Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34

Thread: Health Care Reform

  1. #16
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by ryan View Post
    I'd say that renting/owning a home is not a luxury. What else would you suggest? Live on the street?

    I'd be interested to see a study that shows how poor life choices drinking/smoking/obesity/etc effect health costs later in life. Again, why is the government subsidizing your bad investment?
    They've done those studies. And that's why there are enormous taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and maybe sugar-loaded soda. To offset the costs.

    People who smoke pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    People who drink pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    Etc, etc, etc.
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

  2. #17
    Member ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    North Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by NBuffaloResident View Post
    They've done those studies. And that's why there are enormous taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and maybe sugar-loaded soda. To offset the costs.

    People who smoke pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    People who drink pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    Etc, etc, etc.
    If the budget was balanced this might make sense, but with the state and federal deficits the way they are, and politicians refusal to cut budgets, regular taxpayers are still going to have to make up the difference. Is this not true?
    Someone who can't balance a budget probably shouldn't be in a position to spend someone else's money.

  3. #18
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by ryan View Post
    If the budget was balanced this might make sense, but with the state and federal deficits the way they are, and politicians refusal to cut budgets, regular taxpayers are still going to have to make up the difference. Is this not true?
    No. It's not. Not based on deficits. You are comparing apples and oranges.

    $2 in is $2 in. If I give you $2 today, to pay for my soda next week, and you spend my $2 this week and don't have it next week; is that the fault of me requiring that $2 next week? No. I still paid you the $2.
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by NBuffaloResident View Post
    Good find. I didn't see that.

    So, Massachusetts is spending about a hundred dollars more per person than NYS, and everyone is covered.

    Seems like they got the bases covered. The state spends only $100 more per person, and every single person is covered by health insurance.

    Seems like a good game plan to follow.
    You don't read well do you?? This was BEFORE 2006 when they signed their HC bill, which didn't take effect till 2008...
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by NBuffaloResident View Post
    They've done those studies. And that's why there are enormous taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and maybe sugar-loaded soda. To offset the costs.

    People who smoke pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    People who drink pay more in taxes, which in turn offsets their health care costs.

    Etc, etc, etc.
    But you have no problem with Community raitings??
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  6. #21
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    You don't read well do you?? This was BEFORE 2006 when they signed their HC bill, which didn't take effect till 2008...
    So, really, neither you or I have any idea how the model affected prices then?

    Your conjecture of Mass. having the highest spending compared to other states, based on their Health Care model is just not verifiable. In other words, you just made that up.

    So, in reality, the only study done on the model proposed is the one put forth by the CBO, which states:

    1) It will reduce the deficit.
    2) It will cover all but 6% of Americans
    3) Costs for employer provided insurance will stay the same, or drop by about 2-3%.
    4) Costs for individually purchased insurance will increase by about 4%, but health insurance plans will be more comprehensive.

    Sounds like a good package, wouldn't you agree?
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

  7. #22
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    But you have no problem with Community raitings??
    No. I don't.

    Maybe there is a better way to do it. However, I'm not able to find one that comparably spreads risk over the greatest sized pool.
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

  8. #23
    Member run4it's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    5,689
    http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/p60-236.pdf

    Ok, Doogie. According to the 2008 census numbers, 46.3 million people did not have any kind of health insurance.

    Of that number, there were 9 million non-citizens without insurance. Assuming ALL of those are illegals (which obviously they are not, but for your argument...)

    That leaves 37.3 million people without insurance.

    There were 10 million people above the $75k household income threshold that did not have insurance. Let's say those are the ones who don't "by choice." (again, not likely...try buying your own insurance for a family of 5 with a $75k income. But again, just for your argument...)

    That leaves 27.3 million middle-to-lower class American citizens uninsured.

    Again, according to the census, out of a total of 183 million citizens that make less than $75k and would assumedly want health insurance, 14% of them don't have it/can't afford it. That's roughly 1 in every 7 people.

    According to the US Census, these are the numbers. 27 million people who are in a position to want and need insurance, but unable to get it. 14% of the population who are not in a position to be able to obtain insurance but still need it. 1 in 7 people you pass on the street who want health insurance, need health insurance, but are denied.

