To conservatives: healthcare insurance is a high risk business, and that's why the CEOs justify their big bonuses. But isn't insurance suppose to be a low-risk business because it's called insurance? a big reason is that not everyone is on health insurance, so not a big money pool, that's why insurance companies want more people to get insurance, NOT JUST because they want more money. Thus my question is, with everyone getting insurance, wouldn't insurance costs going to go down?
to liberals: healthcare is a personal right as well as a personal choice. If the person dont want to get insurance and get sick it's their fault. It's not a privilege that can be regulated like car insurance, where if u dont get insurance and cause an accident you will lose your license or other consequences. So my question is where is the constitutionality of this? ALSO how do you expect the government to pay for this? Don't tell me by raising taxes on the rich, because that's not going to work for everything.
The Patriot2012-05-16T12:53:42Z
Favorite Answer
Simple. America can not afford no reform, not just in terms of human lives, but costs.
Look at the facts.
FACT - Insurance companies in the USA before the reforms pushed up prices, did not pay out claims when they should and bought or blackmailed politicians [1] FACT - PER PERSON the USA spends more on healthcare than any other nation on the planet [2] FACT - Obama debated his plans before the election for healthcare [3] FACT - the chance of a child under five of dying in the USA is greater than industrialised nations with universal health coverage [4] FACT - Obama was elected to bring in change [5] FACT - Obama wants to stop insurance companies from screwing America [6] FACT - The reforms Obama wants work in the Netherlands and Switzerland [7]
Let me know if my facts are wrong, but please provide proof.
The government is paying for the subsidy tax credit and administration of the ACA with money saved through Medicare, $500 billion over the next 8 years. Is that the cost you are asking about or is it something else? If the Bush tax cut finally expires that will give more money for the health care plan. If the millionaire's 4% tax increase goes through that will help. The health care act reduces the burden on the government and enables lower rates for insurance if the risk is spread through the entire population, not just old and sick people. It is a risk pool or an exchange like Congress has with dozens of different plans according to need and budget.
Yes, if someone does not get insurance it is their fault and their loss except they end up at the ER and get free services. A society has an obligation to help its citizens. We cannot let people get sick and die, yet it is too costly for the government to pay for everyone's care. The government already pays for the military and subsidizes Medicare and Medicaid. When a hospital cannot get paid it has to increase its prices and pass that onto your insurance premiums. Lack of insurance in our system has a big economic impact.
CEO's justify their income based on performance of the assets of the corporation, not because it is a high-risk business. With Obamacare in the works, however, it IS a high risk business at this time. The trouble is, if health care is perceived to be "free" then people will use it as if it is free. In Japan, lots of old people go to the doctor for five minutes every day just because they are lonely.
In australia we have medicare.... everyone pays 3% of the gross wage into medicare.... it is not perfect, but at least everyone gets free health care... we have had medicare for over 20 years... no one complains about paying for it... and why would you complain... if you are paying it, it means you have a job... and you know if you happen to lose your job, you can still get free hospital and doctors etc... l do not understand why america does not have the same... l see on here you all arguing, why should l have to pay for others... FINE... but what happens when you become the OTHER... lol.. a thumbs down.... what makes me laugh the most on YA.... is seeing americans asking why people from other countries hate you so much... take a good look at yourself... your so greedy, your not even prepared to help each other...
those individuals sufficiently previous to have voted for greater desirable than one or 2 Presidents, in spite of occasion association, understand the place this might land up. i might say the two Trillion is a GROSS underestimate of the suitable costs, even the suitable startup costs, and the risk that we are going to get what they are promoting us at present is decrease than 5% (surely, it would be a universal if we actual have been given precisely what they describe). evidently that the mindset is "blame the Repubs, and shop chanting the chant. If we are saying it adequate, and hurry as rapid as we can, we can get adequate human beings to have self belief it, or have confidence us, and get this ingredient accomplished." that's the comparable mindset they took on the restoration Act. Regardless, we nevertheless could pay for it, and we've not got the funds. How clever is it to borrow, borrow, borrow, from a worldwide monetary gadget that's suffering and nevertheless interior the throes of the worst credit disaster interior the history of Earth?