Five major ObamaCare taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013

[OohPooPahDoo]

SO when the ACA doesn't end up dramatically driving up taxes or health insurance costs, will all the Conservatives here admit they were wrong? Will Fux News apologize for spreading lies?

Oh shit. I forgot I wasn't dreaming anymore. My bagel.

No they won't.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

SO when the ACA doesn't end up dramatically driving up taxes or health insurance costs, will all the Conservatives here admit they were wrong? Will Fux News apologize for spreading lies?

Oh shit. I forgot I wasn't dreaming anymore. My bagel.

No they won't.

But they're so intellectually honest though!

 

[Dot Com]

well Willow?

 

[Greenbeard]

I'm sure RomneyCare works well on a state level, not sure why states, just don't enact their own, nothing seems to work well on a National scale, look at education, highest in the world, mediocre results.

Almost every state has accepted a great deal of federal grant money to enact their own (whether or not they've followed through is a different story). That's what the past two years have been about.

No, the last two years is pulling away freedom from the American people.

And it seems the Feds have failed at education, why trust them for getting this right?

...maybe that's why states are intended to take the lead in designing, implementing, and operating the reforms.

Refer to my previous post.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I'm sure RomneyCare works well on a state level, not sure why states, just don't enact their own, nothing seems to work well on a National scale, look at education, highest in the world, mediocre results.

Almost every state has accepted a great deal of federal grant money to enact their own (whether or not they've followed through is a different story). That's what the past two years have been about.

No, the last two years is pulling away freedom from the American people.

And it seems the Feds have failed at education, why trust them for getting this right?

The Fed's have failed at education? WTF? Federally subsidized student loans and Pell Grants have enabled millions to attend college who would not otherwise be able to. How's that a failure fucknut?

 

[oldernwiser]

SO when the ACA doesn't end up dramatically driving up taxes or health insurance costs, will all the Conservatives here admit they were wrong? Will Fux News apologize for spreading lies?

Oh shit. I forgot I wasn't dreaming anymore. My bagel.

Let's not fall into that trap. Health insurance costs WILL continue to rise - but it won't be anything that ACA does that causes it. Premiums will continue to rise for the same reason they've always gone up: cost of CARE keeps rising. More people - particularly healthy people - will stabilize the rise for a while, but only until inflated medical costs catch up to the amount of new dollars in the system. ACA never addressed this issue.

 

[kellysmith]

Hello i m new to join this forum please let me know about this forum.

 

[oldernwiser]

Almost every state has accepted a great deal of federal grant money to enact their own (whether or not they've followed through is a different story). That's what the past two years have been about.

No, the last two years is pulling away freedom from the American people.

And it seems the Feds have failed at education, why trust them for getting this right?

The Fed's have failed at education? WTF? Federally subsidized student loans and Pell Grants have enabled millions to attend college who would not otherwise be able to. How's that a failure fucknut?

And it's almost always a Republican house which cuts the funding for education, saying the States should do more on their own. The republican run states slash educational funding causing those loans to be more expensive, and the grants to not cover so much of the rising tuitions. Teacher's are being laid off, and school systems are contracting because it seems to be the conservative way - pay unlimited fortunes on things that don't mean a damn thing, and cut back the funding on the things that do.

The Feds have ALMOST failed at education, and if it weren't for a few liberals making a small difference they surely would have by now.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No, the last two years is pulling away freedom from the American people.

And it seems the Feds have failed at education, why trust them for getting this right?

The Fed's have failed at education? WTF? Federally subsidized student loans and Pell Grants have enabled millions to attend college who would not otherwise be able to. How's that a failure fucknut?

And it's almost always a Republican house which cuts the funding for education, saying the States should do more on their own. The republican run states slash educational funding causing those loans to be more expensive, and the grants to not cover so much of the rising tuitions. Teacher's are being laid off, and school systems are contracting because it seems to be the conservative way - pay unlimited fortunes on things that don't mean a damn thing, and cut back the funding on the things that do.

