Congress Approved Health Care Bill

[LostOutrider]

One of the most grievous con-jobs inflicted upon American voters is the false and unwavering dichotomy of our two-party labels. You are Right or Left, Conservative or Liberal, Red or Blue and if you have one belief that falls on one side of the line then you are now branded as such and subject to dismissal due to responsibility for the wildest element from that side of the line. Lord help you if you believe that your taxes should pay for certain basic assistance to folks in need because now you are in support of welfare queens getting bonus pay for factory-wombs only as long as they refuse to work and agree to eat only ice cream and lollipops. A thousand other rampant exaggerations apply, but only if they serve to confuse the issue at hand and polarize, polarize, polarize. That gets the generally apathetic and ignorant voter off the LayZboy to smear his Cheeto-dusted fingers onto the voting machine so that the pols, regardless of party affiliation, will have another term to do whatever the hell they wanted to do anyway and still call it a representative democracy.

The car insurance analogy is good. Yes, there is no requirement for everyone to have a car - but there is a requirement for hospitals to care for anyone who walks in the door, whether or not they have insurance. That cost is already passed onto you in the form of your $100 aspirin and is one reason behind the horribly out of control health-care costs. Because I do not want to live in a country that makes it okay to turn sick children away from an ER because Daddy lost his job and can't afford insurance - I would prefer there be a better way than those two extremes. The point of disagreement is if this is a better way or not - and I don't expect to convince anyone here of that. I haven't seen yet what other crap they'll slip into this bill that has nothing at all to do with health care - or exactly how this will play out - but something is better than the continuous 'no' shouted from the pols who benefit most from the status quo.

[Rick]

Sourdough - You are correct on the 59 1/2 age rule. My comment was to Lowkey. I don't think he's that old. That's why I referenced early withdrawal.

Lowkey - Your 401K is the best tax deferred vehicle you can invest in especially if your company is providing matching dollars at any level. That's free money. Also, consider this. There is a common rule called the value of money. In short, it means the value of a dollar is worth more today than it will be tomorrow. There is a lot that goes into that but the easy way to think about it is inflation. So you are deferring paying taxes with today's dollar so you can pay taxes tomorrow with a dollar that is worth less. Make sense? It's puts more real money in your pocket today and let's you pay the government with less money tomorrow. How can you not like that idea?

[BENESSE]

Sourdough - You are correct on the 59 1/2 age rule. My comment was to Lowkey. I don't think he's that old. That's why I referenced early withdrawal.

Lowkey - Your 401K is the best tax deferred vehicle you can invest in especially if your company is providing matching dollars at any level. That's free money. Also, consider this. There is a common rule called the value of money. In short, it means the value of a dollar is worth more today than it will be tomorrow. There is a lot that goes into that but the easy way to think about it is inflation. So you are deferring paying taxes with today's dollar so you can pay taxes tomorrow with a dollar that is worth less. Make sense? It's puts more real money in your pocket today and let's you pay the government with less money tomorrow. How can you not like that idea?

Right on the money Rick!
If there's ONE thing to remember, this is it.

[Sourdough]

Lowkey - Your 401K is the best tax deferred vehicle you can invest in especially if your company is providing matching dollars at any level. That's free money. Also, consider this. There is a common rule called the value of money. In short, it means the value of a dollar is worth more today than it will be tomorrow. There is a lot that goes into that but the easy way to think about it is inflation. So you are deferring paying taxes with today's dollar so you can pay taxes tomorrow with a dollar that is worth less. Make sense? It's puts more real money in your pocket today and let's you pay the government with less money tomorrow. How can you not like that idea?

Rick, I agree if the Company is matching the dollars, but I think VERY few companies are matching today.

I still think investing is not for everyone. And for many the peace of mind and quality of life that comes from owning a farm, homestead, ranch, is priceless.

[Rick]

I can't disagree with that at all. Everyone needs to invest in whatever they are comfortable investing in and at whatever level of risk they are comfortable at. For some it will be land for others gold. It's all good if you do it right and understand how to do it. You just need to educate yourself as completely as possible on the subject.

An awful lot of companies still match 401Ks because they receive some decent tax benefits from doing so. There are actually different kinds of plans an employer can offer; traditional, safe harbor and simple and each one offers different tax advantages.

However, if you are already in one it's not to your advantage to cash it in because of the exorbitant tax penalties.

