Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
F3SS

Obamacare average $20K per family!

232 posts in this topic

_

yes asteroid, we get no bills whatsoever.

our healthcare costs are taken straight from our wages, as a form of tax, and we don't begrudge it, because we never see it, and our wages are adjusted accordingly, ie- if you're paid minimum wage, you pay hardly anything, but if you earn megabucks, you pay more, but it's never so much that it hurts, in fact, it's never that much that you even feel it!

wouldn't it be better if the americans adopted the same, means-tested system? or would there be too much pressure from the high-earners?

There have been many reports the NHS is going bankrupt.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and please don't think i'm poking fun, or disrespecting our cousins across the pond. i'm genuinely interested as a matter of debate, not to engage in a game of 'our way's better than yours!'

so any barbed comments will be dealt with as only a yorkshire man can.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

excuse me for joining in, and not being american, and for skipping the first nine pages of this post, but wouldn't $20,000pa for an entire family be cheaper than healthcare is now?

bearing in mind that where I live, healthcare is deducted from you wages as 'national insurance', at which I pay £7000pa ($11,000?) and never visit a doctor, wouldn't it all balance out over time?

I know for a fact that if I was seriously injured/had a terminal illness, then my needs would be met regardless of how much money I had, or had paid into the system, because working for the common good of everyone is a selfless act, which I may or may not have need of, now or in the future, but am comfortable in the knowledge that it's there if needs be. it's not communism, just common sense.

You're excused. Would it balance out over time? Maybe. Maybe not. It's not the governments job to force me into making bets because essentially it is a gamble. All insurance is a gamble but until now it's been up to me to wager those bets or not. See I don't know how efficient your system is. I haven't heard much good but your system is not the same. We won't have universal healthcare deducted from our paychecks. It'll still be like regular insurance. We are mad because we are forced to buy it. We are forced to give money to either a corporation or the IRS simply because we are alive. The rich wont hurt and the poor will still be excluded from paying just like with everything else. Basically this whole thing is to force the middle class to pay for the poor. The problem is that the not so well off are never given any incentive to be a contributor. They are encouraged to be dependent victims of society. Whatever.

I'd like universal healthcare. Unfortunately our politicians have never proven themselves responsible enough handle such funds in an appropriate manner. I hope you make really good money because $11,000 a year in gambling money taken from your paycheck surely must hurt. That's $55,000 every five years. If you work forty years that's $440,000! The only thing good I can see happening from that is if you never needed it or at least not all of it would be if the remainder went to your spouse or next of kin and so on and so on. Sort of like AT&T rollover minutes. Whatever you don't use gets carried on. I'd bet it gets sucked up into oblivion though when you die.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes asteroid, we get no bills whatsoever.

our healthcare costs are taken straight from our wages, as a form of tax, and we don't begrudge it, because we never see it, and our wages are adjusted accordingly, ie- if you're paid minimum wage, you pay hardly anything, but if you earn megabucks, you pay more, but it's never so much that it hurts, in fact, it's never that much that you even feel it!

wouldn't it be better if the americans adopted the same, means-tested system? or would there be too much pressure from the high-earners?

It certainly bears much more merit then we are getting and I think thats what people envisioned Obamacare to be like. Unfortunately the Insurance companies got involved and destroyed the entire thing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically this whole thing is to force the middle class to pay for the poor

Are you saying we are going to continue to have a middle class of any sizable amount of people ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying we are going to continue to have a middle class of any sizable amount of people ?

As I see it, no. This'll downsize the middle class and increase the amount of poor and as the amount of poor grows less and less middle class people will be around to foot the bill. I've actually stated much longer detailed scenarios how this may happen but I'm a little sick of repeating myself ATM. Nothing personal. Just go find my posts in other obamacare threads if you like. I'm sure you'll find something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been many reports the NHS is going bankrupt.

_

yes michelle, I won't try to pretend our healthcare system is perfect, because it isn't, far from it, but it IS staffed by dedicated professionals who care more about saving lives than what's in their wage packets, and if that means they end up working 70hrs a week and being paid for 40, then they just get on with it and do it. i've never met a nurse who's complained about her shifts, and i've had a few operations, due to being a right gormless tw*t, but they're well paid, and well respected, so even though the NHS is in crisis, it will always survive due to the dedicated people who staff it.

we have the same opinion of your armed forces. well staffed, by people who are dedicated, no matter what!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need. I was just pointing out what I saw as a flaw in your statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are mad because we are forced to buy it. We are forced to give money to either a corporation or the IRS simply because we are alive.

