How tough is life in America now?

[deleted account] ( 469 moms have responded )

This is a question for all you Americans. In Australia we hear that there are massive problems with unemployment and poverty over there now. But you guys don't seem to be complaining a lot.



What is it like for you and people close to you?



Are you struggling financially and do you worry about the future?



Thanks in advance for your honesty!

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

[deleted account]

I do agree that it cannot be free, but you must also consider the background of the person immigrating--$700 is a lot, but it's doable for most middle class families looking to move to another country. On the other hand, it is a complete impossibility for a single mom making $8/day trying to feed 3 kids.

We have medial clinics that charge on a sliding scale based on income ( I know, they're hard to find, but they do exist), so couldn't we apply the same methods to the immigration procedures/fees?

Also, people here illegally don't exactly have it easy--I work with them, I know their living conditions. You are able to charge your immigration fees to a credit card--they can't get credit cards, or even bank accounts. They carry all the cash they have on their person at all times, the color of their skin marks them for muggings and robberies that they cannot even report. Many women are here because of a scam where they were promised papers in exchange for one year's work in a sewing room, then they got here and were forced into prostitution--In most cases they do not even have an opportunity to escape, but if they do, they cannot say anything because they risk separation from their children, deportation, and sometimes even prison back in their home country.

I hate hearing citizens talk about those here illegally as if all they had to do was walk across an unguarded boarder, set up shop, and take advantage of Americas social programs. It's not that easy, and I just want people to see these people for what they are--disparate parents who want a good, safe life for their kids. Yes, they are here illegally, they are committing a crime, but rather than just complaining about them and hurting them more, we should be trying to help them--whether that be through programs to legalize their residence and integrate them into the American society, or clean up their home countries so that they can stay there peacefully. I'm rather getting sick of the selfish "not my family, not my problem" mentality of Americans, then when they need help, they whine about having no one to help them....well that's why. If you want help when you are down, you need to help others when you are up.


Okay, sorry for the rant, off my soapbox now...

[deleted account]

A lot of people here illegally do pay income taxes. Employers who hire them often falsify their records, so the employee does pay income taxes. Those who work "under the table" are working for pennies on the hour--literally $15-$20 per day for 16-18 hour workdays--and we need them. Without them, the cost of hamburger, chicken, and many other fruits and vegetables would go through the roof. Many also work in roofing, and road construction--so your taxes would go up if legal citizens were employed there because legal citizens demand more.

Also, as a Native American, I don't really get why Americans are so upset about the immigrant population--I mean, that's how Americans got here, right? The only difference is that Americans came in with guns and killed the people who were here, whereas the current immigrant population is just trying to come in a and do jobs Americans don't want......you'd think they'd be more welcoming.

The immigration process to America is treacherous, and impossible for many. It can take anywhere from 2 to 15 years, you have to learn English, and it costs hundreds of dollars. I know learning English seems like a common sense requirement, but if you live in a place with no library, have no car, and no access to the internet, learning a second language is impossible. Furthermore, many Americans don't have an extra $700 lying around, plus the cost of travel, so add another $300 or so, yet they expect these poor immigrants to pay that. These people are here because they want their children to grow up in a house where they don't have to fear getting shot when they walk outside, where they don't have to fear the latest famine or disease, where skinning a knee is not a life threatening event. So sit up in your air-conditioned apartment with running water and doors that lock, drive around in your personal car, and take pride in the fact that you are more deserving of basic needs and luxuries than these people because of where you were born, or because of your ancestors violent actions.

[deleted account]

And America is not Socialist....at all. I don't know where you got that idea because if it were, we would not have the people struggling as you say they are.

The only "socialist" type thing we have is public aid--welfare, foodstamps, etc.--which according to your post is heavily depended upon. Are you suggesting we cut out public aid to struggling citizens?

[deleted account]

Stella said: "I don't have a problem with my money going to our military at all. But, I grew up on military bases all over the place and was raised to appreciate our military."

Whaaat? What does "appreciate the military" really mean? The military is just a tool of the government of the day. Saying you were raised to appreciate the military doesn't make sense to me at all.

