T-seeker,personal responsibility does not require a mandate. mandates are
forcing someone to do something. those who are personally responsible
don't need to be forced. I am surprised this simple concept confused you.
I thought Republicans were all about "personal responsibility," which is
why they/conservatives came up with the idea of the mandate. The
cheap plan Feinberg recommends has a $10,000 deductible which means it pays no
benefits until a person's annual out-of-pocket medical costs exceed
$10,000. The reason it's called catastrophic coverage is that it's
primarily intended to keep people from racking up huge amounts of debt for
catastrophic injuries like getting hit by a bus. Until tragedy strikes, however,
every doctor's visit, lab test, and prescription filled comes out of
pocket. How much does a young person pay in medical costs over a year? The most
frequently cited figure is $854 (based on 2008 figures).The
out-of-pocket costs incurred in a bronze plan aren't likely to be different
than Feinberg's catastrophic option (however, the Obamacare plan caps
annual out-of-pocket costs at $6,350 instead of that $10,000 deductible) since
bronze plans often will have high deductibles in order to keep their premiums
low. But unlike catastrophic plans, even before the deductible is met, they
might cover some of the costs of things like routine doctor's visits,
preventative care and prescriptions.
Isn't it funny to watch leftists squirm around the term tax. They love
them, the want them (for everybody else), they dream about them, but they can
never admit to it, or claim responsibility for them or even mention them. The
fee is a tax. All kinds of new tax increases on the general public. Another
group of lies from the biggest liar president ever. You get taxed if you
don't buy the plan. you get taxed if you buy the wrong plan, your employer
gets taxed if he buys you the "cadillac" plan. Nearly two dozen new
taxes that will hit the middle class directly or indirectly. Of course the
employer passes these costs (tax) on to the consumer just like all other costs
they pay. All this to subsidize healthcare for half the nation. Something we
were already doing, without obamacare!
lagomorph?Colbert? THAT's your best source? a liberal comic?I could go out and buy 4 cartons of cigarettes and 3 cases of booze.
I'd never use them, didn't want them. but at least I'd have
something. yeah, makes a LOT of sense.opt out and you are paying
for the right not to buy something you don't want and the cost is less.nope, BO told us there'd be no tax increase - the scotus said it IS
a tax, and that is the sick sophistry roberts used to say this mess is
constitutional. call it a tax, which is what it is. BO lied, like he always
The letter writer is kind when he refers to Feinberg's misleading article
as an containing an "error." Others pointed out other "errors"
Feinberg made in his article. Interestingly, it turns out that
another Koch affiliate, the "Center to Protect Patient Rights," an
Arizona-based advocacy group, headed by Sean Noble, a devout Mormon from
Arizona, is entangled in an ongoing California probe that a state election
regulator has called the largest case of “campaign money laundering”
in California history.
Actually, I think the fee applies if you buy insurance outside the exchanges,
but it is the wrong KIND of insurance.In other words if you are
young and healthy and all you want is a catestrophic injury or illness insurance
policy, that won't fly. You have to get one that covers all the stuff Obama
wants it to cover or it doesn't count. You still have to pay the penalty.
Excellent letter. Aren't facts wonderful?
@Lost: As Stephen Colbert observed last night, opting out and paying the
penalty is like paying rent on a house you don't get to live in. At least
when you opt in, you get something (insurance coverage). Opt out and you are
paying money for nothing in return.
Lost in DC - The interesting part of your post is that those same goals are the
basis of the ACA - that everyone have insurance, regardless of where they get
it. But if course you perpetuate the spin by stating that someone would have to
pay their insurance premium AND the penalty. That is not the case. The ACA is
just a law to make insurance available to those who were otherwise unable to
obtain it either because of their income or their pre-existing conditions. And
it also contains a requirement for those who choose not to get coverage,
regardless of their circumstance, to obtain it and stop relying on the rest of
us to pay higher premiums required by insurance because hospital charges are so
high, having to make up the loss of revenue for treating uninsured patients.
our commonly leftist posters missed the point of the original article.
it's cheaper for millenials to opt out and pay the tax (the scotus called
it a tac, so stop using the euphemism) than to buy something they do not
want.bo's propagandists will spin this somehow.
Thanks David for educating the readers. Too bad the publishers of the previous
letter (the DN) couldn't have done the same thing.
This will be spun as a negative by the tea party people who are moving past
hysteria into paranoia.