_

I can understand why you're angry!

the money that we pay to fund the NHS is means tested, so if you earn minimum wage, £6.70 ($10.50) you pay 11%, 70p, but you don't actually pay it, because your employer pays half, so you don't notice 35p out of every £6.70

it might not be perfect, but it's (only just!) working, and it means everyone pays the same, regardless of your earnings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

_

I can understand why you're angry!

the money that we pay to fund the NHS is means tested, so if you earn minimum wage, £6.70 ($10.50) you pay 11%, 70p, but you don't actually pay it, because your employer pays half, so you don't notice 35p out of every £6.70

it might not be perfect, but it's (only just!) working, and it means everyone pays the same, regardless of your earnings!

Well here employers with over 50 employees have to provide full coverage, I mean they have to pay everything. Sounds great until they decide to downsize to 49 employees therefore leaving it up to each individual to buy or be fined. And the self employed and employers with under 50... You get the picture. Our new system is full of many ways to drastically financially burden many regular folks. Layoffs, job loss or buying expensive policies while still receiving a bill after their hospital visit. I dunno man. If you're happy then that's fine but many in America prefer to do things our own way and learn our own hard lessons without federal oversight. Your system seems better than our new one though.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr fess, I was kinda hoping your new system was a lot like ours, where you paid into the system what you could afford to pay in, and the cost was shared equally, so you weren't stuck with a bill after treatment, even after you've already poured your hard-earned into it, but our population is only a quarter of yours, so there's bound to be differences semantically. but to an outsider, it seems that cutting the private sector out of healthcare, and nationalising it, would be at least a step forward?

companies shouldn't be allowed to make a profit from people's suffering, and while they have you by the balls, where paying is mandatory, it can't get better!

.

(next time, vote 'shrooma' for president! yaaaayy!!)

:-)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a lot of sense especially concerning congress and their healthcare. I understand the plight of preexisting conditions but I don't see how insurance companies can stay afloat. Look to auto insurance. If no one buys it until they crash well then that can't last too long. Sooner or later the insurance company will go broke. But I get that in order to have preexisting conditions included that everybody has to chip in to make it work either by purchase or f'd up fine. Isn't your gripe that everyone else has to pay for those who get care without insurance via higher costs? But you're ok with literally everybody covering the costs wether they use it or not instead of just those who receive healthcare. Man I could go on and on but I have stated my thoughts time and again here so I'll digress and just say I think it's crap and think it will ultimately become such a cluster*#~^* that eventually the democrat saviors will step in and tell us they have a new solution and that they never wanted it to be this way and that it's someone else's fault and the only way to fix it will be purely at the hands of the government. They'll say we didn't want single payer but it's the only solution and it must be done now!

Ya know this whole mandate deal hasn't been made certain for the future yet. As I understand it the mandate may still be overruled in a couple years when it goes back to the SCOTUS. IIRC they couldn't rule against the mandate until it was actually implemented and is to return back to the SCOTUS for final ruling in 2015 or 2016.

Forcing every working adult out of several thousand dollars a year just doesn't jive well with me. Scratch that... Adults under 26 with parents still around will be covered under the parents. After all, dependence is the way of the left.

Lastly, I can't come up with a better plan. It's way out of my level of expertise. I'm just a blue collar man. If you know of a better idea than present it but just because you don't doesn't mean you have to accept something you think sucks.

You are absolutely right. I guess I am the minority on this, but I would not mind at all paying more for health insurance or higher taxes knowing that it would be going towards other people's healthcare. But that must just be me. The way I see it is that I can just make more money to make up the difference. I am young, I have a great job, my future looks bright and I am intelligent. I will have no problem increasing my earnings to make up for the extra cost in insurance. To me, that is what America is all about, you can make as much money as you want you just need to be smart and work towards it. I would much rather my tax dollars be spent on healthcare for our aging population then be spent on some of the insane and frivolous things our government spends billions on already. But I guess I must be in the minority. Oh and if I spend money on that, then I would want to not have to worry about going bankrupt because of one nasty accident. We are all one nasty accident away from bankruptcy unless you have awesome insurance or a substantial amount of wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr fess, I was kinda hoping your new system was a lot like ours, where you paid into the system what you could afford to pay in, and the cost was shared equally, so you weren't stuck with a bill after treatment, even after you've already poured your hard-earned into it, but our population is only a quarter of yours, so there's bound to be differences semantically. but to an outsider, it seems that cutting the private sector out of healthcare, and nationalising it, would be at least a step forward?

companies shouldn't be allowed to make a profit from people's suffering, and while they have you by the balls, where paying is mandatory, it can't get better!

.

(next time, vote 'shrooma' for president! yaaaayy!!)