The military has no objectives of its own - it can be used for good or evil.

If you have idiots or liars in power, the military is sent off to do idiotic or deceitful things.

Saying you appreciate the military is a blanket statement which sounds like you are refusing to think deeplyand make up your own mind about the rights and wrongs of military activity, now and througout history.

[deleted account]

I have to agree with Krista and Megan that UHC would definitely boost our economic situation. I also agree that the recently passed ACA falls short in many, many ways and may not do enough for us.

Stella, you said you keep your family covered by taking jobs with larger companies who offer group insurance. You do realize that this is not an option for much of America right now, right? Most of the big companies that offer group insurance plans are cutting jobs, not adding them. Do you suggest those that have been cut continue to be jobless rather than take a job that does not offer insurance. That philosophy is also very detrimental to small businesses, which is what America was built upon. The current healthcare system makes it difficult for small businesses to recruit and keep good employees, forcing many out of business and eliminating competition for big business.

Furthermore, even if you are lucky enough to land a job with group insurance, if you have ever had a preexisting condition and a gap in your coverage, that group insurance can limit your coverage. I had cancer, graves, and NF. Even if I could get a job with a big business (which I won't because I am an entrepreneur) It would not cover my bills should my cancer come back, nor would it cover lab work or treatment for my other conditions. This is because while i was fighting cancer the first time around, when I was 19, I was forced to stop working (I was too sick to work and had not been at my current job for a full year yet, so I could not take FMLA...even in FMLA had been an option, I needed more than 12 weeks) and thus lost the group policy that I had through that job. Yes, I had the option to extend coverage through COBRA for $860/month, but I was a homeless teenager with no job--I couldn't pay for it. So my coverage lapsed and now I cannot get insurance.

The ACA helps to keep that from happening to other people. In 2014, I will be able to get health insurance, and I can assure you, I am counting down the days! Yes, it will cost a friggin fortune because the law fell short at limiting profits for insurance companies, but at least i will have it. There are subsidies for those who need them, and Stella, if you are truly struggling to make ends meet, you will qualify because they are available to anyone making up to 400% of the federal poverty rate--unless you are in one of the most expensive cities here, you should be able to live very comfortably and still get a subsidy.

Also, the ACA puts no more limits on where you can get medical care/what doctors you can see, than your current insurance carrier. Why are so many Americans okay with their insurance company telling them where they can go and what treatments they can seek, but not okay with UHC which actually gives citizens MORE options than most private insurers?

469 Comments

View replies by

[deleted account]

Oh, one other problem with the ACA is the 1099 tax reform they stuck into it that has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. This requires business owners to file a 1099 for every single vendor they use, documenting every single expense they intend to write off--down to filing one for Staples if you buy ink pens there! Formerly, all we had to do was have receipts to back up purchases, but filling out that many 1099's AND keeping receipt records is a lot of accounting for many small businesses. It will put some out of business.

That said, despite the issues I have with ACA, I do feel it is a step somewhat in the right direction....but we need to take a lot more steps.

[deleted account]

The penalties are yearly, and if you choose to pay the penalty you still have to cover the cost of your own healthcare should you become ill. The premiums for health insurance will be closer to $1000/month for middle class families, but cannot exceed a certain percentage of their income, which should be affordable.

Sherri, if a family who chooses not to have insurance has a member suddenly get sick, using cancer for example, because it's expensive and can strike pretty much anyone, and they end up with, say $700k in medical bills but only make $40,000/year. How would they pay the medical bills? The penalty is basically insurance for the sate/country, because if they cannot pay the bill, the taxpayers will have to pay it, so it is only right that they either have insurance, or make payments into the tax fund that will pay their medical bills if they default. Right?