The Feds have ALMOST failed at education, and if it weren't for a few liberals making a small difference they surely would have by now.

I would phrase it more positively - the feds have succeeded in making a college education accessible to millions who would not have it, in spite of the Republicans.

But of course, as we know, Obama is an elitist snob for suggesting all Americans should have the opportunity to go to college. Republicans hate that idea, because it means more competition for them.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

SO when the ACA doesn't end up dramatically driving up taxes or health insurance costs, will all the Conservatives here admit they were wrong? Will Fux News apologize for spreading lies?

Oh shit. I forgot I wasn't dreaming anymore. My bagel.

Let's not fall into that trap. Health insurance costs WILL continue to rise - but it won't be anything that ACA does that causes it. Premiums will continue to rise for the same reason they've always gone up: cost of CARE keeps rising. More people - particularly healthy people - will stabilize the rise for a while, but only until inflated medical costs catch up to the amount of new dollars in the system. ACA never addressed this issue.

I'm inclined to agree with you. But I think there are ways to keep the costs of health care down; even if it means the government subsidizing it more. Then again, if we're doing that, why not just take it one step further and go for Universal Health Care?

I personally would love to see an America modeled after England's system. Many, many Britons just carry and use two different types of health insurance. One is government supplied, the other is privately owned. Then you have REAL choice.

But I would agree that the cost of CARE does seem to be on the rise. I'd be willing to cut some defense spending to pay to keep those costs manageable though.

 

[Newby]

Here's a hint how the UK does it...and there's more that I haven't listed, but wanted to give you an idea on how UK finances their healthcare...and yet they're still in some very serious debt. You may run your house like that, but I sure don't. If our economy plunges, it would have a serious ripple effect around the world, and surely we would be off the US dollar standards, probably use china's currency.
UK VAT = 20%
Income Tax
0 - £2,560 10 per cent (starting rate for savings only)
0 - £35,000 20 per cent (basic rate)
£35,001 - £150,000 40 per cent (higher rate)
Over £150,000 50 per cent (additional rate)
Income tax rates
TV license per year
A colour television licence is £116 a year (around $192 US)
Gas Tax
Sixty per cent of the price of unleaded petrol

Read more: Fuel tax: British motorists pay up to 60% duty and VAT on petrol | Mail Online

UN debt
£1,003.9bn.....64.2% of GDP for roughly 62 million people

but Meister, they are NOT paying $600 a month for their Health Care Insurance with another $3000 out of pocket expense before the Insurance comes in and pays for any care, and the companies are not paying their 60% of the employee's health care insurance.

So the question for me and many other families would be, if we had a universal Health Care Plan, would we be charged in taxes MORE than the $1000 a month I pay now for health insurance? my quess would be that we would pay less, if there were no middle man costs involved, such as the for profit insurance industry who just pushes paper....

Even if matt and I had to pay $600 a month extra in taxes for a universal Plan, we still come out with $400 a month MORE in our own pockets of our own money...

yes, this could vary per household, I understand all of that...I'm just saying, it matters none to me, whether I am forced to pay a for profit Insurer $1000 a month or pay the govt $600 a month, for the same or better services, other than the savings.

These countries are running up massive debt, Care....even with all those taxes. Our government isn't going to be able to contain those costs with near the same or better services. In fact, we will end up with paying more for less, count on it. The costs are already being revised upward, for the same service..something from .9 trillion to nearly 1.8 trillion...and it's only going to get worse. Difference is with your 600 a month government service and your 1000 a month private service is that the government is just going to increase it's debt to cover the shortfall. But, rest assured that the taxes will keep rising along with the debt. It may not bother you with taxes, but it sure bothers me, because the days of personal savings will be no more than a dream. Like so many countries, your born poor, your going to stay poor, your born middle class, your going to stay middle class.
The American dream will surely be dead. I'm just glad I'm in my 60's because I'm not going to see the full effect of this debacle in my lifetime in America, but I can look at the major players in Europe struggling with debt, deficit, and massive government.

