• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 03:23
CEST 09:23
KST 16:23
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Serral wins EWC 202543Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 202510Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202580RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15
Community News
Weekly Cups (Jul 28-Aug 3): herO doubles up5LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments3[BSL 2025] H2 - Team Wars, Weeklies & SB Ladder10EWC 2025 - Replay Pack4Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced58
StarCraft 2
General
Clem Interview: "PvT is a bit insane right now" Serral wins EWC 2025 TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy Would you prefer the game to be balanced around top-tier pro level or average pro level? Weekly Cups (Jul 28-Aug 3): herO doubles up
Tourneys
WardiTV Mondays $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 485 Death from Below Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion How do the new Battle.net ranks translate? Which top zerg/toss will fail in qualifiers? Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Nobody gona talk about this year crazy qualifiers?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 2 Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 1
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Muta micro map competition Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Beyond All Reason [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok)
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread Bitcoin discussion thread 9/11 Anniversary
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Gtx660 graphics card replacement Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
[Girl blog} My fema…
artosisisthebest
Sharpening the Filtration…
frozenclaw
ASL S20 English Commentary…
namkraft
The Link Between Fitness and…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 794 users

Ask me about H.R.3962

Blogs > motbob
Post a Reply
1 2 Next All
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-11-11 22:46:08
November 11 2009 08:17 GMT
#1
I am currently reading through the entire House health care bill in order to be more knowledgeable in the fierce debate that is currently going on in this site as well as elsewhere. I'll be summarizing each section here as I go. In the meantime, feel free to ask me questions about the bill... I've got the text here in front of me.

EDIT: The bill makes a lot of modifications to Medicare, which I won't be reading about. There's some other inane stuff... I won't be posting a summary of every single section.

TITLE I

Sec 101

This section discusses the immediate formation of a temporary "high risk pool program," basically a health insurance program for people who aren't on Medicare, Medicaid, or health insurance from their employer AND have tried to get health insurance but were denied it or offered it as a higher price since they had a pre-existing condition.

Important: "The premium shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market"

So, basically, since this program is taking in all the high risks but can only charge 125% more than normal, it's probably going to lose a lot of money. 5 billion dollars has been set aside for this plan per year it's running. But... it's only a temporary fix.

Sec 102

This section basically says that if health insurance companies make more than 15% off of their customers, they have to refund their customers. In other words, if insurance company A charges $125 billion in premiums and pays out $100 billion to hospitals, they have to refund their customers $10 billion.

Sec 103

This section makes it harder for a health insurance provider to stop providing coverage by claiming fraud by the consumer. In other words, if you made a mistake like putting the wrong height/weight on your health insurance app, the health insurance provider cannot immediately take away coverage if you get sick; it must convince a third party arbitrator that you meant to commit fraud before it can take away coverage.

Sec 104

"The Secretary... shall establish a process for the annual review of increases in premiums for health insurance coverage. Such process shall require health insurance issuers to submit a justification for any premium increases prior to implementation of the increase."

Sec 105

Health insurance companies must provide health insurance plans that include coverage of dependent children under the age of 27 instead of 18. So if you are living in your parents' basement up to the age of 27 they can more easily cover you under their health plan .

Sec 106

Title: "LIMITATIONS ON PREEXISTING CONDITION EXCLUSIONS IN GROUP HEALTH PLANS IN ADVANCE OF APPLICABILITY OF NEW PROHIBITION OF PREEXISTING CONDITION EXCLUSIONS."

Your homework is to figure out what this means!

As far as I can tell, this section involves enacting a temporary measure making it more difficult for health insurance companies to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions before the permanent measure discussed later in the bill, which will totally ban denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, goes into effect.

Sec 107

Title: "PROHIBITING ACTS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE FROM BEING TREATED AS PREEXISTING CONDITIONS."

Self-explanatory. It's pretty amazing this had to be added, lol.

Sec 108

Title: "ENDING HEALTH INSURANCE DENIALS AND DELAYS OF NECESSARY TREATMENT FOR CHILDREN WITH DEFORMITIES."

Again, self-explanitory.