I will agree there are issues with ACA. One thing that is killing me right now is that the "high-risk pools" created in 2010 do nothing for me because of the way my business is structured, and there is no legal way to restructure it. I own an office building, which is financed. I lease space in the building to businesses, and my income from that is several hundred thousand dollars per year, however, the majority of that goes toward paying the loan and the property managers--my actual income from the building is only about $25k annually. Now, I get to write the loan off when I do my taxes, but the high-risk pool insurance thing wants to look at my income before the write off, so they want several thousand dollars per month. I have to buy from the high-risk pool because private insurers outside of it will not insure me. Now, as I understand it, the high-risk pools are only a temporary option to help people until 2014 when people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage or charged higher rates. So I just have to stay healthy for 2 more years. And hopefully, it is laid out so that they will look at my income after my loan write off--I believe this loophole was fixed, just not in time for the high-risk pools.

Childcare is expensive! That's why I only work during the school year.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/03/2012

6,435

12

72

The cost of child care is why I'll only be working part time when I can work. When I lived in New York I had in home day care centres and never paid more than 500$ a month if that! That was great. Sometimes I'd pay 60$ a week.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/03/2012

6,435

12

72

Thanks, I just posted that on my facebook page because I have friends who insist they have to pay a fine now.

MeMe - posted on 08/03/2012

140

0

8

I want FREE child care like Quebec!! Bring it on - I am tired of paying $700/month and soon to be $1600/month! FFS, FREEEEEEE is what it should be!

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/03/2012

6,435

12

72

As Jenn said because it's a tax penalty. Taxes are filed yearly. I can ask my mom about this too since she does people's taxes back in New York.

Personally I believe we should just overhaul the US system and implement a combination of the French and Canadian systems. This would include free child care and paid maternity leave.

Jenn - posted on 08/03/2012

675

1

47

Because it is a tax penalty, it will be yearly. It would make more economic sense to pay the penalty than the $14,0000/yr premiums we currently pay for private health insurance!

Rosie - posted on 08/03/2012

8,657

30

321

that is per year-not monthly, if you DON'T have insurance...which like i said will be easier to pay for (or not pay at all if you qualify for medicaid-133% of the poverty level you will qualify)

Rosie - posted on 08/03/2012

8,657

30

321

sherri there is no $1000 monthly fine. where did you get that information? can you repost a link, cause i can't find anything that says it here....

i do get what you are saying about those not wanting insurance and then having to pay for it-yes that will affect that person. but that person probably doesn't have insurance because they can't afford the premium right? soooooo, the government HELPS with the premium, which will also be LOWER because insurance companies CAN'T charge you more than a certain percentage of your income for a premium (depends on how much you make above the poverty line, for my family they can't charge more than 6.3% of our income).



i feel like a broken record too! ;)

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/03/2012

6,435

12

72

Sherri, can you post the link to where you found that information?

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/03/2012

6,435

12

72

1000$ a month could refer to COBRA which is what unemployed people can apply for now. My friend in NY and I are talking about it and how that's crazy.

But Sherri, try the links Rosie posted. They're quite helpful. She's also right that you can blame the GOP/ Tea Party for the confusion. Remember the so called Death Panels back in 2009? They were really refering to the DNR orders which many elderly people who are either in extended care facilities or have in home care. These orders are signed by the patient to tell their care givers that they don't want to be given CPR or have anyone try to save them if they say go into cardiac arrest. According to Obama's new plan patients will be given more information about the DNR orders. The GOP blew this out of proportion and started claiming that the new health care laws would allow the elderly to just die. They also went as far as to claim that countries with UHC allow their elderly to die. This is definitely not true. DH's grandma is in a nursing home where his mom works. She's 89 and has alzheimers, she's fallen a few times, broke her hip and now is in a wheel chair. She gets excellent care.

Here in BC we are trying to keep our new law which allows terminally ill patients to end their lives on their own terms. But that shouldn't be confused with allowing someone with a terminal illness to just die in general. Oregon has a simular law in place already which allows assisted suicides in that state to be legal.

Janice - posted on 08/03/2012

1,890

18

63

Sherri I think you are missing Rosie's point. She is trying to say that the information Julie posted and I inquired about is lies or half truths. As long as you keep paying your insurance premium through your husband's employer, you will not be taxed/fined except when you go go to the tanning salon of course ;)

Correct me if Im wrong Rosie.