    You might call this the price of doing business. I call this unacceptable.
    Last edited by run4it; March 9th, 2010 at 11:13 AM. Reason: thought you might like the link
    But your being a dick
    ~Wnyresident

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    But of those 1 in 7 (really 1 in 11, since you left about 130 Million people out), how many qualify for govt programs already??? Why'd you leave that number out too?
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  10. #25
    Member run4it's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    5,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    But of those 1 in 7 (really 1 in 11, since you left about 130 Million people out), how many qualify for govt programs already??? Why'd you leave that number out too?
    Try reading the study. I didn't leave anyone out. And I didn't account for people who already qualify for gov't programs because a) I would think that most of them who DO qualify WOULD sign up, and b) the information simply wasn't in the study. The fact is, you can't account for them either. Let's say that those people offset those above the $75k income line who still can't afford health insurance, as well as the legal resident non-citizens who cannot either.

    You can't get around the fact that a huge portion of American citizens (27 million + people) have NO CHOICE but to either forgo health care or be destitute.

    Again, I call this unacceptable.
    But your being a dick
    ~Wnyresident

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by NBuffaloResident View Post
    No. I don't.

    Maybe there is a better way to do it. However, I'm not able to find one that comparably spreads risk over the greatest sized pool.


    So which is it?

    I'm not seeing how that is a bad thing.
    Or

    No. I don't.
    Do you or do you not agree with the States idea that it's okay to FORCE HI companies to charge a 25 year old healthy active person the same as a 60 year old overweight diabetic??
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  12. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by run4it View Post

    You can't get around the fact that a huge portion of our society have NO CHOICE but to either forgo health insurance or be destitute.

    Again, I call this unacceptable.


    I agree with you on this!! You and i just have different ways of solving the problem!

    (I fixed your sentence for you.)
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  13. #28
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    But of those 1 in 7 (really 1 in 11, since you left about 130 Million people out), how many qualify for govt programs already??? Why'd you leave that number out too?
    I'd hazard, that if they have no insurance, they don't qualify for government programs.

    It would be ludicrous to just say no to health insurance if you can get it from a government program.

    If a family of 4 makes more than 35K per year, they don't even qualify for Family Health+.
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by NBuffaloResident View Post
    I'd hazard, that if they have no insurance, they don't qualify for government programs.

    It would be ludicrous to just say no to health insurance if you can get it from a government program.

    If a family of 4 makes more than 35K per year, they don't even qualify for Family Health+.
    Theirs a lot of lazy and uninformed people out there!

    "In 2003, a BlueCross BlueShield Association study estimated that about 14 million of the uninsured were eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP. These people would be signed up for government insurance if they ever made it to the emergency room."

    http://www.coverageforall.org/pdf/BC...ed-America.pdf
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  15. #30
    Member NBuffaloResident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    Theirs a lot of lazy and uninformed people out there!

    "In 2003, a BlueCross BlueShield Association study estimated that about 14 million of the uninsured were eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP. These people would be signed up for government insurance if they ever made it to the emergency room."

    http://www.coverageforall.org/pdf/BC...ed-America.pdf
    "Although a disproportionate number of uninsured are low-income individuals,
    more than 30 percent — 13.2 million — of the uninsured are middle-class, with
    income levels of $50,000 or more."

    From your source.

    So, it would seem, the current reform plan before congress is a great start. It solves the issue of so many who are eligible but not covered by mandating them to get coverage. It does this by penalizing them.

    It also solves the Middle Class burden of insurance, by offering tax credits to reduce the impact of purchasing insurance.

    And...
    "Of the remaining 13.9 million uninsured, more than 40 percent are short-term
    uninsured."

    - From your source.

    And this would be solved by the mandates that insurance would be carried over from job to job, guaranteeing coverage, and eliminating the short-term uninsured.

    You have an issue with the plan? What part do you take issue with?
    Raptor Jesus: He went extinct for your sins.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The right to health care is impossible
    By Jim Ostrowski in forum USA Politics and Our Economy - President Joe Biden
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: May 12th, 2009, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •