RE: Name your penalty!

RE: Name your penalty! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

pahunkboy -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:07:38 PM)
then add in that a good % of the folks can not functionally read. here- one has to have a law degree in contract law to grasp all the wonderful aspects of this bonanza.

Elisabella -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:08:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval • A 40-year old individual making $30,000 a year in a medium-cost area of the country will get an $850 subsidy toward buying a policy, which should cost about $3,500, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation subsidy calculator. Translation: a 40 year old individual making $30,000 is going to have to make room for an extra $2,650 in his budget...close to 10% of his income. quote: The formula is pretty complicated. Basically, though, people who make three or four times the poverty level would get enough federal money so that they would not have to pay more than about 10 percent of their income for a decent health insurance package. 10% is a fair bit - it's the difference between the $40k tax bracket and the $300k tax bracket. Saying that 10% of your income is no longer yours is a big deal for some people, and those people who make around $40k a year, and live in an urban area, are the people already hit hardest - they make enough that they're not eligible for any social welfare programs but not enough to have any decent standard of living. quote: People who make less would have to pay a smaller slice of their income for coverage. For instance, individuals who make about $14,000, and four-person families with incomes of about $29,000, would not have to pay more than 3 to 4 percent of their incomes for insurance. So going by the math in my above post - people who make less than minimum wage will have to pay the smallest percentage of their income, but are still losing 3-4% of their income. 4% of 14k is $560 which is probably higher than a month's rent on their apartment. quote: And those who make even less – under 133 percent of the federal poverty level – would be able to enroll in a newly expanded Medicaid program. 133% of $11,201 is $14,897. Still under the $15k earned by someone making minimum wage. Another case of "sounds really good on paper until you do the math." ETA - I'm not going to redo the math but apparently I was wrong about the poverty level. I was using the figure I found for 2008 which was ~11k. The current figure for 2009 for a single person is closer to 10k. http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml Which means someone making minimum wage is even farther from the poverty line than I thought. Carry on.

slvemike4u -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:09:49 PM)
Seems while I was away Ven adressed Elisabella's post( in better and more comprehensive fasion then I would be capable of doing) so before I go back to packing allow me to say ...Thanks Merc, and I hope it goes without saying the hopes for the weekend is reciprocal [:)]. PA the folks you descired are either a) off the grid and therefor have no need to fear this legislation and b) no one on 10k a year is paying Federal,State or local tax.....period.

jlf1961 -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:11:11 PM)
I dont think the mandatory purchase will stand.

Silence8 -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:15:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u I guess my only option would be to point out that "decent" people do in fact comply with their governments regulations.[8\|] Would you say someone who can't afford to pay for private health insurance is automatically not a decent person? Having the government tell you "you must do this" isn't going to make everyone automatically capable of doing it. If you can't afford a car, you don't buy a car. If you can't afford a house, you don't buy a house. If you can't afford health insurance...you'll be fined a lot of money so you're even less able to afford it until somehow being fined magically makes you richer and then the problem is solved. [8\|] Precisely. The way our society works is that it sets up a series of increasingly impossible (not to mention arbitrary and dehumanizing) tasks to complete, and then admonishes you for not completing them. CASE IN POINT: I just renewed my health insurance. They made me produce a whole host of personal documents demonstrating my income and taxes, etc. They gave me a week to complete it, and threatened to raise my rates if I didn't complete it in that narrow window. There was a lengthy legal section that of course was mandatory to sign (the best indication you're dealing with the devil!) Our system through and through is a sham.

subtee -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:19:37 PM)
Who is "they?"

pahunkboy -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:21:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I dont think the mandatory purchase will stand. Then there are folks that do alternative medicine. Not everyone is sold on RXs.

Silence8 -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:22:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee Who is "they?" My health insurance company. I guess it should have been 'it'?

tazzygirl -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:23:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Community service. There are plenty of repairs and cleaning jobs to be done in any city, town, county, rural area, etc. An excellent suggestion! thank you! but, we also have to look at it this way... if community service takes these jobs away from actual employees, is it fair to those employees who were getting paid?

pahunkboy -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:26:55 PM)
I don't know about you- but I am sick and tired over seeing trash thrown out on the highway. people are slobs.

subtee -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:28:18 PM)
No, I didn't mean that. [;)] Just that it's not the guvment

tazzygirl -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:29:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Yet you would still be entitled to care? Hardly a penalty. Honey even without health insurance you can still pay out of pocket. I wrote this on another thread, but pertaining to the same topic... quote: Yet we should penalize everything across the board... hospitals, Drs insurance companies, ect... but dont have any expectations that what the american people have been screaming about.. namely accessability to health care and the non-denial of coverage due to pre-existing conditions or hidden conditions. Im sorry, as liberal as i may seem, you cant do this. you cannot penalize one half of the equation without the expectation of the other half to hold up to their end. in other words, if the government is listening to the people and demanding coporations to comply, then we the people have to own up to our end of this complaint and obtain for ourselves insurance. if we dont, then a penalty must be accessed. if one isnt, then the point of accessing fines against a corporation is one sided and on the whole completely unfair.