ETA: posted at the same time as Rosie

Rosie - posted on 08/03/2012

8,657

30

321

but, i've explained that already. nobody pays $1000 a month for anything....where did you get this imaginary number? you will get HELP paying for insurance premiums that will soon be LOWER thanks to the ACA. as for older people, they get free preventative services, lowered medicare premiums, discounts on brand name drugs if they fall in the donuthole...i'm failing to see how it's hurting anyone.



and i can damn well blame republicans for the confusion on this. where the hell did you get the idea that there would be higher costs for you other than republican talk? all you have to do instead of listen to that jibberish is go to government websites and see for yourself. i did post a link so you could see how it would affect your family directly.

Rosie - posted on 08/03/2012

8,657

30

321

that is the republican way...to confuse and fear monger, and exaggerate. i swear..i had one friend who posted a chain email about "cattle guards" getting fired by the president. then of course went on to bash the president for firing so many people....turns out cattle guards are pieces of metal to prevent livestock from escaping...not people-it even initially stated so in the email. metal obviously can't be fired by the president. also this particular story has been around for years, was used on clinton as well.
it makes me so sad that people get so outraged over lies..it twists their minds to not think openly about other situations. it only sets up confusion for those trying to figure out what is real and what is not. the republican party is notorious for this. glen beck, rush limbaugh and the likes spew lies, and half truths everyday and their adoring fans eat the shit up. it disgusts me.

Janice - posted on 08/03/2012

1,890

18

63

Life is tough in America. Why?
Because its so damn hard to sift through the bullshit and find the truth!
I want to be an informed citizen who makes informed choices but that is really hard to do when I have small kids that dont allow me to spend hours researching. I am trying and confused, so how is there any hope for those who have no interest to make a remotely informed opinion.

Now I know all about the benefits and pitfalls of UHC by talking with those who actually live with it. However, the US is not getting UHC. ACA is confusing and obviously its easy to manipulate the provisions of the bill in order to confuse people. I just dont understand how 1/2 the items in the bill are even related.

Kristi - posted on 08/03/2012

1,355

3

78

Megan--"Also I will reiterate that ACA is NOT UHC. They don't even share a genus or species. They're only slightly in the same classification."

I think you should stop using fancy words like, "genus" and "species," you are just adding to the confusion between UHC and every man, woman, and child for themselves....BABAHA! (yes, I meant to spell it that way. That's how Grace's little nephew says it, I love it! ; ))

MeMe - posted on 08/03/2012

140

0

8

Yeah, I suppose it all depends on which part of Canada you live. I have always had an OBGYN (in Alberta and here in Nova Scotia). My GP is a OBGYN and a pediatrician, which is great, I get 3 in one. She delivered my son, too. I have always had an OBGYN for each of my pregnancies (been pregnant 4 times, counting this time).

Look around, Megan. If no female docs or OBGYN's are taking new clients right now, you can be put on a list. You will eventually get in and once you are, then each of your daughters could use her too, when they are older.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

I've had pros and cons so far. My MIL and my friend in Slave Lake (so two separate people in two separate provinces) have told me they've never seen an actual OBGYN because you will only see them if you have issues with your pregnancy not for paps and the like. For those they see their GP. My GP will be a man and although I know he went to the same type of school as my wonderful OBGYN back in New York, but my theory is that a male gyno is like a mechanic who has never owned a vehicle. So I'm nervous about having a guy check out my vagina, vulva and other parts because I've had female doctors my adult life only my pediatrician was male (He was really nice though) That's my biggest con. Well that and waiting to get a GP. The downtown clinic gave us lists, but no one had an opening. Thankfully the one we go to now is down the block so we can walk there.



However I was without insurance back in New York and I was only temporarily covered when I was pregnant. This is why I'm an advocate for true UHC not the ACA which is just a bandage

MeMe - posted on 08/02/2012

140

0

8

Yep, that is EXACTLY my experience too. I don't know how many times I have had an appt for myself or one of my kids and once arriving, I have gotten them to throw my or their file in too. No problem. They would see both of us, even though one of us was not a scheduled appt. I just did it last week, actually.



