would have the same effect of not allowing people to go uncovered until they get so sick they have to get insured while allowing the people who don't want/cant afford it be free of penalty.
The problem is what is to stop them from dropping their health insurance as soon as they are better and not sick. The reason why they have the taxes if you don't have health insurance is so that people can't just get health insurance when they are sick and then drop it when they get better. Which would be playing the system since that is how it is currently set up, the only thing that would be stopping it is the tax if you don't have health insurance.
slippery slope. what will the government be able to order us to buy / pay for next? will they be able to tell us which healthcare service we can purchase? what about forming a government sponsored healthcare service and telling us we can only buy health care from the government? would there be any oversight to it? any consumer protection? not likely. maybe one day, now, the government will tell us which types of food we can eat so our health insurance adjustments aren't too high
There are other ways they could have prevented healthcare flip flopping without threatening IRS tax evasion charges on you if you don't comply. If that is the case and they are just threatening punishment for trying to play the system then why not only penalize the people who play the system and not everyone in America? If you go without healthcare for so long and can afford it, then penalize them when they start to buy it instead of penalizing everyone else for not buying any. When I buy health insurance I am pretty sure I sign a 1 year term agreement and I can't change or drop my plan unless something drastic happens. It is not the governments responsibility to protect the interests of Health insurance companies. They just gave them guaranteed customers (under penalty of tax evasion charges) and they are protecting them from having to adjust their policies to the needs of consumers, while at the same time fucking over the middle class and working poor.
You can blame the republicans for that. Pretty much there were 2 options for universal healthcare. A republican was the one that came up with the idea that was given and is now what is in place. The other option was everyone pays for healthcare thru their taxes. But it is the governments responsiblity to protect the people. Which some are employed by the health insurance companies. Honestly, american's complain about the weirdest things. I mean you guys complain about high gas prices, even tho you have one of the cheapest gas prices in the world (even if you do import most of it anyways). You guys even complain about something that is for the greater good for your own country and it's people. Mind you, the US should have just down universal healthcare and just used tax dollars to pay for it, and cut back on your military spending. Honestly you guys should do that anyways, you have way to much military spending. But I guess the reason why you guys do have that is because you do have a military based economy.
Yeah clearly Defense is what we spend too much on lol. http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/defense-entitlement-spending#
That includes Social Security and only includes the DoD spending only, not everything that included in defending your country. Compared to other countries you do spend a lot more then every other country. And you spend about 4 000$ a year per person on your total defense spending in 2010. And in 2012 from what is released and what is estimated and requested, total defense/military spending was inbetween $1.030–$1.415 trillion That figure does include FBI counter-terrorism, International Affairs, Energy Department(defense-related), Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, NASA (satellites), Veterans pensions, Other defense-related mandatory spending, and Interest on debt incurred in past wars as well as the DoD (which was $707.5 billion). Theses are all things you can really cut down on, compared to Entitlement which you can't really cut down on.
Just stop bitching and pay health taxes you silly Americans. Won't turn you into a Socialist state. Honestly freedom wise I'd be more worried about the laws that forbid smoking fucking everywhere and stupid shit like restrictions on beverage sizes.
Oh yes you can cut entitlement spending. It's just that leftists want people to need to come to the government trough to keep them good little slaves to the system so they block efforts to reform Social Security (which is going bankrupt) and efforts to curb fraud in Medicare/caid. Also your own quote shows that as a % of GDP we don't spend that much. Lastly I don't think that we spend too much on Defense. That is my opinion just as your is that we spend too much. Opinion, period.