[dscrick]

Rick you are correct. Our nation has been bankrupted by those we elect to "Represent" us. I was thinking about the national debt, which is 12.5 TRILLION dollars at this point, and I'm amazed how easily those kinds of numbers get thrown around. People have no comprehension of how huge a number that is; $12,500,000,000,000

So I did some research, and found some startling examples:

If you had ten trillion dollars (I'm using ten instead of 12.5 to make the math simpler) in one dollar bills, and you laid one flat (a dollar bill is .0043 inches thick according to the Treasury dept) and started a stack, you could make a stack 678,660 MILES HIGH. A stack that could go from earth completely around the moon and back, with about 50,000 miles left over!

If you had ten trillion dollars, and spent ONE MILLION dollars a day every day. it would take you 27,390 years and 8 months to spend it!

If you had ten trillion dollars, and you gave ONE MILLION dollars to someone every minute 24 hours a day seven days a week, It would take you over 3 years to give it away, and you would create TEN MILLION new millionaires.

If you had ten trillion dollars you could give all 227 million adults in the U.S $44,000 each. Cool, then we could all pay off the government debt we owe, which happens to be $44,000 each! Deficit erased! Oops, sorry, I was thinking like a congressman for a second

[Trabitha]

And it's insurance for damage/injury to others.

Not to mention Justin, Auto Insurance is regulated by the State for the right to operate a vehicle. Forced Healthcare insurance would then turn into "the right to obtain healthcare". What happens if you can't afford insurance? You get a fine. What happens if you can't pay that fine? You get slapped with a BIGGER fine. What happens when you can't pay THAT? Jail time.
Care WILL be refused under this bill, unlike now. You can and DO get care even if you don't have insurance now, with this bill you will NOT get care if you do not have insurance.

See how that little circle went? This bill did not help us. In short it made the small 50 million minority and the administration feel good at OUR expense.

[2dumb2kwit]

One of the most grievous con-jobs inflicted upon American voters is the false and unwavering dichotomy of our two-party labels. You are Right or Left, Conservative or Liberal, Red or Blue and if you have one belief that falls on one side of the line then you are now branded as such and subject to dismissal due to responsibility for the wildest element from that side of the line. Lord help you if you believe that your taxes should pay for certain basic assistance to folks in need because now you are in support of welfare queens getting bonus pay for factory-wombs only as long as they refuse to work and agree to eat only ice cream and lollipops. A thousand other rampant exaggerations apply, but only if they serve to confuse the issue at hand and polarize, polarize, polarize. That gets the generally apathetic and ignorant voter off the LayZboy to smear his Cheeto-dusted fingers onto the voting machine so that the pols, regardless of party affiliation, will have another term to do whatever the hell they wanted to do anyway and still call it a representative democracy.

The car insurance analogy is good. Yes, there is no requirement for everyone to have a car - but there is a requirement for hospitals to care for anyone who walks in the door, whether or not they have insurance. That cost is already passed onto you in the form of your $100 aspirin and is one reason behind the horribly out of control health-care costs. Because I do not want to live in a country that makes it okay to turn sick children away from an ER because Daddy lost his job and can't afford insurance - I would prefer there be a better way than those two extremes. The point of disagreement is if this is a better way or not - and I don't expect to convince anyone here of that. I haven't seen yet what other crap they'll slip into this bill that has nothing at all to do with health care - or exactly how this will play out - but something is better than the continuous 'no' shouted from the pols who benefit most from the status quo.

That's one heck of a job, you did there, Lost. Not only did your second paragraph hit most of the talking points used to try and sell that bill to the public, but it also did exactly what your first paragraph complained about!

[2dumb2kwit]

Can someone please tell me how they are going to expand medicare, to have better coverage, and cover more people, all while cutting it's funding by half a trillion dollars?

[rebel]

Can someone please tell me how they are going to expand medicare, to have better coverage, and cover more people, all while cutting it's funding by half a trillion dollars?

I guess the IRS will help you figure that out.

[rebel]

Did I hear correctly, this was going to cost about $ 1200. per month?

[2dumb2kwit]

Did I hear correctly, this was going to cost about $ 1200. per month?

At this point, I think it just depends who's numbers you believe.

I personally think it will be higher, than that.

[2dumb2kwit]

Don't forget the cost of this thing that is not covered by the bill. The ways and means committee, says that we will need to give the IRS an extra 10 billion, to hire over 16,000 more people to police the mandates of this bill.

