Why so serious...winners and losers of health-care reform.

Winners: People that don't pay much in taxes.

Losers: People that pay most taxes.

The more government you add to any industry the more you burden business, commerce and entrepreneurs. This will benefit government and big corporations but hurt the small businesses that are the greatest source of strength and jobs in our nation.

Socializing something makes it equally worse for all.

 

Are you kidding? I'm listening as much as I can right now. It's great comedy. :grin:

 

Read the bill. Small businesses don't have to provide health care. If they do they get huge tax breaks. Small businesses (at least the mom and pop variety) benefit the most. This should encourage anyone who opened a small business or was thinking of doing such but feared so because they might have to provide health care will now be free of that burdon.

 

Winner: mis- and disinformation
Loser: An informed electorate able to make logical and rational choices

 

I don't know how insurance companies aren't big winners in all of this.

 

What do you base this on?

 

This bill isn't even remotely close to socialism. Claiming otherwise is simply a lie.

 

Good article from an economics standpoint:

http://bit.ly/alo6gS

 

Big pharma doesn't care much because as always they will just pass the cost on to us. Insurance just got 30 million more customers with a government guarantee of paid premiums. The states just got a higher burden in Medicaid expenses.

The cost of drugs in this country is what should be socialized and not in the way the government wants to do it. We should collectively bargain for all drugs we buy like other countries to make it a fair market.

 

How are we getting the tax credits for our premiums? Will they go directly to the insurance company? Will we have to wait until the following year to recoup the premiums when we file our tax return?

 

Insurance companies just had 30 Million people, the vast majority of which are young, healthy, and high profit potential, forced to buy their expensive products.

This is the biggest corporate welfare bill since 2008. This hurts the big insurance companies in the same way that TARP hurt the big banks. Congress and the President scolds them, while handing them billions of our money.

 

Because there is more Government money, there is moral hazard galore. So the prices of healthcare will rise and rise and the premiums will rise and rise.

Any individual, business owner or tax payer will take the burden.

Maybe people will think about not having 10 kids if the birth and healthcare isn't free. Maybe people will not have as much gang violence if they don't think they'll get patched up for free showing up at the emergency room.

We have quasi-socialism now which made the system bad, and now we're adding more to make it better.

Spreading the cost helps no one in the long run.

 

This is also an example of continued unfunded liabilities of the US government. So the corporations get a tax break, but the government debt grows.

This eventually leads to higher interest rates and higher taxes for those of us that pay them.

 

Congratulations, you would make the worst insurance company executive ever. Not to mention a horrible economist.

 

Insurance currently works as they are able to pick and choose their policies, but if they force them to take all (pre-conditions) it will hurt the industry.
Those prices turn around and are passed onto the public and now added to the government liabilites.

If there was no insurance, prices would be much much lower as well as people strive to get the most when the additional amount they pay is minor or free in many cases.

"Hey its free! Why not!" I think economics understands human nature better than you do.

 

This is the reason they had to do a mandate as well to bring the young, healthy uninsured into the system, allowing their premiums to offset those with preexisting conditions or those who get sick and can't be dropped.

Perhaps, but then only the wealthy would be able to get bypass surgery or cancer treatment. Is that really what we want, healthcare only for those who can afford it?

Of course, this is one of the big reasons that almost every insurance plan has co-pays, so that people don't abuse the system.

 

No - you are pretty much dead wrong. Let's wind back to the very beginning to show where you are confused.

The concept of insurance operates on the very principle of aggregating losses and spreading them among policyholders because no individual policyholder can accurately project their future liability.


This is not an argument, this is a fact.

Accordingly when you state "spreading losses never works" - there is an entire multi-trillion dollar industry that operates on this principle.

 

I just don't believe anything is a 'right' except for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

This idea that no one should get better healthcare is an emotional and moral argument. The US government is not around to decide what is morally right or wrong. If I pay more than I should get better treatment. Period. If there is a free system then prices will fall dramatically though there will be varying levels of care.

There is McDonalds and there is Ruth Chris. Pick what you can afford. Why is a Harvard Trained physician and professor paid the same as a guy that got his medical license in India? Thats why service and preventative care are non-existent in this country, because its a numbers game.

If it was a free system I'm sure hospitals would treat peoples wellness instead of the disease which is the reaction.

The system is *****ed and this just makes it worse.

 

So why do they screen people? Obviously we have seen with AIG and Banks what companies that take on bad risks/loans can become.

 

I work in the medical field and let me be the first one to tell you that Hospitals make a ton of money. Drug makers, insurance companies, doctors, and hospitals make a ton of money each year. GP's tend to make less money compared to specialists. GP's don't normally request really expensive testing like the other speicalists do.

I think lab companies will be affected.