Sec 109

There will no longer be lifetime limits on aggregate dollar benefits in any health insurance plan.

Sec 110

Title: "PROHIBITION AGAINST POSTRETIREMENT REDUCTIONS OF RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS BY GROUP HEALTH PLANS."

2 ez

Sec 111

If you are an employer, and you provide health insurance to your retirees before they are eligible for Medicare, the government will help you pay your retirees their obligated benefits.

I think this section is trying to encourage employers to extend coverage to youngish retirees who don't qualify for Medicare.

Sec 112

This section creates subsidies for "Wellness Programs" in small businesses, which are basically programs which would teach employees how to live healthier lives and why certain lifestyle changes would benefit them. Actually this is a little hard to explain so let me just copy/paste what a Wellness program is:

+ Show Spoiler +
(c) Wellness Program Components- For purposes of this section, the wellness program components described in this subsection are the following:

(1) HEALTH AWARENESS COMPONENT- A health awareness component which provides for the following:

(A) HEALTH EDUCATION- The dissemination of health information which addresses the specific needs and health risks of employees.

(B) HEALTH SCREENINGS- The opportunity for periodic screenings for health problems and referrals for appropriate follow-up measures.

(2) EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT COMPONENT- An employee engagement component which provides for the active engagement of employees in worksite wellness programs through worksite assessments and program planning, onsite delivery, evaluation, and improvement efforts.

(3) BEHAVIORAL CHANGE COMPONENT- A behavioral change component which encourages healthy living through counseling, seminars, on-line programs, self-help materials, or other programs which provide technical assistance and problem solving skills. Such component may include programs relating to--

(A) tobacco use;
(B) obesity;
(C) stress management;
(D) physical fitness;
(E) nutrition;
(F) substance abuse;
(G) depression; and
(H) mental health promotion.

(4) SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENT COMPONENT- A supportive environment component which includes the following:

(A) ON-SITE POLICIES- Policies and services at the worksite which promote a healthy lifestyle, including policies relating to--

(i) tobacco use at the worksite;
(ii) the nutrition of food available at the worksite through cafeterias and vending options;
(iii) minimizing stress and promoting positive mental health in the workplace; and
(iv) the encouragement of physical activity before, during, and after work hours.

Sec 113

Title: "EXTENSION OF COBRA CONTINUATION COVERAGE"

Self-explanatory, if you read up on what COBRA is:

http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_cobra.HTML

Sec 114

This section provides for grants to be given to the individual states for the general goal of insuring the uninsured population. In other words, the feds are basically saying to the states, "hey, maybe you guys can make better use of this money than we can."

+ Show Spoiler +
(b) Types of Programs- The types of programs for which grants are available under subsection (a) include the following:

(1) STATE INSURANCE EXCHANGES- State insurance exchanges that develop new, less expensive, portable benefit packages for small employers and part-time and seasonal workers.

(2) COMMUNITY COVERAGE PROGRAM- Community coverage with shared responsibility between employers, governmental or nonprofit entity, and the individual.

(3) REINSURANCE PLAN PROGRAM- Reinsurance plans that subsidize a certain share of carrier losses within a certain risk corridor health insurance premium assistance.

(4) TRANSPARENT MARKETPLACE PROGRAM- Transparent marketplace that provides an organized structure for the sale of insurance products such as a Web exchange or portal.

(5) AUTOMATED ENROLLMENT PROGRAM- Statewide or automated enrollment systems for public assistance programs.

(6) INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES- Innovative strategies to insure low-income childless adults.

(7) PURCHASING COLLABORATIVES- Business/consumer collaborative that provides direct contract health care service purchasing options for group plan sponsors.

Sec 115

Oops, I was wrong in my post below. This section gives the HHS Secretary the power to create national standards for electronic communications between health care providers and health insurance companies! I'll let Sen. Al Franken explain why this is useful:

"Because of the complexity of health care in this country, there are billions of administrative transactions between health care providers, payers, intermediaries, and vendors. Right now, these systems are not standardized, resulting in an unnecessary and costly burden on providers and patients. Physicians reported spending at least three hours weekly interacting with plans; nursing and clerical staff spend much larger amounts of time. When time is converted to dollars, clinical practices nationwide spend at least $23 billion to $31 billion each year on unwieldy interactions with health insurance companies."