I agree with you Meister, except about the part where it won't affect you. In your age bracket, by the time you're another 10 to 20 years older, they will be rationing healthcare and older citizens will be the first on the list to deny because of their 'age' and their 'worth' to society overall. They're in the highest cost bracket when looking at the overall healthcare bill. It's going to be very ugly, and these ignorant folks who are all for it right now will someday regret the support that they've given to this now. Wait until they're 70 something and God forbid get something like cancer and are allowed only 'palative' care because of their age.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

but Meister, they are NOT paying $600 a month for their Health Care Insurance with another $3000 out of pocket expense before the Insurance comes in and pays for any care, and the companies are not paying their 60% of the employee's health care insurance.

So the question for me and many other families would be, if we had a universal Health Care Plan, would we be charged in taxes MORE than the $1000 a month I pay now for health insurance? my quess would be that we would pay less, if there were no middle man costs involved, such as the for profit insurance industry who just pushes paper....

Even if matt and I had to pay $600 a month extra in taxes for a universal Plan, we still come out with $400 a month MORE in our own pockets of our own money...

yes, this could vary per household, I understand all of that...I'm just saying, it matters none to me, whether I am forced to pay a for profit Insurer $1000 a month or pay the govt $600 a month, for the same or better services, other than the savings.

These countries are running up massive debt, Care....even with all those taxes. Our government isn't going to be able to contain those costs with near the same or better services. In fact, we will end up with paying more for less, count on it. The costs are already being revised upward, for the same service..something from .9 trillion to nearly 1.8 trillion...and it's only going to get worse. Difference is with your 600 a month government service and your 1000 a month private service is that the government is just going to increase it's debt to cover the shortfall. But, rest assured that the taxes will keep rising along with the debt. It may not bother you with taxes, but it sure bothers me, because the days of personal savings will be no more than a dream. Like so many countries, your born poor, your going to stay poor, your born middle class, your going to stay middle class.
The American dream will surely be dead. I'm just glad I'm in my 60's because I'm not going to see the full effect of this debacle in my lifetime in America, but I can look at the major players in Europe struggling with debt, deficit, and massive government.

I agree with you Meister, except about the part where it won't affect you. In your age bracket, by the time you're another 10 to 20 years older, they will be rationing healthcare and older citizens will be the first on the list to deny because of their 'age' and their 'worth' to society overall. They're in the highest cost bracket when looking at the overall healthcare bill. It's going to be very ugly, and these ignorant folks who are all for it right now will someday regret the support that they've given to this now. Wait until they're 70 something and God forbid get something like cancer and are allowed only 'palative' care because of their age.

That is so much hyperbole it's unbelievable. Where are your links to back that claim up? It sounds like "Death Panels" which has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. You speaking on "feeling" like this will happen is not the same as it actually happening.

Scare mongering seems to be the only way Conservatives know how to make a point these days.

 

[Newby]

These countries are running up massive debt, Care....even with all those taxes. Our government isn't going to be able to contain those costs with near the same or better services. In fact, we will end up with paying more for less, count on it. The costs are already being revised upward, for the same service..something from .9 trillion to nearly 1.8 trillion...and it's only going to get worse. Difference is with your 600 a month government service and your 1000 a month private service is that the government is just going to increase it's debt to cover the shortfall. But, rest assured that the taxes will keep rising along with the debt. It may not bother you with taxes, but it sure bothers me, because the days of personal savings will be no more than a dream. Like so many countries, your born poor, your going to stay poor, your born middle class, your going to stay middle class.
The American dream will surely be dead. I'm just glad I'm in my 60's because I'm not going to see the full effect of this debacle in my lifetime in America, but I can look at the major players in Europe struggling with debt, deficit, and massive government.

I agree with you Meister, except about the part where it won't affect you. In your age bracket, by the time you're another 10 to 20 years older, they will be rationing healthcare and older citizens will be the first on the list to deny because of their 'age' and their 'worth' to society overall. They're in the highest cost bracket when looking at the overall healthcare bill. It's going to be very ugly, and these ignorant folks who are all for it right now will someday regret the support that they've given to this now. Wait until they're 70 something and God forbid get something like cancer and are allowed only 'palative' care because of their age.

