Obamacare to cost average of $20 Thousand per family

[Rosse88]

I think eventually the employers will get over it and absorb the costs over time, like they have been doing for centuries.

But for now let's weep for the small businessman who doesn't care about his employees...his feelings are important.

That is one of the most ignorant and snide comments I have read in this entire post. These are not the simple "absorb" moments as the ACA changed the manner in which premiums are handled. If you do not understand that, please refrain from insulting us. So in short, Ill explain this a little more:

If your company entity is over 50 full-time employees now, you must provide coverage. It changed as all forms of interaction are now considered an entity. Employment shares, labeling in contract, they all count as you. Also, 50 is not that many employees. ESPECIALLY when you considering the change in counts. They also changed full-time to 30 hours weekly. Also generally considered part time by most individuals. There are also fewer gains to providing the full insurance now. Generally, the reason the packages were eaten by companies was to compensate for lower wages. That is not the case now.

Small business also have to worry about cost upkeep and expansion. Generally, most companies that are small make minimum profit and many of the owners take personal hits. Seriously, do you have ANY concept of what business entails?

[Wells]

Simple solution, let the 2/3rds of america's total population that don't pay income tax starve, not have health insurance, etc. They don't deserve any benefits, This is a democracy not a fucking socialist regime.

Oh internet, never change.

[mistuhbull]

Couldn't it just be that the entire EU has half the GDP per capita compared to the US?

Couldn't it also be the fact that US citizens live unhealthy lifestyles which has nothing to do with the success or failure of US healthcare?

The amount of ignorance on confounding factors in this thread is too damn high.

You're wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

[Bloodninja]

Well, tough shit. Many hospitals ARE for profit and WOULD NOT EXIST if they were not able to make a profit. Just like many grocery stores, housing complexes and other companies that provide basic needs. And life is not a "liberty" that should be guaranteed at any cost to anyone who can pay.

I genuinely hope that you, who I assume is not covered under health insurance because then you would be an enormous hypocrite, is stricken very ill or a victim of a horrible accident. Then you would feel the cost of your beloved for-profit system and wonder, is this really the best we can do? And before you have the time to ponder the answer the hospital throws you on the streets because you can't afford your life-saving treatment. Oh well tough shit.

Infracted: Please refrain from wishing horrible sorts of situations on other posters, no matter how serious you're being, it's against the rules.

[tiporispit]

I'm just glad that I live in a country where this basic human right is practically free.

I used to be glad to live in a country where you get out what you put in. Democrat vote buying with welfare programs has driven this country into a version of that socialist European cesspool.

[Wells]

Couldn't it just be that the entire EU has half the GDP per capita compared to the US?

Couldn't it also be the fact that US citizens live unhealthy lifestyles which has nothing to do with the success or failure of US healthcare?

The amount of ignorance on confounding factors in this thread is too damn high.

I hear if you just list stuff that may or may not be an important factor its an argument.

[Magpai]

Why isn't it?

Because it's unrealistic and unjust. There's only so much wealth you can funnel into the healthcare industry, private or public sector, under the guise of preserving life at any cost. And it's easy to see why "life being guaranteed at any cost to anyone who can pay" is a stupid idea. You could justify anyone forcing anyone else to hand over their money or property as long as you can link it to "life" using that logic. You're gonna pay for my next hamburger or I'm going to beat the living hell out of you until you do.

Put simply, the "right to life" doesn't mean the right to force any possible burden on your neighbors that can be tied to prolonging your life.

[Wells]

There's only so much wealth you can funnel into the healthcare industry, private or public sector, under the guise of preserving life at any cost.

Well better pick the systems that spend the least and get the most then. Oh wait that single payer.

[Fadinglight]

Cash, credit, or bankruptcy? Oh well you're an average american with a life threatening illness making less than 100k a year? Seems bankruptcy is your only option!

Bankruptcy sounds like a much better option than death.

[yurano]

Well, tough shit. Many hospitals ARE for profit and WOULD NOT EXIST if they were not able to make a profit. Just like many grocery stores, housing complexes and other companies that provide basic needs. And life is not a "liberty" that should be guaranteed at any cost to anyone who can pay.

Why isn't it?

Because you run into the problem of how much of life should be a 'guaranteed' liberty.

In modern civilization, we believe that very basic necessities like food and water should be covered under welfare, but only in limited amounts (especially to limit abuse).

If Obamacare had instead been aimed at providing very basic national healthcare to cover poor people that are frequently abused by sketchy insurance companies, I doubt many would complain.

However, Obamacare is aimed at providing high level and expensive healthcare too all, which is going to incur an exorbitant cost. Since the poor can't pay, the rich (people and businesses) are going to shoulder the load. Even worse is when businesses decide to dump the load on the poor as with the case at Walmart I quoted earlier.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Well, tough shit. Many hospitals ARE for profit and WOULD NOT EXIST if they were not able to make a profit. Just like many grocery stores, housing complexes and other companies that provide basic needs. And life is not a "liberty" that should be guaranteed at any cost to anyone who can pay.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are all laid out in the declaration of independence, a document that precedes the constitution. Since we've been recently arguing how important the second amendment is, do you disagree with the declaration of independence, or do you interpret them according to your own needs and wants?

[Wells]

Bankruptcy sounds like a much better option than death.

False dichotomy.

[Kaleredar]

I used to be glad to live in a country where you get out what you put in. Democrat vote buying with welfare programs has driven this country into a version of that socialist European cesspool.

Yes... how dare we try and assist veterans... old people... people who can't afford food...

What a dystopian world we must live in.

[Wells]

If Obamacare had instead been aimed at providing very basic national healthcare to cover poor people that are frequently abused by sketchy insurance companies, I doubt many would complain.

Best thing in this thread so far.

[Magpai]

I genuinely hope that you, who I assume is not covered under health insurance because then you would be an enormous hypocrite, is stricken very ill or a victim of a horrible accident. Then you would feel the cost of your beloved for-profit system and wonder, is this really the best we can do? And before you have the time to ponder the answer the hospital throws you on the streets because you can't afford your life-saving treatment. Oh well tough shit.

You can bet your ass if something happens to me that is not covered by my insurance, I won't be wishing the government would force other people to pay for a treatment that cost several average family incomes for me.

[Fadinglight]

Oh internet, never change.

Hmm.. you were the one talking about buying lunch or whatever. Spend money on food not WoW and internet access

[oblivionx]

Well better pick the systems that spend the least and get the most then. Oh wait that single payer.

Which your party in their tyranny of a majority couldn't pass.

So I see the argument leading to "it's the republicans fault" on the horizon...

[Reclaimer]

I think it's stupid that there's a "penalty" for not having insurance.

I wouldnt worry, 2016 is along way away. The gov know there's alot of people that are legit broke and have nothing. Stuff like this dont slove shit and its all back to
SQ1. What are they going to do? Jailtoss you for being unable to pay? I dont think so.

[Wells]

Which your party in their tyranny of a majority couldn't pass.

So I see the argument leading to "it's the republicans fault" on the horizon...

I don't think you know what a tyranny of the majority is, but that's another battle.

[Magpai]

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are all laid out in the declaration of independence, a document that precedes the constitution. Since we've been recently arguing how important the second amendment is, do you disagree with the declaration of independence, or do you interpret them according to your own needs and wants?

It's only that simple if you're 100% self-centered. What happens when your "right to life" conflicts with someone else's right to economic liberty and right to pursue happiness?