Title II

Sec 201

Definitions and stuff like that are found in this section

Sec 202

This section assures you that the government won't force your insurance company to stop offering you the coverage you have now.

Sec 211

Probably the most important part of the bill. Read it in full and Google any terms you don't know


A qualified health benefits plan may not impose any preexisting condition exclusion... or otherwise impose any limit or condition on the coverage under the plan with respect to an individual or dependent based on any of the following: health status, medical condition, claims experience, receipt of health care, medical history, genetic information, evidence of insurability, disability, or source of injury (including conditions arising out of acts of domestic violence) or any similar factors.


Sec 212

This section makes it so that health insurance companies are obligated to offer their health insurance plan to you if you want it. They are also obligated to allow you to renew you coverage. There are exceptions in cases of fraud and non-payment.

Sec 213

Insurance companies are only allowed to charge different premiums for the same plan based on

- age
- geographic location
- family enrollment

and for no other reason.

Sec 214

This section builds on the concept of not allowing insurance companies to discriminate on the price of premiums between buyers.

Also, certain protections extended to mental health patients in previous legislation are now extended to mental health patients in more situations. Yeah, random, I know.

Sec 215

This is a really neat section and hard to summarize, so I'll just copy and paste here. "Provider network" just means hospitals the plan is accepted at.

+ Show Spoiler +
(a) In General- A qualified health benefits plan that uses a provider network for items and services shall meet such standards respecting provider networks as the Commissioner may establish to assure the adequacy of such networks in ensuring enrollee access to such items and services and transparency in the cost-sharing differentials among providers participating in the network and policies for accessing out-of-network providers.

(b) Internet Access to Information- A qualified health benefits plan that uses a provider network shall provide a current listing of all providers in its network on its Website and such data shall be available on the Health Insurance Exchange Website as a part of the basic information on that plan. The Commissioner shall also establish an on-line system whereby an individual may select by name any medical provider (as defined by the Commissioner) and be informed of the plan or plans with which that provider is contracting.

(c) Provider Network Defined- In this division, the term `provider network' means the providers with respect to which covered benefits, treatments, and services are available under a health benefits plan.


Sec 216

This is a section that makes it easier to cover your dependent child as a parent.

Sec 217

"In the case of health insurance coverage offered under a qualified health benefits plan, if the coverage decreases or the cost-sharing increases, the issuer of the coverage shall notify enrollees of the change at least 90 days before the change takes effect (or such shorter period of time in cases where the change is necessary to ensure the health and safety of enrollees)."

ModeratorGood content always wins.
theron[wdt]
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
United States395 Posts
November 11 2009 08:20 GMT
#2
i haven't been keeping up with the news. What are people getting mad about?
TheYango
Profile Joined September 2008
United States47024 Posts
November 11 2009 08:23 GMT
#3
On November 11 2009 17:20 theron[wdt] wrote:
i haven't been keeping up with the news. What are people getting mad about?

A bit off-topic, but I'm pretty sure a good portion of people getting mad about it don't keep up with the news either.
Moderator
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
November 11 2009 08:27 GMT
#4
On November 11 2009 17:20 theron[wdt] wrote:
i haven't been keeping up with the news. What are people getting mad about?

People are generally angry because of the idea that they will be taxed in order to pay for other people's health care.

There are other reasons, but they're generally caused by misconceptions about what the bill says.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
Misrah
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
United States1695 Posts
November 11 2009 08:37 GMT
#5
Is the medical system going to be reworked into all computer/ digital?

How do they plan to relocate the use of MRI/CAT/CT scans or other expensive procedures?

does the bill state anything about preventing a disorder, or simply dealing with the progressive stages?