That is so much hyperbole it's unbelievable. Where are your links to back that claim up? It sounds like "Death Panels" which has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. You speaking on "feeling" like this will happen is not the same as it actually happening.

Scare mongering seems to be the only way Conservatives know how to make a point these days.

So says the genius who doesn't know how a damn tax credit works.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

I agree with you Meister, except about the part where it won't affect you. In your age bracket, by the time you're another 10 to 20 years older, they will be rationing healthcare and older citizens will be the first on the list to deny because of their 'age' and their 'worth' to society overall. They're in the highest cost bracket when looking at the overall healthcare bill. It's going to be very ugly, and these ignorant folks who are all for it right now will someday regret the support that they've given to this now. Wait until they're 70 something and God forbid get something like cancer and are allowed only 'palative' care because of their age.

That is so much hyperbole it's unbelievable. Where are your links to back that claim up? It sounds like "Death Panels" which has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. You speaking on "feeling" like this will happen is not the same as it actually happening.

Scare mongering seems to be the only way Conservatives know how to make a point these days.

So says the genius who doesn't know how a damn tax credit works.

You're right; I had no clue how taxes work, and you uber-smart Conservatives totally schooled me. It wasn't that you misunderstood my point about why people don't pay any income tax. Sure okay.

Still doesn't mean that you're not completely pulling this idea of rationed health care out of your ******* ass. Which you are. But that's what Conservatives/Tea Baggers do now.

DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS!

 

[Newby]

That is so much hyperbole it's unbelievable. Where are your links to back that claim up? It sounds like "Death Panels" which has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. You're talking out of your ass, and you know it. You speaking on "feeling" like this will happen is not the same as it actually happening.

Scare mongering seems to be the only way Conservatives know how to make a point these days.

So says the genius who doesn't know how a damn tax credit works.

You're right; I had no clue how taxes work, and you uber-smart Conservatives totally schooled me. It wasn't that you misunderstood my point about why people don't pay any income tax. Sure okay.

Still doesn't mean that you're not completely pulling this idea of rationed health care out of your ******* ass. Which you are. But that's what Conservatives/Tea Baggers do now.

DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS!

Finally, admission is the first step to recovery!

 

[ConservaDerrps]

So says the genius who doesn't know how a damn tax credit works.

You're right; I had no clue how taxes work, and you uber-smart Conservatives totally schooled me. It wasn't that you misunderstood my point about why people don't pay any income tax. Sure okay.

Still doesn't mean that you're not completely pulling this idea of rationed health care out of your ******* ass. Which you are. But that's what Conservatives/Tea Baggers do now.

DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS!

Finally, admission is the first step to recovery!

Oh, and we're now to the stage where you have no intelligent rebuttal for my point, so you choose one sentence out of context to focus on.

Boy, you must be a really great Moderator...

 

[Newby]

You're right; I had no clue how taxes work, and you uber-smart Conservatives totally schooled me. It wasn't that you misunderstood my point about why people don't pay any income tax. Sure okay.

Still doesn't mean that you're not completely pulling this idea of rationed health care out of your ******* ass. Which you are. But that's what Conservatives/Tea Baggers do now.

DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS! DEATH PANELS!

Finally, admission is the first step to recovery!

Oh, and we're now to the stage where you have no intelligent rebuttal for my point, so you choose one sentence out of context to focus on.

Boy, you must be a really great Moderator...

There is no intelligent reubuttal to an uninformed and illogical 'point', and you wouldn't recoginze one if it slapped you in the face anyway. From what I've read so far, you're not worth the time.

 

[oldernwiser]

but Meister, they are NOT paying $600 a month for their Health Care Insurance with another $3000 out of pocket expense before the Insurance comes in and pays for any care, and the companies are not paying their 60% of the employee's health care insurance.

So the question for me and many other families would be, if we had a universal Health Care Plan, would we be charged in taxes MORE than the $1000 a month I pay now for health insurance? my quess would be that we would pay less, if there were no middle man costs involved, such as the for profit insurance industry who just pushes paper....

