Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What do you like/dislike about the most current Health Care proposal?


  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

#46 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,115 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 11:19 AM

OK so I did a little research:

http://money.cnn.com...eform/index.htm

They are for rich people who want to try and not use benefits to get a tax break. It's a Bush era tax scheme and we all know how those worked out.

From the wrap-up:

The future of HSAs
As for what will come of HSAs in the ever-shifting landscape of health reform, there's likewise disagreement. None of the bills currently under consideration in Congress so much as mention HSAs. But Daniel Perrin of the HSA Coalition, a nonprofit lobbying group, worries that savings accounts could still be crowded out by the effects of reform.

For example, says Perrin, most of the proposed reform legislation would require plans to offer a minimum level of benefits, which would make it harder for insurers to keep premiums low by limiting coverage. Those low-premium, high-deductible plans are the ones HSAs are intended to support.

"I'm going to get the same price for a plan with a $500 deductible or a $4,000 deductible -- why would I do that?" Perrin asks. This, he insists, is what transpired in Massachusetts when it implemented its health-exchange-based system in 2006.

Yet even if the benefit requirements pass unscathed -- Sen. Max Baucus, for example, has countered with a plan that would offer four benefit levels ranging from "Bronze" to "Platinum" -- Park notes that the Congressional Research Service estimates that most high-deductible plans could remain in place by increasing the benefits they provide.

And according to the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, which tracks HSAs through tax filings, the accounts have survived that state's reform -- which includes minimum benefit levels -- just fine. The number of HSA-using tax filers in Massachusetts rose from 2,195 in 2005, the year before the state enacted its new health insurance system, to 7,434 in the still-incomplete 2008 tax year, with more expected to file in the coming months.

Entrepreneur Andrew Field hopes that HSAs not only survive but can be improved. While he's pleased that HSAs have his employees "thinking like consumers," he admits that the medical system is not especially forthcoming about the prices on its menus: Finding information to comparison-shop for medical services "has not been great," he says. One of his top requests for health reform: "I would look at requiring pricing to be disclosed. That's a pretty-nonintrusive regulation."



#47 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,308 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 16 March 2010 - 11:26 AM

There should be some type of standard pricing model out there similar to what auto mechanics have. I use to know the name of that scale but it escapes me.
The HSA's are good for those that may not have the monthly income to pay for a lower ded plan.
And the money they do NOT use rolls over year after year. There maybe a year where they don't have to dip into. It can be there when they are at retirement.

I still say there are so many ways to cut costs, increase benefits, speed up procedures and what have you.

#48 Epistaxis

Epistaxis

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,182 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 12:00 PM

which version are they up to now? Its changed so much, i am not sure what all the changes are.

Anyway, my issue is the same as it was before, the cost. I think they are seriously underestimating what this will cost over the next few years, and over the long haul. Yes i have heard all the arguments about how much we are spending on health care, and even if i take them seriously, most of that is spent by private citizens and companies, and is not dependent on taxes.

I am concerned that this will be underfunded, and eventually added to the debt. They are never going to get away with the necessary raises in tax to cover it, and imo, it could eventually become like medicaid. Underfunded and politicians will be afraid they will be voted out of office if they vote for enough taxes to cover it.

Fwiw, the thing has several hundred pages. I doubt any of us have read all of it.


bingo

#49 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,792 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 16 March 2010 - 12:19 PM

So I think I can sum up by saying those opposing have no idea why they oppose it other than its "gubment run helfcare" which it isn't.


We deserve whats coming in the next decade.


More like that YOU think you deserve another subsidy and entitlement.

I deserve to keep some of my hard earned money. I pay enough taxes.

Obama and clan are determined to re-distribute wealth...it is as plain and simple as that.

#50 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:00 PM

More like that YOU think you deserve another subsidy and entitlement.

I deserve to keep some of my hard earned money. I pay enough taxes.

Obama and clan are determined to re-distribute wealth...it is as plain and simple as that.



I own my own business and pay my own health care. I depend on no one.

You?

#51 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,308 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:07 PM

I own my own business and pay my own health care. I depend on no one.

You?


Do you qualify for various tax deductions and write offs and depreciation of equipment?

#52 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,519 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:07 PM

Wouldn't opening up competition, tort reform, and some minor gov influence lower healthcare than what we have now?

Isn't medicare a gov healthplan ? (honest question)

#53 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:10 PM

Wouldn't opening up competition, tort reform, and some minor gov influence lower healthcare than what we have now?

Isn't medicare a gov healthplan ? (honest question)


Congrats, you just described what the final bill will be, minus the tort reform which I fully support.

#54 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,519 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:12 PM

Congrats, you just described what the final bill will be, minus the tort reform which I fully support.


I honestly stopped trying to keep up with it. I will wait to someone else agrees with what you posted because you are a sneaky hippy.

Did the public option die yet ?

#55 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 20,086 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:13 PM

Yes, its dead. The pres has backed off it and the senate has said they will not pursue it, votes just are not there.

#56 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,308 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:13 PM

Wouldn't opening up competition, tort reform, and some minor gov influence lower healthcare than what we have now?

Isn't medicare a gov healthplan ? (honest question)


Correct that medicare is a gov healthplan. Technically we already have universal health care it's just very expensive because of folks going to an emergency room and then that costs gets absorbed by others.

So on one hand, that refutes the myth about people not having access or equal access to health care.

The CBO claims to project out savings. That was hailed a few weeks ago by some that are only for reform without understanding costs. So I asked who here can project how much they are going to save in the future? If you can't even do it as an individual how in the wide world of sports can you do it for this? You CAN'T.

#57 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,732 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:14 PM

Wouldn't opening up competition, tort reform, and some minor gov influence lower healthcare than what we have now?

Isn't medicare a gov healthplan ? (honest question)


money that would be saved by capping malpractice suits is roughly equal to the amount of money that malpractice costs the system currently. in other words, tort reform wouldn't lower the cost of healthcare any significant amount, it would just be transferring the cost from doctor to patient, and would serve only to protect doctors who are overprescribing and contributing to one of the top causes of death in the country.

#58 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,519 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:15 PM

Yes, its dead. The pres has backed off it and the senate has said they will not pursue it, votes just are not there.


So basically it's a 1000 pages of gibberish that we wont know the full scope of until it's passed ?


I need a dumbasses edition......*wanders off to watch FOX and MSNBC at the same time*

#59 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,732 posts

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:15 PM

2000 pages

#60 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,308 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 16 March 2010 - 01:15 PM

money that would be saved by capping malpractice suits is roughly equal to the amount of money that malpractice costs the system currently. in other words, tort reform wouldn't lower the cost of healthcare any significant amount, it would just be transferring the cost from doctor to patient, and would serve only to protect doctors who are overprescribing and contributing to one of the top causes of death in the country.


I think over testing moreso than presribing. The medicine piece would be much lower than all the various tests run.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com