• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

the Obamacare question dems can't aviod

don't make me go back and quote your lying ass. You specifically said someone earning $800 will only get $400 in the take home pay and you seemed for some silly reason to think that was amusing.

It is not only not amusing, it is bullshit.

Are you slow? Do you understand what a levy is as opposed to a marginal rate of taxation. 1.5% flat rate is a levy.

Let me dumb it down for you. If someone earns $20 million a year and pays 1.5% of that to fund UHC, would that money from that levy be suitable to fund their health care only or potentially the healthcare of them + a LOT of others.

That is the whole point of taxation, you work out the cost to fund and then you tax accordingly. You come up with a figure that will equate to a revenue amount to fund your policies. UHC would not be 50%, wouldn't even be close. You are being disingenuous.

Holy Mother of God you are stupid. Single people already see 35% or more taken out of there checks every two weeks, if you had a 10 % tax rate increase to help cover UHC then that would put someone at paying a 45% tax rate out of there check. close to half. So yes a $800 check could end up close to $400 after ALL FUCKIN TAXES.

AFTER ALL TAXES, AFTER ALL TAXES, AFTER ALL TAXES

Now admit you got confused and move the fuck on.


No one ever said that to fund UHC that you would have to have a 50% tax. I said that people would lose half there checks after the additional tax that would be placed on there already taxed check.

Again, JUST BECAUSE YOUR COUNTRY DOES IT ONE WAY DOESN'T MEAN EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD WILL DO IT THE SAME.
 
??? WTF

When he was trying to get this passed, he said it would save people $2500. Not
ohh hey guys, in 10 years you will be saving $2500.

I don't know what to tell you. You're just wrong on this. Why do you think no one has been talking about this until some right-winger propaganda site made a video? Further, this is most likely going to backfire the way the enrollment fiasco did. Remember? The WH gave an enrollment estimate for Year 1, and right-wing propagandists misinterpreted that as the minimum number needed for the law to work and were insisting that it wouldn't be met because of the predictably slow start, and then it exceeded the number, and they looked stupid.

As much as I am against it, I wish we would just go full blown single payer.

I think it would be funny to see the youtube videos of people freaking out the first time they saw their paychecks basically cut in half from the tax raises needed to fund it.

Other people have pointed out how dumb this is, but it should also be noted that because of the cost savings of single payer, the U.S. gov't actually pays more for healthcare (VA, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) than countries with single payer.
 
Can't win them all but you have to start somewhere. It's not about dems and reps its about the handful few within each party that are capable of running a nation. All the rest are in it for bribes and business aspirations. Such as those that post in this forum. :icon_lol:
 
Holy Mother of God you are stupid. Single people already see 35% or more taken out of there checks every two weeks, if you had a 10 % tax rate increase to help cover UHC then that would put someone at paying a 45% tax rate out of there check. close to half. So yes a $800 check could end up close to $400 after ALL FUCKIN TAXES.

A 10% increase from 35% is 38.5%, not 45%. And someone making $800 a check isn't paying an ETR even remotely close to 35%. Including all state, local, and federal taxes and fees, there is no income group where people pay 35% of their income in taxes. Theoretically, someone with a multimillion-dollar income with no realized capital gains and a lousy accountant could pay that much, I guess.
 
It was dumb of dems to say outright that they could keep their plans, changing the standards would obv have some repercussions with the insurance plans. However it does make sense to have certain standards set forth in all insurance plans. That said you are still dodging the question thats been asked and pointing at other things.

Is the country on a whole paying more or paying less with the system now?

Republicans are pushing the issue to play the bullshit game with the elections coming up. In a year or so im sure the numbers will come bad or good, but safer to press now since it cant be provided yet.

It was "dumb" for them to say that? How about it was a blatent and humungous lie...
 
Beyond the repeating video of savings, do the repubs have some study or what not saying that americans havent saved with Obamacare yet. I have not seen anything from either side that really shows the numbers, be they good or bad.

The government has never saved a dime on any program.....ever.....
 
A 10% increase from 35% is 38.5%, not 45%. And someone making $800 a check isn't paying an ETR even remotely close to 35%. Including all state, local, and federal taxes and fees, there is no income group where people pay 35% of their income in taxes. Theoretically, someone with a multimillion-dollar income with no realized capital gains and a lousy accountant could pay that much, I guess.

Mathowned.

Re: Robert's breast pump example - my wife gave birth 10 months ago and received a breast pump. No expense was passed on because she has been paying her insurance bill consistently the last 5 years. I imagine it is like that for most people that have been insured.
 