Even if matt and I had to pay $600 a month extra in taxes for a universal Plan, we still come out with $400 a month MORE in our own pockets of our own money...

yes, this could vary per household, I understand all of that...I'm just saying, it matters none to me, whether I am forced to pay a for profit Insurer $1000 a month or pay the govt $600 a month, for the same or better services, other than the savings.

These countries are running up massive debt, Care....even with all those taxes. Our government isn't going to be able to contain those costs with near the same or better services. In fact, we will end up with paying more for less, count on it. The costs are already being revised upward, for the same service..something from .9 trillion to nearly 1.8 trillion...and it's only going to get worse. Difference is with your 600 a month government service and your 1000 a month private service is that the government is just going to increase it's debt to cover the shortfall. But, rest assured that the taxes will keep rising along with the debt. It may not bother you with taxes, but it sure bothers me, because the days of personal savings will be no more than a dream. Like so many countries, your born poor, your going to stay poor, your born middle class, your going to stay middle class.
The American dream will surely be dead. I'm just glad I'm in my 60's because I'm not going to see the full effect of this debacle in my lifetime in America, but I can look at the major players in Europe struggling with debt, deficit, and massive government.

I agree with you Meister, except about the part where it won't affect you. In your age bracket, by the time you're another 10 to 20 years older, they will be rationing healthcare and older citizens will be the first on the list to deny because of their 'age' and their 'worth' to society overall. They're in the highest cost bracket when looking at the overall healthcare bill. It's going to be very ugly, and these ignorant folks who are all for it right now will someday regret the support that they've given to this now. Wait until they're 70 something and God forbid get something like cancer and are allowed only 'palative' care because of their age.

I don't think I could agree with this any less.

While elders will be in one of the highest brackets for care payments, there is no mandate that says that their individual care would be any less adequate than what a 20-something could expect.

There IS one point which should be considered though. At the present time, a lot of doctors want to preserve their own standard of living. Medicare and Medicaid payments are typically less for the same services performed than what providers can get from private insurers and self-payers. As a result, many front-line doctors (GP and Family Care) already don't accept patients who are covered under a government plan. Again, ACA falls short here as there is no mandate which says they MUST be accepted. With further cuts to Medicare payments, we could lose even more doctors.
The long shot of this scenario is that as more of us move into the bracket that uses Medicare, we'll find that there are already too few doctors spread out among too many patients. This will force primary care to be performed in hospital ERs - pushing up the cost of care in that sector by placing a greater demand on hospital staffs, which is what ACA tried to avoid. ACA does make it easier to BECOME a doctor, so perhaps a modification to require a few years service in a community hospital would hold that problem at bay.

I don't see any death panels, or palliative care only scenarios - unless that's the patient's own wish. There is a built-in out-of-pocket cap which further holds down long term care costs (keeping the HOSPITAL from denying care based on upcoming expenses), and a provision that still hasn't been implemented which provides living assistance - once they figure out how to get it done.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Finally, admission is the first step to recovery!

Oh, and we're now to the stage where you have no intelligent rebuttal for my point, so you choose one sentence out of context to focus on.

Boy, you must be a really great Moderator...

There is no intelligent reubuttal to an uninformed and illogical 'point', and you wouldn't recoginze one if it slapped you in the face anyway. From what I've read so far, you're not worth the time.

I accept your surrender.

 

[auditor0007]

While the individual mandate tax gets most of the attention, the ObamaCare law actually contains 20 new or higher taxes on the American people. These taxes are gradually phased in over the years 2010 (with its 10 percent “tanning tax”) to 2018 (when the tax on comprehensive health insurance plans kicks in.)

Six months from now, in January 2013, five major ObamaCare taxes will come into force:


Read more: Five major ObamaCare taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013 | Fox News

Well, if they let the Bush tax cuts expire, then we can talk about some significant tax increases that might actually be for the good. Until then, I'm not holding my breath.