“There’s no doubt this will raise the cost of insurance. If you thought it was too expensive before, just wait. Not only will the insurance companies pass on the tax to the consumer but we’ll also be paying more for our insurance because it’s mandated. Inevitably cost increases when you force everyone to be covered.”
care to back that up with any sort of evidence, or proof? no doubt…

Anony, it is called Econ 101. Companies don’t actually pay taxes. They pass them on in the form of higher prices.

It’s because of stupidity like Baucus’ proposal, we need Single-Payer Health-Care (HR 676). Why this clown and DINO is involved in this extremely important issue, is beyond me.

“Companies don’t actually pay taxes. They pass them on in the form of higher prices.”
hold on, pouty. i thought that you capitalist puritans argued that it was taxes that were driving corporations overseas… but now you claim that they don’t pay these taxes. you have an obvious contradiction in your economic theories, bub.
the truth is, adding people to the ranks of the insured will quite likely drive down the cost overall. it’s simple math. so simple in fact, that even you could get it. let’s say for example you have a small group of 10 people, 9 of which are pretty healthy and one who comes down with cancer. if it costs $100 a day to pay for the care of the cancer patient, each person could pay $10 per day to cover it. now let’s say that 10 more relatively people were added to that group. it would bring the cost per member from $10 each down to $5 each. it could go the other way if there were more terminally ill people than healthy people added.

It really is an amazing idea. Crazy amazing. I thought about the analogy made by someone else on another site about this being like the auto insurance we are required to buy. The point was made about those not needing auto insurance because they don’t have a car. Totally valid. But the argument they will return with is that everyone has life so everyone needs health insurance.
Of course what that implies is that the gov is now going to regulate life through fines.
And that is a scary proposition and one that flies in the face of the Declaration of Independence but it is in my opinion where we find ourselves today.
As to the anonymous reincarnate’s comment about companies, taxes, and capitalist puritans. Companies move for better profits. Higher taxes on here equates to less profit window. Moving to a country with less tax burden and cheaper wage means lower operating costs equals bigger profits.
And your math forgets the amount of people the government will have to higher to missmanage your health system. Look to England. They are third largest employer in the world because of the people they higher in their so called “great” health care system. Just look at the cash for clunkers fiasco. On the face it looked great. But they haven’t paid out and have been rushing to higher 1,000′s of people to work on the program. That $3Billion plan just got a lot bigger they just haven’t reported it yet.

Anony,
“hold on, pouty. i thought that you capitalist puritans argued that it was taxes that were driving corporations overseas… but now you claim that they don’t pay these taxes. you have an obvious contradiction in your economic theories, bub.
First, I like the capitalist tag AND the Puritan tag. Thanks.
Second, Hal hit before i could. Companies do move to avoid passing the taxes along in the form of lower wages (i.e. no salary increases, layoffs, etc.) so as to remain competitive.
Third, I actually work in the health insurance field and your example shows you have no idea what you are talking about. That is no where close to how it actually workd for a group of 10.

Companies move for better profits. Higher taxes on here equates to less profit window. Moving to a country with less tax burden and cheaper wage means lower operating costs equals bigger profits.
hal, i don’t disagree with you. my belief is that a large number of them simply don’t pay taxes at all. however, pouty disagrees with you. he now claims that companies don’t pay these taxes, they simply pass them on to consumers.
“math forgets the amount of people the government will have to higher to missmanage your health system. Look to England.”
no, i just left it out so that simpleton pouty could grasp the concept of pooled risks as applied to the health insurance market. yes, there will be overhead that will eventually equate to slightly higher taxes, or by cutting from other programs such our bloated military spending.
you assume that it would be grossly mismanaged before it has even started. if the government is so bad at managing its programs, i tell you to urge your right-wing politicians to tear medicare and social security and our military security from the people and see where they get.
i should remind you that england isn’t the model for any health insurance reform legislation being considered here. however, even conservative british politicians wouldn’t trade their system for ours!

“I actually work in the health insurance field”
well, that explains your strong opposition to reform.
“First, I like the capitalist tag AND the Puritan tag. Thanks.”
you’re welcome. i’m glad that i pegged you accurately and that you don’t take it as an insult. but you only bolstered your contradiction.
“your example shows you have no idea what you are talking about”
so, you still didn’t follow the math. i’m sorry for you.

Anony, we really get under your skin, don’t we?
Yep I’m in the insurance field, health insurance in the past and medical liability now. And I AM for reform. I’ve said that before. Maybe you missed it. I’m just not for government takeover. That is socialism.
Speaking of medical liability, where are you guys on that? Oh I know. In the pocket of trial lawyers. Duh!

“Anony, we really get under your skin, don’t we?”
not at all. but if you all fell off the face of the earth tomorrow, i wouldn’t shed a tear about it either.
“I’m just not for government takeover. That is socialism.”
and since nobody is proposing a government takeover – or socialism – here, then you support the president’s reform. good, i agree with you.
“Speaking of medical liability, where are you guys on that? Oh I know. In the pocket of trial lawyers. Duh!”
hm, there you go jumping to conclusions. why ask if you don’t care to first hear my answer?
speaking for myself, i think that if a doctor mutilates a patient because he/she is incompetent at his/her job then he/she should be liable for his/her mistakes, don’t you? or if a nurse administers 4 times the dose of a medication due to negligence, the nurse should be liable, too. if a pharmaceutical cranks out pills that kill people, they also should be liable. if a gun blows up in the shooter’s face, the gun manufacturer should be liable. if someone is driving their honda down the highway and it spontaneously explodes, then honda should be liable. that’s not supporting trial lawyers, that’s supporting consumers.
on the other hand, if there are pointless lawsuits, they should be mitigated.
is this your solution? eliminate lawsuits? do you have any research, any numbers that can prove that by eliminating frivolous lawsuits against doctors and surgeons, etc. then health insurance would be affordable and insurance companies wouldn’t drop people who get sick or people with pre-conditions or discriminate based on gender and age?

“For those of you who can’t afford health care insurance, you better start saving now for the fine or the insurance you’ll be forced to buy by 2013″
well, there’s a great argument for providing an affordable public option for those who are self-employed, poor, or unemployed. of course, there is a conditional waiver for those who still can’t afford insurance.
the fine is aimed at those who can afford insurance but choose not to buy it, causing the rest of us to subsidize their health care expenses. i guess you didn’t catch that part.

The proposed Health care must just be a bad joke. let’s see if I get this right. Families who don’t get insurance because they can’t o pay upo to $3800afford the cost will now have to pay up to $3800 in fines like they will be able to afford this.
What about the unemployed? add to that the disabled and the lack of decent work for Americans, this work instead being given to illegals, insurance needs to be free to those who aren’t working

brightness likely running retrieved

reducing ces movit