Truthfully, this past year, I would say on average, one of us has been to the doctor at least once a week. During the winter, when my son had ear infections for 4 months, there were times we were at that office 4 times in a week. I told them once, that we were just gonna move in! LOL They thought that was funny.



It works great, I honestly could not fathom it any other way and I am very pleased to know, you are finding it helpful. Once you and your older daughter are able to use it too, I think you will be very pleased, as I can see, you are already appreciative. ;)



Oh and yes, typically, if one family member is with a doctor, you can all see them. Which is great, too!

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Sherri, are you reading the link Rosie provided or the one that Janice googled? Because the one that was googled is untrue.

I would like to know what you would propose the US do instead of UHC since you obviously oppose it. Pay plans? Savings plans? Expedition to Denmark?

Also I will reiterate that ACA is NOT UHC. They don't even share a genus or species. They're only slightly in the same classification.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Meme: We used the clinic because we noticed my 16 month old's condition going down hill on a Saturday and since she was just not drinking and seemed warm even for temps in the low 30's here in Kelowna we went to the walk in clinic down the street from me. I've really only used a walk in since I moved to BC so I can't speak too much on first hand experiance. I can say that back in the US I waited 2hrs once when at Thomas Moore medical clinic at Ft Hood. Another time I was a few minutes late because G.W. Bush was visiting the base and they canceled my appointment. Military health care can suck sometimes.

DH and our baby just started seeing a GP. DH needed to bring in some paperwork from when he'd had his learning disability assessment and the doctor just scheduled the day after their initial appointment to bring the paperwork in. When I scheduled the appointments (DH was busy working on a project) for DH I was also able to have our daughter seen at the same time during the same appointment. (Said more for non Canadian benefit) Since it's a family GP when my older daughter and I get our care cards in a few months we can see that doctor as well.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Sherri do the phrases: 'It won't help my family' or 'You can get it if you qualify' ring a bell?

I know you don't intend to come off that way, but it reads that way to people.

Isobel - posted on 08/02/2012

9,849

0

286

There are more line ups in some parts of Canada than others, just like there are more line ups in some parts of the States, my understanding is that our shortage of GPs is comparable to yours.

It doesn't really matter though, because we are trying to explain why UHC is better for the country, you only care what's best for you.

MeMe - posted on 08/02/2012

140

0

8

Megan---However if you NEED a specialist and it's a life or death situation one will be found for you (even flown in from the US if need be) and you'll be seen.



This is correct AND Canada has been known to fly the individual to the States and pay for all of the medical needs. Pretty awesome if you ask me.



And yes, if you are not dying, you can wait a week or two. If you have a fever or your kids do, the doctors fit you in that day. I have been there, done that, so many times over the past 21 months, it isn't even funny. I did not have to go to a walk-in clinic, either. However, I have used them. Simply because many of them are open on the weekend and most doctors offices, are not.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Sherri, the reason that Canada has the wait times is because everyone has health care and can be seen. Also unless you have a life threatening issue you can wait. That's why we have so many walk in clinics here in Canada so we don't wait around in a doctor's office to be told the same thing someone else who has access to our medical records could do in less time. If you're not bleeding from both ears, you can wait. If you or your child is running a high fever, go to a clinic. It's not exactly rocket science, don't treat it as such.

Canada has a shortage of specialists- we know that. It's a national fact of our life. We also have a doctor shortage and we have to deal with it because in our country everyone has affordable accessable health care. However if you NEED a specialist and it's a life or death situation one will be found for you (even flown in from the US if need be) and you'll be seen. No one has said that UHC is the be all end all. It's a manmade system so it has flaws. It doesn't help that our PM is trying to privatise the system for his own benefits.

ACA is NOT the same as UHC. I've looked through it myself. It's not the same set up as UHC in Canada or other countries so please don't get the two confused with each other. ACA covers a majority of Americans. UHC covers everyone. Even our politicians use it along with their supplimental insurance. When I start working here in BC I can work as a government health care employee. I will have the same quality of health care as my ass hat PM. And I won't need to bribe someone to get seen.