:-)

Well I'm definitely not the expert on this matter but the things I said are to my understanding the truth. You make a good point about population sizes. The bigger the population the less that collectivism works, IMO. This isn't a knock on the UK but we don't want our government in charge of anything except their constitutional duties in America. So no to nationalism. Even though I like the idea of universal healthcare the simple fact is that governments aren't good with money management. They always go far beyond there means and then whine and belittle the citizens into thinking we need to keep paying more and more for their mistakes.

And yes certain businesses do have you by the balls when it comes to your health but the fact is that profit is the driving force behind progress and innovation. Yea sure there is price gouging but you can't expect people to work and provide such complicated things for free or just at cost. For instance I am not going to fix your roof for just the cost of the shingles. Why would I? Seriously. If you can't do it yourself than you should expect to pay someone. I took the time out of my day to gather ladders and tools, used gas and wear and tear on my vehicle to drive to the store, bought the materials needed for repairs, climbed on your roof and risked the inherent dangers of just doing that like falling off the roof and many more behind the scenes stuff. If employees are involved then their is the cost of their labor plus all the insurances and other aspects of business involved. Basically there is a lot of headaches and hassles involved for those you hire for a service. As for doctors, same thing. They did extensive schooling and are doing things to keep you healthy that you could never dream of doing yourself. Can you put a price on your health? Without profit there would be no extra money for new tools and machines and further education if needed or the funds to hire more staff. So non profit doesn't cut it unless doctors of the world decide to open charity foundations. Non profit is for volunteers, not skilled specialists unless they choose. As for profit in general, you can't stop greed and not all extra money has to be payed forward towards the business but for everything involved with being charge of a business or someone's life I think some expendable cash is a justified reward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will still be that 1 nasty accident away from bankruptcy under Obamacare unless you can afford 15% of that major accident bill. Ill let you do the math for the larger events. Obamacare will not reduce the 15% you owe.

http://www.facethefactsusa.org/facts/hospital-costs-nearly-double-in-decade/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are absolutely right. I guess I am the minority on this, but I would not mind at all paying more for health insurance or higher taxes knowing that it would be going towards other people's healthcare. But that must just be me. The way I see it is that I can just make more money to make up the difference. I am young, I have a great job, my future looks bright and I am intelligent. I will have no problem increasing my earnings to make up for the extra cost in insurance. To me, that is what America is all about, you can make as much money as you want you just need to be smart and work towards it. I would much rather my tax dollars be spent on healthcare for our aging population then be spent on some of the insane and frivolous things our government spends billions on already. But I guess I must be in the minority. Oh and if I spend money on that, then I would want to not have to worry about going bankrupt because of one nasty accident. We are all one nasty accident away from bankruptcy unless you have awesome insurance or a substantial amount of wealth.

As I've said many times before and a few times in this thread that I too would love universal healthcare. The problem is the irresponsibility that comes with government handling our money. I'd have to think long and hard before voting for such a thing if it were to arise. I'd be weary of the 'catch' whatever that may be. Our founders weren't stupid. They knew our government was never meant to run our lives. Just manage them in a way, maybe. The day we have administration after administration that consecutively reduces our debt and spends less than they bring in I may concede that government is responsible enough appropriate our taxes towards 'free' healthcare. Right now I just want them the heck out of my life and my paycheck. They don't deserve to be involved in either. Unfortunately our ideas of government issued healthcare is just a pipe dream.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will still be that 1 nasty accident away from bankruptcy under Obamacare unless you can afford 15% of that major accident bill. Ill let you do the math for the larger events. Obamacare will not reduce the 15% you owe.

http://www.facethefactsusa.org/facts/hospital-costs-nearly-double-in-decade/

So even with insurance a million dollar freak hospital visit is gonna cost $150,000 out of pocket? Not that the other $850k taken care of isn't nice but still sounds like the title of the affordable in the Affordable Care Act is just what it says it is. An act. From that perspective I guess they aren't lying. Don't they call that in politics 'plausible deniability'. Orchestrated confusion making liability hard to prove.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr fess, our healthcare system isn't solely funded by public money. the government is obliged to devote a proportion of our taxes to healthcare, which numbers in the billions of £UK, but with the recent recession, the NHS is one part of our society that's suffering from cutbacks, hence michelle's post about reports that the NHS is nearly bankrupt.

the situation isn't all that bleak however. if I suffered from a major accident at work, which, with the nature of my job, combined with my inherent gormlessness, is more a case 'when' than 'if', I know that there'll be a team of experts who'll put me back together now matter how deeply government funding bites.

what concerns me more is the amount of libraries,leisure facilities, and extra-curriculum teaching facilities that are closing, as the young people in our country tend to riot when they're bored, and as fond as I am of baseball-batting teenagers*, it's not exactly an ideal solution.....

.

(*humour!!)