How does plastic surgery fit into all of this?
A thread vaguely bashing SC2? SWARM ON, LOW POST COUNT BRETHREN! DEFEND THE GLORIOUS GAME THAT IS OUR LIVELIHOOD
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-11-11 10:18:09
November 11 2009 09:09 GMT
#6
On November 11 2009 17:37 Misrah wrote:
Is the medical system going to be reworked into all computer/ digital?

As far as I can tell, no.
EDIT: actually, sort of! See section 115!

How do they plan to relocate the use of MRI/CAT/CT scans or other expensive procedures?

dunno what this means. But if the government started deciding what tests were neccessary there would be a huge uproar, so that's not in the bill.

does the bill state anything about preventing a disorder, or simply dealing with the progressive stages?

You mean like mandating mammograms or something? As far as I can tell, no.

How does plastic surgery fit into all of this?

Nowhere, unless it's covered under the public option which I really really doubt.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
nttea
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Sweden4353 Posts
November 11 2009 09:58 GMT
#7
a majority of the americans want a public option!
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
November 11 2009 10:37 GMT
#8
On November 11 2009 17:17 motbob wrote:

Important: "The premium shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market"



I wonder if this means 125% more than the standard rate, or 125% times the standard rate (that is, 25% more than the standard rate). If it is the latter, that is quite a scary notion because I am pretty sure that a range between 75%-125% is not enough to describe the costs it would take to provide health care for the population. People's health needs are a lot more variable than that.
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
November 11 2009 10:40 GMT
#9
On November 11 2009 19:37 gchan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2009 17:17 motbob wrote:

Important: "The premium shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market"



I wonder if this means 125% more than the standard rate, or 125% times the standard rate (that is, 25% more than the standard rate). If it is the latter, that is quite a scary notion because I am pretty sure that a range between 75%-125% is not enough to describe the costs it would take to provide health care for the population. People's health needs are a lot more variable than that.

Yeah, it's expected to have to be subsidized. The gov't is setting aside 5 bil per year to subsidize it. But as I said in the OP, it's a temporary measure that will only be in effect until some other stuff in the bill is created a couple years from now.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
November 11 2009 10:41 GMT
#10
Oh, and if you want to comb through the bill, comb through the numbers, not the actual parts of the bill. That is where most of the skepticism comes from. When I first looked through the numbers, most of the government estimates for medicare and the costs for the public alternative plan are grossly understated. Considering a baby boomer retiring generation, vastly underfunded pension liabilities on the books of states/counties/large companies, and the probable dropping of health insurance from many small companies, the government is going to be taking on a lot more individuals than it expected. But by then, it'd be too late. It would be political suicide to take away health care from those who are accustomed to having it at a rate too low.
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
November 11 2009 10:43 GMT
#11
On November 11 2009 19:41 gchan wrote:
Oh, and if you want to comb through the bill, comb through the numbers, not the actual parts of the bill. That is where most of the skepticism comes from. When I first looked through the numbers, most of the government estimates for medicare and the costs for the public alternative plan are grossly understated. Considering a baby boomer retiring generation, vastly underfunded pension liabilities on the books of states/counties/large companies, and the probable dropping of health insurance from many small companies, the government is going to be taking on a lot more individuals than it expected. But by then, it'd be too late. It would be political suicide to take away health care from those who are accustomed to having it at a rate too low.

There's no way I could possibly analyze that. I just have to trust that the CBO knows what it's doing.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-11-11 11:13:40
November 11 2009 11:06 GMT
#12
I'll give you a start. Here are the numbers:

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/health_care/hr3962_mgr_update.pdf

Information about number of people covered is on page 11, Table 3. Do you really think that those numbers are believable? Especially the number of employer based coverages. The supposed penalty for companies not providing insurance is a 2-8% tax on their profits (source). For companies in the small-mid range--that is with 10-100 employees--it is very likely going to be cheaper to take the tiny tax hit than it would be to buy health care coverage for all their employees. Considering that these companies employ 25% of all people in the United States (source), this will be a huge number of employees dumped into the public system.