Pardon me for saying so, but you are coming off as more than a tad clueless and selfish towards those in the US who don't have insurance.

MeMe - posted on 08/02/2012

140

0

8

Sherri---Second I do have my valid reasons. I have and my husband have family in Canada with UHC they have had problems seeing specialists, waiting for hours just to see their doctors, having trouble making doctors visit appts. having to wait a week to be able to be squeezed in instead of going same day as we do.

This is just so untrue. 36 years I have lived here and this information is not fact. It is simply crazy talk. I brought my son to the doctor the other day, without an appt. I walked in (no not a walk-in clinic, our actual doctor) and they seen him within 30mins. I call bullshit and someone is really filling your head full of false information.

I have also been to many specialists between myself and my two kids (severe adhd and ear infections). We have never had to wait for more than 2 weeks. Except for me to see the GI specialist. I did wait 8 months. However, that is because I had preliminary testing done, that proved I did not have anything serious. So, for me to allow others that DO have something serious go before me, I am fine with that. I still got my appt and honestly, it was a waste of my time because I didn't leave learning anything more, since I already knew what I was being told. My regular doctor told me but I was given an appt with the specialist, so I could feel better about the prognoses and it cost me nothing. ;)

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

janice, as previously explained, you won't get taxed if you can't afford insurance. you would actually get help from the government to pay your premiums, which also can't be higher than 9.5% of your total income, and the percentage gets lower as your income gets lower (so more than likely will decrease unless you have stellar insurance like my parents) your premiums will decrease, AND the government will help you pay them if you make up to 400% of the poverty line. this chart should help you figure out what your poverty line percentage is.http://coverageforall.org/pdf/FHCE_FedPo...

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

My biggest issue with ACA is that it's NOT anything like UHC. It's a start which won't be implemented at all if Romney and co get elected, but it's still not going to help everyone. UHC would help everyone and the US can afford to cover all of its citizens.

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

people who drink to much and die (such as my bio-dad) or smoke and get cancer are sure to have much higher medical bills as well. doesn't mean i want to take their right to smoke or drink away. i wouldn't disagree with having insurance be higher for a helmetless rider, or a smoker/drinker though.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

LOL Isobel! I checked the site too. The fact that people are throwing around phrases like bleeding liberal, Socialist pig and the like should have been a clue that the site wasn't exactly non biased.

MeMe - posted on 08/02/2012

140

0

8

Exactly, Isobel. That was gonna be my next stance.

What about all the people that witness someone flying off their motorcycle and having their brains splattered all over the road? I cannot imagine that is something people can just drive on by and have absolutely no impact from it, at all. I know I would and I know darn well my kids would be having nightmares for a very long time. Yeah, it definitely affects more than just the idiot choosing not to wear a helmet.

Isobel - posted on 08/02/2012

9,849

0

286

and if I see somebody get thrown off a motorcycle, I'll be paying for therapy for me and my kids for the rest of our lives.

Isobel - posted on 08/02/2012

9,849

0

286

Breitbart.com LOL...you do know that he's been proven to be THE biggest liar in your nation's history? That his lies cost people their jobs and shut down one of the most useful and respected organizations in America???



edited to correct an error...LOL should say LMMFAO

MeMe - posted on 08/02/2012

140

0

8

Sherri---@ Jenny just because I don't advocate for UHC doesn't make me obtuse. I have repeatedly stated a revamp needs to be done with the current system, I do not however agree that UHC is that solution. It also won't benefit my family, it currently will benefit others though...that is not a bad thing.



Why do you say it would not benefit your family? Of course it would. What you pay each month between your health insurance and federal tax, is more than likely MORE than what you would pay if all you had to pay into was UHC via your taxes. Unless, your husband pays less than $300/month in Federal taxes (which I doubt).



Rosie---People that do not wear a helmet or seat belt and end up being only "half" killed. Could very well be costing you and every other insurance paying person. Since, if this person does not have insurance but obviously needs medical care, who do you think will be footing that bill? It is surely NOT the hospital. ;) These people are a part (even if it is small) of why the US insurance premiums are so high. Which, indeed affects anyone that pays for their insurance.