TreasureKY -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:30:00 PM)
Ohhh... I remember this one. [:D] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ozVMxzNAA

tazzygirl -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:30:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I have asked pahunk, who cant seem to come up with an answer... so i will ask all of you here... What penalty would you prefer? Many complain about taxes, jail, ect (and i thought jail was out)... so, name some penalties you feel would be better... i personally see only taxes or denial of care on all levels... is this preferable? penalties? who is the injured party that someone has to pay damages? Taxes? To pay for your abortion? realone... when you can give an intelligent response, then you will get one in return... until then shut the fuck up, you stupid asshole.

sappatoti -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:30:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl So, in relation to the health care debate... what penalty would you prefer instead of taxes? Assuming that I am even in favor of the recently passed legislation, it is in my best economic interest to keep the present penalties. As Thadius has pointed out, for those who are healthy and do not normally use health insurance during the year, the cost of the tax/penalty is minimal when compared against the annual cost of all of those premiums paid. It makes economic sense to pay the penalties only. Having stated that, I am not in favor of this legislation and believe it is a violation of my liberty and freedom of choice. I will not be purchasing a health insurance plan simply because the only reason I need is because a bad law, in my opinion, is passed. On this issue I will hold fast to my principles and take whatever penalty falls my way as a result of my defending them. I am not alone in my convictions. Not only do I personally know people who, from a patient perspective, will not be adhering to this law, I know eight physicians who have stated they will cease to accept health insurance of any kind as payment for their services. This group of eight are comprised of four general practitioners, one cardiologist, one endocrinologist, one surgeon, and one neurologist. These physicians know that many of their current patients will no doubt need to move on and find other providers who will accept their health insurance simply because they cannot afford to pay cash. But they also know they have patients who do not or at present cannot use health insurance and will settle up their payments in the form of good ol' cash. I now put this question out for all to consider. Knowing that there are some of us who will violate this new mandate, what should our penalty be? Not receiving care? There are physicians who will provide care for those who stand with them, so that is kind of a wash. Throw us into some sort of jail or forced labor system? Those are penalties usually used for criminal violators and at present non-conformance of this health care legislation is a civil offense only. The only plausible penalty would be to make the cost of non-compliance much greater than the cost of the annual premiums. But I doubt that would enough of a deterrent to make those who act on their conscience in this matter to roll over and submit.

Silence8 -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:33:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Seems while I was away Ven adressed Elisabella's post( in better and more comprehensive fasion then I would be capable of doing) so before I go back to packing allow me to say ...Thanks Merc, and I hope it goes without saying the hopes for the weekend is reciprocal [:)]. PA the folks you descired are either a) off the grid and therefor have no need to fear this legislation and b) no one on 10k a year is paying Federal,State or local tax.....period. I think your 'b' is incorrect.

Vendaval -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:36:59 PM)
From what I have seen in California, most community service jobs don't replace actual workers. That could be different in other states and counties though. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Community service. There are plenty of repairs and cleaning jobs to be done in any city, town, county, rural area, etc. An excellent suggestion! thank you! but, we also have to look at it this way... if community service takes these jobs away from actual employees, is it fair to those employees who were getting paid?

Vendaval -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:43:00 PM)
I have errands to run so cannot address all of your post now. But I can say that $560 divided over 12 months would be much less, about $46 per month, than the cost of private insurance now. Is this a perfect solution? No. But it at least gives someone at this level of income a chance for coverage. quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval quote: People who make less would have to pay a smaller slice of their income for coverage. For instance, individuals who make about $14,000, and four-person families with incomes of about $29,000, would not have to pay more than 3 to 4 percent of their incomes for insurance. So going by the math in my above post - people who make less than minimum wage will have to pay the smallest percentage of their income, but are still losing 3-4% of their income. 4% of 14k is $560 which is probably higher than a month's rent on their apartment. on.

tazzygirl -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:43:12 PM)
The problem isnt just their office. Hospitals must also be paid. How many of them are willing to stop accepting insurance? Trust me, im not happy with this bill either, but i do view it as a beginning. Im all reality, the point of this thread was to make people actually think about the alternatives. The alternative to taxing would be denial of care... something no one here even wanted to discuss. Facts are simple. This is pointing out how many are working, full time, below the poverty level. Its pointing out the humanity in all of us. No one, besides me, even suggested denial of care. Im surprised no one has taken into consideration the fines and taxes against employers and insurance companies.. not that there will be alot.

tazzygirl -> RE: Name your penalty! (3/26/2010 5:44:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval I have errands to run so cannot address all of your post now. But I can say that $560 divided over 12 months would be much less, about $46 per month, than the cost of private insurance now. Is this a perfect solution? No. But it at least gives someone at this level of income a chance for coverage. quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval quote: People who make less would have to pay a smaller slice of their income for coverage. For instance, individuals who make about $14,000, and four-person families with incomes of about $29,000, would not have to pay more than 3 to 4 percent of their incomes for insurance. So going by the math in my above post - people who make less than minimum wage will have to pay the smallest percentage of their income, but are still losing 3-4% of their income. 4% of 14k is $560 which is probably higher than a month's rent on their apartment. on. Would that not also be pre-tax if its employer offered? That takes it to around 35 dollars a month.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875