Then add in underfunded pension liabilities. If you don't know what they are, read up on them. They are the reason why all the large companies are jumping on board with health care reform. More than 75% of all S&P500 companies have underfunded pension liabilities. This is estimated to be in the ball park of $3 trillion dollars (source). Granted, these are numbers that combine both pensions and health plan liabilities, but the jist of it is that most large companies (as well as local municipalities) are not preparing for this at all. So what's going to happen? (1) Companies just write off the liabilities and dump the people on the plans to the government (2) Companies start funding these pension funds (unlikely) or (3) the government will bail them out and buy up all the people on these health plans. In the most likely scenarios, the government is going to take up even more people. Now, considering this, go back and look at the numbers. Are they reasonable? I think not.

And this was just with my preliminary look at the numbers. I havn't even looked that closely at Medicare. If you want to legitimately argue for health care, look at the numbers. If you're just looking at the arbitrarily made up clauses by politicians, you are arguing idealogy as much as the next person. You mentioned in the other thread that you want empirical hard evidence. So look it up and run the figures yourself. The resources are out there.


Edit: And just so you know, the government is notoriously bad at cost estimates. The federal government--that is, the government with access to the most resources--didn't even have audited financial statements until 1994. They didn't start forecasting beyond their budgeted fiscal half year until 1997 (and in 1997, it was only like 3 pages out of a hundred page financial). Even in the last federal government CAFR for 2008, they don't really forecast beyond 2 years (you'll notice that the numbers beyond 2012 are usually just absurd fillers). A couple months ago, I ran a quick regression on the deviation of government estimates from actual performance for the last decade, and suffice to say, the government is pretty terrible at cost estimates. They are trying to sell votes, not provide accuracy.
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-11-11 11:23:22
November 11 2009 11:20 GMT
#13
You're not taking into account that employers can lower wages to pay for health insurance. The idea is that that's what a lot of them will do in response to the tax.

So what's going to happen? (1) Companies just write off the liabilities and dump the people on the plans to the government (2) Companies start funding these pension funds (unlikely) or (3) the government will bail them out and buy up all the people on these health plans. In the most likely scenarios, the government is going to take up even more people.

...health insurance and pension liabilities seem to be an entirely different thing to me. If companies run out of funding for promised pensions, the retirees are shit out of luck and have effectively lost thousands and thousands of dollars. But if health insurance stops being offered... workers/retirees can just get a new private plan. And they don't have to hop onto the government plan, right?

EDIT: and about your last point, about the gov't always being over budget... how do I respond to that? I can't show numbers or anything to prove that this time the project will be under budget... that's way over the head of an undergraduate student like me. Again, I just have to trust the CBO when they say that even accounting for the program going over budget, the bill is deficit neutral.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
November 11 2009 11:37 GMT
#14
I should have clarified about pension liabilities. Those figures are taken from the financial statements of companies, and in those companies, the account for pension liabilities includes actual pension payouts (as in payouts to retirees), and promises to provide health care for employees once they have worked a certain number of years (this was popular before the 90s, like at GM). I was addressing the people in the latter half of the category. And you are right in that they could get on a private plan, but most of the people on the pensions of these companies are not wealthy (they are line laborers in outdated manufacturing companies). Considering that the public option will likely be "cheaper" than private offers, these people will end up on Medicare or the public option.

And no, you don't have to say that the CBO will be right. I only have an undergraduate degree, but I go out and seek all the statistics and analysis myself. You will soon realize that there is very little actual academic study on anything in the business field or government accountability. That is why you have to go find the figures yourself. Most economics graduate students don't have much more insight than good undergraduate students; and for those that do, they are usually in the growing fields of international/emerging market economics or behavioral economics. These really have no relevance on anything more specific than a nation wide macroeconomic analysis; if you really want true data, go to the source. Most academics are idiots anyway.
ShroomyD
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
Australia245 Posts
November 11 2009 11:42 GMT
#15
How much will it cost?
아나코자본주의
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
November 11 2009 11:46 GMT
#16
On November 11 2009 20:37 gchan wrote:
Considering that the public option will likely be "cheaper" than private offers, these people will end up on Medicare or the public option.

....and this gets to the heart of why I was confused that this was such a big deal in the first place. Retirees on Medicare? That's not a bad thing. Retirees too young for Medicare on the public plan? Oh well, they'll be eligible for Medicare in just a few years.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
nttea
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Sweden4353 Posts
November 11 2009 11:48 GMT
#17
you will have to pay for the healthcare of sick people sooner or later, and emergency care will be alot more expensive than preventive care, not to mention that more people can work if they aren't sick. My point is passing this bill with a public option will be good for the economy, and thus not a cost.
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
November 11 2009 11:48 GMT
#18
Oh, and yes you can show that the numbers are absurd. Back to the example of employer coverage. The estimated growth in coverage by employers is 8% from 2010 to 2019. Is that reasonable, considering the echo boomer generation entering the work force and more baby boomers likely to stay in the work force? Probably not.

Another absurd figure: page 12, the figure for projected revenues from penalty payments by employers. The total expected is $135 billion dollars. Given that the tax penalty is going to be 2-8%, I'll use a high average estimate of 7% for the expected penalty. $135 billion / 7% is almost $2 trillion dollars. They're expecting to collect penalty payments on $2 trillion dollars worth of profits to fund their program. Reasonable? I think not.
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
November 11 2009 11:55 GMT
#19
On November 11 2009 20:46 motbob wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2009 20:37 gchan wrote:
Considering that the public option will likely be "cheaper" than private offers, these people will end up on Medicare or the public option.

....and this gets to the heart of why I was confused that this was such a big deal in the first place. Retirees on Medicare? That's not a bad thing. Retirees too young for Medicare on the public plan? Oh well, they'll be eligible for Medicare in just a few years.


I'm not saying it's a bad or good thing. I'm saying that the government estimates don't accurately reflect these numbers. I'm saying that the government is grossly underestimating their costs and will have to pay a lot more than they expect...and by the time they want to do anything, it will be too big of a mess to fix (like social security).
gchan
Profile Joined October 2007
United States654 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-11-11 12:10:18
November 11 2009 12:01 GMT
#20
On November 11 2009 20:48 nttea wrote:
you will have to pay for the healthcare of sick people sooner or later, and emergency care will be alot more expensive than preventive care, not to mention that more people can work if they aren't sick. My point is passing this bill with a public option will be good for the economy, and thus not a cost.


Except that the cost of health care is mostly going to be for retirees, not for the young. Some 50%+ of health care costs is spent in the last 2 years of people's lives. I am actually for moderate government intervention in providing preventive care incentives and children's health care, but most of what the bill is going to cover will to be to force insurance companies to accept old people into their coverage. Those that aren't, will be on Medicare which is being greatly expanded. This is going to sound absolutely draconian, but these elderly people aren't really going to provide much in the way of economic growth for the economy. They are going to be consuming a lot more resources than they provide. And yes, they did probably earn those resources from a lifetime of working, and yes, it wouldn't be fair to take those benefits, but you have to look at the bottom line. The cost will be more than we can afford. The US isn't doing well, and to place even more a burden on that economic system with more taxation is asking for a disaster. So don't expand the health care system to cover individuals who aren't going to provide anything for the economic system.
1 2 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 37m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ProTech19
StarCraft: Brood War
Rain 5984
ggaemo 2330
Zeus 827
Backho 522
Larva 324
Leta 186
PianO 138
Nal_rA 94
Aegong 45
ivOry 6
Dota 2
BananaSlamJamma208
XcaliburYe130
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K896
shoxiejesuss34
allub32
Other Games
summit1g6541
Fnx 2643
singsing755
Tasteless229
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick795
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 77
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta33
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Rush1672
• Stunt243
• HappyZerGling149
Other Games
• Scarra1096
Upcoming Events
WardiTV Summer Champion…
3h 37m
Stormgate Nexus
6h 37m
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
8h 37m
The PondCast
1d 2h
WardiTV Summer Champion…
1d 3h
Replay Cast
1d 16h
LiuLi Cup
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
RSL Revival
3 days
[ Show More ]
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
RotterdaM Event
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
FEL Cracow 2025
CC Div. A S7

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
HCC Europe
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025

Upcoming

ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
Roobet Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.