Janice - posted on 08/02/2012

1,890

18

63

Ok well I did some searching. I found this which makes me nervous...and I support ACA so maybe someone can help me make sense of this

The first, and best known, of these seven taxes that will hit all Americans as a result of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate Tax (no longer concealed as a penalty). This provision will require a couple to pay the higher of a base tax of $1,360 per year, or 2.5% of adjusted growth income starting with lower base tax and rising to this level by 2016. Individuals will see a base tax of $695 and families a base tax of $2,085 per year by 2016.

Here is the full article http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/...

Jenny - posted on 08/02/2012

4,426

16

129

"I have repeatedly stated a revamp needs to be done with the current system, I do not however agree that UHC is that solution."

Sure but you can't give a good reason why which backs up my previous post. You just don't like the idea of it. You pay more in premiums (did you give Kelly the name of that company yet?) than I pay in taxes and I have access to more care as well as all of our other social programs. How is that working out for you?

My Mom was low income and paid no MSP payments. Her brain blew up and she had two brain surgeries, lived in ICU for three months and had extensive after care. Money was never mentioned once in relation to her care. There is no arguement you can present me that can show a better, more caring system than what I get to experience. You have nothing to back up your opinion that UHC is not a good system for you.

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

how will it hurt people that can't afford it? and if you were aware of who would get the penalties then why were you freaking out about some imaginary $1000 cost each month?

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

but i like facts!!!! *pouts*

i'll throw my 2 cents into the helmet situation as well. i live in iowa, i believe it's one of 2 or 3 states that have no helmet laws. i agree with it for adults, not for children. if you want your brains splattered out on the highway,more power to you. just as if someone wants to smoke a bowl, more power to you. i'm firmly against any law that restricts what you can or cannot do with your own body, as long as you aren't hurting anyone else (as in driving under the influence).

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Isobel, pretty much what everyone else has tried to say or what I've said.

I do love how Sherri did jump to conclusions about what I had posted yesturday. I don't have my permanent resident status yet so I don't qualify for UHC. Since I don't qualify for UHC please tell me how in the hell would I purchase it? The 125$ a month would pay for emergancy services that myself or my older daughter might need NOT UHC.

Canadians do have a higher net worth than Americans- it was revealed last week by some big study. Canadians also pay less for their health care, are sick less, have more time off, are less stressed and are more likely to live longer than Americans.

So in conclusion- I'll stay here now and just visit. Thanks.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 08/02/2012

6,435

12

72

Oh so this is what happens when I make my 2hr drive back from my MIL's house? Fun!

Rosie, stop trying to confuse people with facts you know we can't have that! :) But I'll check that site becuase I'm curious since my parents still live in New York.

I'm just popping in for the helmet stuff then I'm going to take a nap.

When I lived in Texas helmets were optional on people over 17 on motorcycles so we had a lot of soldiers at Ft.Hood who would come home on leave, buy a motorcycle and plaster 190 or I-35 with their brain matter and reset the board. (FYI: The board was at the entrance of the base that said how many days Ft Hood had gone without a vehicle fatality.) They would also reset the board by driving too fast or driving drunk- things that are also illegal but people do them becuase they haven't been educated.

Here in BC our province just banned the use and sale of a certain kind of motorcycle helmet because it's been shown to not to protect someone from a head injury.

I've educated my daughter on why she needs to wear a helmet while riding her bike and her scooter. I was a care aide back in NY I took care of a girl who was hit by a car and was bed ridden, on a feeding tube and couldn't even talk. I make sure my daughter knows about that.

Isobel - posted on 08/02/2012

9,849

0

286

I just thought of the biggest proof of all that UHC doesn't cost as much as you guys think (regardless of all of our taxes), even though you guys have higher wages, Canadians have a higher net worth ;)

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

i urge some of you people to read this. it's very helpful. :)http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra...