Mathowned.

Re: Robert's breast pump example - my wife gave birth 10 months ago and received a breast pump. No expense was passed on because she has been paying her insurance bill consistently the last 5 years. I imagine it is like that for most people that have been insured.

Because of the new healthcare law it's now mandatory for all insurance companies to provide a breast pump to new mothers. There's approximately 12,500 babies born in America each and every single day. At $300 per breast pump that's an additional cost of $3,750,000 per day. This comes to a total of $1,368,750,000 per year.

This is just one of many items that is now mandatory for insurance companies to provide. Are you telling me that insurance companies are just cutting all their profit to pay for these now mandatory requirements? So for breast pump coverage cost for example you're telling me that insurance companies are just coughing up 1.4 BILLION PER YEAR just for shits and giggles?

Just because your wife's insurance premiums haven't changed as of yet doesn't mean that it will not. It also doesn't mean that insurance companies aren't charging more in other areas to recoup the additional cost of this new health care law. You have to realize these companies are full of accountants, finance managers and lawyers. They're not going to just cough up the cost, it will be add here and there in other areas so they aren't hit with a loss in margins.

This means the cost is in one way or another passed back onto the people, the very people that this law was designed to help save money when in reality it's costing us more.

We're just looking at breast pumps and the coverage is in the billions per year. I would have to assume all other areas added up would be in the hundreds of billions per year. I can promise you that insurance companies aren't just cutting hundreds of billions out of their own pocket. That added cost is being put back in the system in one way or another.

.
 
The government has never saved a dime on any program.....ever.....

Absolute statements are a great way to detect bullshit. If you ever hear anybody use words like "always" or "never" to describe something that is not math or science, you can be reasonably sure they are full of shit.
 
Shh, dont tell the liberals and dems that. They don't understand and will get confused. They think more of the same will do the trick. I mean the post office if ONLY losing $25 million per day..... thats an improvement..... give them all raises for such a great job.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/17/postal-service-losing-money-united-states_n_3104513.html
.

The post office has been legislated into the red by the right in order to allow them to point to it as an example of government failure.

Typical right wing tactic = fail miserably at your job an then point to your own failure as evidence to support your anti-government ideology.
 
The government has never saved a dime on any program.....ever.....

This is based on what?

Because of the new healthcare law it's now mandatory for all insurance companies to provide a breast pump to new mothers. There's approximately 12,500 babies born in America each and every single day. At $300 per breast pump that's an additional cost of $3,750,000 per day. This comes to a total of $1,368,750,000 per year.

This is just one of many items that is now mandatory for insurance companies to provide. Are you telling me that insurance companies are just cutting all their profit to pay for these now mandatory requirements? So for breast pump coverage cost for example you're telling me that insurance companies are just coughing up 1.4 BILLION PER YEAR just for shits and giggles?

So actually, the rule is:

Your health insurance plan must cover the cost of a breast pump
 
So actually, the rule is:



And your estimate of the cost of a breast pump seems off:

http://www.walmart.com/search/searc...l0=b&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=23269475802&wl4=&veh=sem

http://www.target.com/s/breast+pump...00001ccf6809&gclid=CK7o7vi3hL4CFYqIfgodprIAAw

And in many cases, breast pumps were already covered so that wouldn't be an additional cost.

And not everyone wants one (or doesn't already have one).

So your cost estimate is off by a huge margin.

Does knowing that you made some mistakes cause you to re-evaluate your position? I'm betting not.

I was going to post something like this but per usual you are on top of it.
 
So...

What I have gotten from getting caught up in this thread is that there are a lot of accusations and bad numbers being thrown around, then being discredited.

It will be interesting to see if those who have been shown to be wrong accept that or whether they just choose to shift their talking points.
 
All I know is he took $2500 away from my Flex account that screwed me royally.
 
This is based on what?



So actually, the rule is:



And your estimate of the cost of a breast pump seems off:

http://www.walmart.com/search/searc...l0=b&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=23269475802&wl4=&veh=sem

http://www.target.com/s/breast+pump...00001ccf6809&gclid=CK7o7vi3hL4CFYqIfgodprIAAw

And in many cases, breast pumps were already covered so that wouldn't be an additional cost.

And not everyone wants one (or doesn't already have one).

So your cost estimate is off by a huge margin.

Does knowing that you made some mistakes cause you to re-evaluate your position? I'm betting not.

Jack, you do all the heavy lifting so my lazy ass doesn't have to Google something as trivial as breast pump prices in order to discredit these loons.
 
Back
Top