:-)

Edited by shrooma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your buying an insurance policy. That copay you pay when you go see the DR. It is part of Obamacare already. It is not going away. Im looking for the hospital stay numbers but Ive found Out of Pocket numbers max at around $8800 for a family per year. But I dont know if thats all health care or only Dr visits/Care. So if you use the insurance your paying for your gonna be responsible up to 8800$ for your family. I cant tell if thats in the form of deductibles or a percentage of services received.

But where are we today ? The PCIP (early enrollees for pre existing conditions exchange) stopped taking new patients a year early because it forecasted it could not afford to take care of the people already under the program. So anyone with a new preexeisting condition (sounds like a double negative I know) will be uninsurable for a year.

The searches are full womens free contraception reports that is making it very difficult to pull any numbers out. Was that an intentional thing ?

Edited by AsteroidX
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mr fess, our healthcare system isn't solely funded by public money. the government is obliged to devote a proportion of our taxes to healthcare, which numbers in the billions of £UK, but with the recent recession, the NHS is one part of our society that's suffering from cutbacks, hence michelle's post about reports that the NHS is nearly bankrupt.

the situation isn't all that bleak however. if I suffered from a major accident at work, which, with the nature of my job, combined with my inherent gormlessness, is more a case 'when' than 'if', I know that there'll be a team of experts who'll put me back together now matter how deeply government funding bites.

what concerns me more is the amount of libraries,leisure facilities, and extra-curriculum teaching facilities that are closing, as the young people in our country tend to riot when they're bored, and as fond as I am of baseball-batting teenagers*, it's not exactly an ideal solution.....

.

(*humour!!)

:-)

Aright I hear ya. Nice to be civil with someone out of the states for once. Couple things though... Just call me fess. Explain gormless. Hit a home run.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, This is where I pulled my info from. And it is the numbers from the Silver Package which is more expensive then the penny pincher package.

That’s why, beginning in 2014, the Affordable Care Act will require individual and small group plans to cap yearly total out-of-pocket costs, including deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance, at the levels applying to Health Savings Account plans, currently at $5,950 for a single-person and $11,900 for a family.

More importantly, these out-of-pocket caps will be even lower for individuals earning less than about $43,000 per year (or less than about $88,000 for a family of four) who purchase silver level coverage through an exchange. So we can expect out-of-pocket costs to shrink for those who can least afford them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

y'know, I didn't really have the whole picture when it came to understanding how you guys' economy worked, but reading your posts is a bit of an eye-opener!

no wonder you're dissatisfied, when everyone, left right & centre, is doing everything they can to take your hard-earned cash!

if it was me, i'd be ****ing furious!!

if you all pitched in and rebelled, there wouldn't be a force on earth that could stop you, you know....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

y'know, I didn't really have the whole picture when it came to understanding how you guys' economy worked, but reading your posts is a bit of an eye-opener!

no wonder you're dissatisfied, when everyone, left right & centre, is doing everything they can to take your hard-earned cash!

if it was me, i'd be ****ing furious!!

Man if you gathered all that in just a few posts you're in for a ride if you stick around here. That said I'd bet that it's happening to you too. There are governments and scammers everywhere in the world and they're all out for the same things. Money, power and things all on your behalf.

if you all pitched in and rebelled, there wouldn't be a force on earth that could stop you, you know....

Thanks for the encouragement. Hopefully we won't find out but the talk is everywhere. That's another topic that'll take you for a ride. I see you're new here. These debates are happening daily.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you notice the backloaded cost on Obamacare here....Just think Path to Citizenship.

Will all non-US citizens, illegal or not, be provided with free health care services? No. Undocumented immigrants will not be eligible for the premium subsidies that will help millions of Americans purchase insurance at affordable rates. Here is the exact bill language: “No Federal Payments for Individuals Not Lawfully Present.—Nothing in this subtitle or the amendments made by this subtitle allows Federal payments, credits, or cost-sharing reductions for individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aright I hear ya. Nice to be civil with someone out of the states for once. Couple things though... Just call me fess. Explain gormless. Hit a home run.

_

not all of judge people by stereotypes y'know fess.

the world has the opinion that all americans are 'stoopid', but nearly 25% of you hold a degree, and that's pretty impressive, and the world seems to think that us brits are all effeminate tea-drinkers, when in reality, we're all a bunch of drunken, hooligan thugs!

but i've never believed anything I read in newspapers anyway.....

.

gormless..., it's a yorkshire word that can only be best described as really really naturally clumsy.

imagine two retards with a tube of superglue, or an epileptic on crystal meth with a machete?

not a good thing.....

:-)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
epileptic on crystal meth with a machete

We actually have those running around my county

Edited by AsteroidX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.