2. Families making less than 133 percent of the poverty line — that’s about $29,000 for a family of four — will be covered through Medicaid. Between 133 percent and 400 percent of the poverty line — $88,000 for a family of four – families will get tax credits on a sliding scale to help pay for private insurance.
3. For families making less than 400 percent of the poverty line, premiums are capped. So, between 150% and 200% of the poverty line, for instance, families won’t have to pay more than 6.3 percent of their income in premiums. Between 300 percent and 400 percent, they won’t have to pay more than 9.5 percent. This calculator from the Kaiser Family Foundation will let you see the subsidies and the caps for different families at different income levels.
4. When the individual mandate is fully phased-in, those who can afford coverage — which is defined as insurance costing less than 8 percent of their annual income — but choose to forgo it will have to pay either $695 or 2.5 percent of the annual income, whichever is greater.
5. Small businesses that have fewer than 10 employees, average wages beneath $25,000, and that provide insurance for their workers will get a 50 percent tax credit on their contribution. The tax credit reaches up to small businesses with up to 50 employees and average wages of $50,000, though it gets smaller as the business get bigger and richer. The credit lasts for two years, though many think Congress will be pressured to extend it, which would raise the long-term cost of the legislation.
6. Insurance companies are not allowed to discriminated based on preexisting conditions. They are allowed to discriminate based “on age (limited to 3 to 1 ratio), premium rating area, family composition, and tobacco use (limited to 1.5. to 1 ratio).”
7. Starting in 2018, the law imposes a 35 percent tax on employer-provided health plans that exceed $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage. The idea is a kind of roundabout second-best to capping the tax code’s (currently unlimited) deduction for employer-provided heath insurance. The policy idea is to give employers that much more reason to avoid expensive insurance policies and thus give insurers that much more reason to hold costs down.
8. The law requires insurers to spend between 80 and 85 percent of every premium dollar on medical care (as opposed to administration, advertising, etc). If insurers exceed this threshold, they have to rebate the excess to their customers. This policy is already in effect, and insurers are expected to rebate $1.1 billion this year.
9. The law is expected to spend a bit over $1 trillion in the next 10 years. The law’s spending cuts — many of which fall on Medicare — and tax increases are expected to either save or raise a bit more than that, which is why the Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will slightly reduce the deficit. (There’s been some confusion on this point lately, but no, the CBO has not changed its mind about this.) As time goes on, the savings are projected to grow more quickly than the spending, and CBO expects that the law will cut the deficit by around a trillion dollars in its second decade. Here’s its graph, which covers the period between 2012 and 2021:

The ACA's taxes and spending cuts make it a slight deficit reduce in its first decade. (CBO)

10. In recent years, health-care costs have slowed dramatically. Much of this is likely due to the recession. Some of it may just be chance. But there’s also evidence that the law has accelerated changes in the way the medical system delivers care, as providers prepare for the law’s efforts to move from fee-for-service to quality-based payments.
11. The law’s long-term success at controlling costs will likely hinge on its efforts to change the way health care is delivered, most of which have gotten very little attention. They include everything from encouraging Accountable Care Organizations to spreading medical homes to penalizing hospitals with high rates of preventable infections to creating an independent board able to quickly implement new reforms through the Medicare system. A partial list of these efforts can be found here.

Rosie - posted on 08/02/2012

8,657

30

321

sherri, the penalty for not having insurance is for only those who can afford it but don't get it. there are federal subsidies to help you pay your insurance premiums if you can't afford it. plus, now adults without children at home can qualify for medicaid.

as of yesterday women do not have to pay for birthcontrol, or preventative services such as papsmears, HIV all other STD testing, breastfeeding services including pumps, and screening for gestational diabetes. you do need to check when your insurance year starts over again, because that is when it will officially begin for each person.

Jenny - posted on 08/02/2012

4,426

16

129

"I never once said people shouldn't have healthcare, the only thing I HAVE EVER said is I am against UHC and the current system. I agree changes should happen and wish they could come up with a better solution that is all I have EVER said."



I think you are just against the idea of it. It would benefit your family immensely and you still won't admit it's a good system. We get more for less under UHC. That is a fact. We save money by having access to treatment before an ER is required. That you would look at that fact and say you still don't agree is showing you are just being deliberately obtuse.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. ...
  8. 10

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms