D'Ohbama!: If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan...

No. This wasn't an Obama generated bill. I'll have to get the details on Monday and post about it.

 

In the words of John Lennon, I'm not the only one. But to deny that you are being robbed of what you truly deserve is just fear speaking.

 

So big pharma created weed and alcohol? I didn't realize big pharma has existed for thousands of years.

 

They've always been here. When men first took up the sword and began conquering each other, it was at the behest of corporations. When idealistic pilgrims agreed to form a government that ruled with the consent of the governed, big pharma was secretly hopping them up drugs. When Washington led the armies against the Red Coats it was at the behest of Phizer. When Lincoln vowed to hold the Union together at any cost, he was doing the bidding of his corporate overlords. When Kennedy proclaimed "Ask not what your country can do for you..." he was admonishing us to kneel before the pharmaceuticals. And when Reagan told his Russian counterpart to tear down this wall it was only so American drug companies could reach an untapped market.

The truth is out there my friend.

 

Exactly...The truth is out there, we just have to tune in. Thank you brother.

 

Certainly seems to be short sighted on the family side. Outside of trying to minimize non-taxable benefits (aka closing loop holes) is there any other reason for doing this?

 

I think he was being sarcastic.

 

Now I'm starting to wonder if Big Wine and Big Crucifix secretly wrote the Bible to promote their products. The evidence seems overwhelming.

 

A popular theory in the health care economist world - right or wrong - is that the Cadillac plans encourage excessive and unnecessary use of the health care system and ultimately drive up costs for everyone. So part of the purpose of the tax was specifically to discourage companies from offering those plans. It's part of the longer-term "bending the cost curve" part of Obamacare, but it is admittedly theoretical.

In an ideal world with no pre-existing conditions, corporations really shouldn't be in the health care business anyway, so if this translates to a cheaper health plan but more actual pay directly to the employees, I think it's a good thing in my view.

So by design, reducing these plans is "a feature, not a bug" - though likely a very unpopular feature.

 

well if he was... I'll take his sarcasm over half these politicians words.

 

Wait - so you believe Washington went to war with the Brits at the behest of Pfizer?

 

"In September 2009, Pfizer pleaded guilty to the illegal marketing of the arthritis drug Bextra for uses unapproved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and agreed to a $2.3 billion settlement, the largest health care fraud settlement at that time.[7] Pfizer also paid the U.S. government $1.3 billion in criminal fines related to the "off-label" marketing of Bextra, the largest penalty ever rendered for any crime.[8] Called a repeat offender, this was Pfizer's fourth such settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in the previous ten years.."

I believe that nothing is what it seems, and anyone can sell out. No matter who it is.

 

I understand distrust of pharmaceutical companies. To increase sales they almost have to make up new diseases.

 

They are for profit entities.

 

My bad I meant to include that in my post. I was also gonna ask was there any proof of that theory that Cadillac plans drive up costs. I did my quick google research and couldn't find anything to suggest they do.

Also, I can't see the govt really getting any significant revenue from this tax either.

 

Are we living in the Matrix then? If nothing is as it seems, then theoretically the entire world may be an illusion, so why care about it?

 

You are right about that, and that's a question you can ask and answer yourself. Who do you care about?

 

People just can't wrap their heads around the fact that there are some people out there who aren't cave dwelling barbarians who might be trying to kill them to make money.

 

They need the tax to help pay for the currently uninsured. They think this tax will help fund their idea. The problem in their logic IMO is that corporations by nature do everything they can to not pay tax. And they certainly aren't going to pay the same amount for an employee's insurance PLUS tax on 40% of that. That's not coming out of their bottom line and hurt their stock price. So they will lower what they pay. They will do this by either considerably lowering the quality of the policy ($0-$250 deductibles will become $1500 deductibles) or they pass that tax cost on to the employee (which will be very substantial...$300-$1000 month increase) . I suspect it will be some of both.