That's right.....companies and individuals will have to show on their tax forms that they have bought health insurance that meets minimum requirements. The IRS will also impose the fines, if you don't have health insurance.

Next you might ask what the minimum health insurance is.....well, that is to be decided at a later date. That's right....they just passed a law that says that you have to buy something, and they will decide later how much of it you have to buy.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/63181

[Rick]

$1200 per month? That won't be individual cost. I haven't seen any numbers on what the premiums will be but I wouldn't be surprised. The plan is based on the Massachusetts plan and from what I've read, it has experienced double digit increases and more are expected prior to the roll out of this new plan.

I haven't heard anyone talk about the doc fix either. That's another $210 billion over ten years. That has yet to be voted on but will be coming up shortly. That helps support doctor reimbursement from medicare.

Nor have I heard anyone squawk about the fact that Medicare savings are going to be used to fund the plan. According to the Congressional Budget Office, those two add ons will erase any deficit savings that were projected. Why does that not surprise me?

@ DSRICK - Sen. Everett Dirksen said, "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money."

[2dumb2kwit]

Someone do some quick math. They are going to spend $1.5 trillion, (estimated, and we know what gov't estimates are like.) to insure 10 million people for 6 years or less. How much does that work out to be...per person, per month?

Isn't that a little over $2,000 per month, per person, for minimal health insurance?
With that big a group, I bet you could insure them for less than $500 per person per month. Where is the other $1,500 per person, per month going???

Granted, I did "assume" a couple of things.
1. Number of people covered.
The info that I have seen, says that the number of people who don't have health ins. that can't afford it, and aren't eligable for schip, medicare etc., is around 10 million.

2. They are calling it just shy of a trillion dollars, but that includes stealing .5 trillion from medicare. I don't think they will pull that off. I call that 1.5 trillion. (But I expect at least 5 times that.)

3. They really aren't covering anyone for the first 4 or more years, of that 10 year time frame, so I'll call that 6 years.

Rick...do I get extra credit, for including medicare in my math??? LOL

[Trabitha]

http://www.teapartypatriots.org/repealthebill/

petition to repeal, but the video to the right is rather interesting to watch too.

Oh, and I went off on just a couple of issues that I have with this bill today in my blog. Would have written a book about it, but the numbers got me depressed so I cut it short. LOL!

[crashdive123]

$1200 per month? That won't be individual cost. I haven't seen any numbers on what the premiums will be but I wouldn't be surprised. The plan is based on the Massachusetts plan and from what I've read, it has experienced double digit increases and more are expected prior to the roll out of this new plan.

I haven't heard anyone talk about the doc fix either. That's another $210 billion over ten years. That has yet to be voted on but will be coming up shortly. That helps support doctor reimbursement from medicare.

Nor have I heard anyone squawk about the fact that Medicare savings are going to be used to fund the plan. According to the Congressional Budget Office, those two add ons will erase any deficit savings that were projected. Why does that not surprise me?

@ DSRICK - Sen. Everett Dirksen said, "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money."

I did talk about the doc fix in a previous post. The Medicare savings are a joke. Cut 500 billion from Medicare and save 500 billion in total costs. Take that 500 billion and add it into the HC plan - yep - saved another 500 billion.

Some other job losses are going to come from the banking industry. Why? Well, the health care law now has the government being the only issuer of student loans (they call that savings). I'm not sure how many regular folks at banks will lose their jobs, but I'd guess the numbers will be high.

Another dirty little factoid - insurance companies are now forced to raise premiums. Why? The gov has mandated whom they have to cover. They have to raise prices to cover many of the pre-existing conditions that they must now cover. (kind of like buying auto insurance after the accident and expecting your car to be fixed).

Those rates will go up around policy renewal time - January 2010 for many. Leading up to November expect both sides to be playing to this. One side saying your premiums are going up and the other saying those are scare tactics - nothing has changed.

[crashdive123]

I would urge you to do some independent research, and not rely on those that have foisted this monstrosity upon us.

Edit: JIC - you must have deleted your post while I was typing.

[Rick]

On to the Senate!!!!!

[2dumb2kwit]

On to the Senate!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2cFEHM9yMw

Oh, wait....you said "senate"......

(The link is Beethovens Moonlight Sonata.)