How Obamacare will affect me.
-
goosebumps
krambman;564433 wrote:I just want to preface this by saying that I have not read past this opening post, so if I repeat anything that's already been said/discussed, I apologize.
First of all, you can still use money from your HSA to purchase over the counter products, you will just need to pay tax on them. You can spend the money in your HSA however you want, heck, you could buy a cheese burger with it, but you only get to use that money tax free and count it as tax free income if it's used on approved purchases. If you use it for other purchases the money goes back to being regular taxable income. Because OTC's will still likely be cheaper than paying for these items tax free as prescriptions, your work load probably won't increase that much because most people will just pay the tax. Since people who don't have HSA plans (like my parents who are on a PPO) have always had to pay tax on things like Band-Aids and Tylenol, there's no reason that people with HSA's should get them tax free. Either there's no tax on it for anyone or everyone should have to pay tax on it. What they are switching to now is the way the system should have been from the beginning. Besides, I believe that even though people will now have to pay sales tax on over the counter items I believe that money used out of an HSA on these items is still free of federal income tax, so the government isn't telling anyone how to spend their money.
Here's how the new health care bill has/will affect me. Well, it actually will have very little effect on me personally. The one major effect that it does have is in the college finance reform that was part of the health care bill has made it easier for me to consolidate all of my loans, which lowers my monthly payment and interest and saves me money. The person it really affects in my family is my 21 year old sister who was born with a rare blood disease that weakens her immune system. Now she's guaranteed to be covered. Insurance companies can't deny her coverage or cancel her coverage the first time she gets sick like they could have before. The only problem is that since they didn't put a cap on premiums she'll get charged an arm and a leg for insurance, but at least she'll still be covered. Also, she can continue to pay her portion of my parent's medical insurance and stay on their coverage until she's 26, allowing her to be better covered than she could be right now as a newly married individual with a husband in grad school.
And you're right, ending British tyranny, abolishing slavery, implementing civil rights and doing away with separate-but-equal, establishing national parks, and providing public education are all horrible things that the government has done. Clearly they have never fixed anything and only make things worse because black people having equal rights has made this country worse than it was in the 1850's.
Sorry, but you are incorrect. You do not JUST pay tax on the purchases you make with your HSA that are non-medical. Right now you pay a 10% fee for anything non-medical (not including OTC med products). Starting next year putting anything on your HSA has a 20% fee attached to it including OTC med products. SO yes they will get Prescriptions for Vitamins, Tylenol, Ibuprofen, Bandaids and what ever else because it will be at least 20% cheaper for them.
And my comment about the government not fixing anything was directed at Social Programs and things they've taken from the private sector. The post office, Welfare, social security, etc. Don't try and turn it into a race thing, You're acting too much like our POTUS. -
Shane FalcoI Wear Pants;564390 wrote:So there is/was no problem with health care in the United States? If you can't afford health care well then too fucking bad right? That's the American spirit.
Didn't say that.
Do you REALLY need a cell phone? Do you REALLY need this or that. Can you as a college student get by with a $500 or a $1000 dollar car instead of one that has a $ 165 per month payment? How many times have you dropped $25 - $100 on a ticket to a football game or a concert or booze or a stupid video game. Its called priorities!!!
If a healthy 20 something year old thinks that health care is a priority in their life then make the sacrafices to pay for it. If that means you cant go out and party like rock stars all the time ,then too bad. Thats life and you have to grow up sometime. Mommy and daddy can't (shouldn't) have to hold your hand forever. -
I Wear PantsI disagree that being on their health care plan ntil 26 is hand holding forever.
I drive a $500 car already.
I haven't been to a football game that wasn't free since Three Rivers. -
CenterBHSFan
Trend:
Most of the people who are out of/have been out of college and have more lifetime experience are against grown adults being on their parents' insurance until their practically 27.
Most of the people who are still young enough to be financially involved in college are all for it.
hmmm.... -
BoatShoesShane Falco;564639 wrote:Didn't say that.
Do you REALLY need a cell phone? Do you REALLY need this or that. Can you as a college student get by with a $500 or a $1000 dollar car instead of one that has a $ 165 per month payment? How many times have you dropped $25 - $100 on a ticket to a football game or a concert or booze or a stupid video game. Its called priorities!!!
If a healthy 20 something year old thinks that health care is a priority in their life then make the sacrafices to pay for it. If that means you cant go out and party like rock stars all the time ,then too bad. Thats life and you have to grow up sometime. Mommy and daddy can't (shouldn't) have to hold your hand forever.
Your position is that people ought to prioritize and be responsible. That, a responsible mid twenties adult when weighing the cost/benefit analysis of choosing between A. $100+ cell phone and B. $100+ high deductible catastrophic injury health insurance will choose the health insurance. Even though, being young and healthy, odds are this person will never use his insurance and would almost certainly use his cell phone...he will choose the insurance because it's the right thing to do, the responsible thing to do and he doesn't want to pass his burden to insure his health onto his fellow citizens.
Bill O'Reilly likes to say lefties live in a world of theory. You're living in a world of theory. The reality is that the cell phone will win out every time...and it has.
Maybe it's true that people ought to be responsible in the normative sense....but this isn't what's really going on....and it's not just generation y either. -
Writerbuckeye
It may not just be Generation Y, but it's sure as hell recent.
I had a job that basically didn't have health insurance my first 8 years out of college, and I had to make the choice of whether to spend money on a nice car, going on dates, telephone calls to sweethearts (which were LOTS more expensive back then), provide coverage of some kind for myself or take a chance I wouldn't get sick and deal with the consequences.
I got the policy (which wasn't that expensive) just in case. Oh and I had a college loan to pay off, too, all while making less than 10,000 per year (this was the mid 1970s).
There were LOTS of things I wasn't able to do...trips I couldn't go on like some friends, games and concerts I had to miss, etc. But after rent, food, the loan payment, and the car (which I needed for work since I was a reporter), I had to be very careful with every penny, but somehow I managed to do it.
I see no reason why kids today can't make it, too. They just have to make some choices that aren't as selfish in the overall scheme of things. -
Little Danny
I Wear Pants;564656 wrote:I disagree that being on their health care plan ntil 26 is hand holding forever.
I drive a $500 car already.
I haven't been to a football game that wasn't free since Three Rivers.
Being on Mommy and Daddy's plan is nearly 1/3 of the average person's life expectancy. Sure it isn't forever, but it is a pretty damn long time. Maybe you would be for a mother to continue breast feeding up until this age. After all, it is isn't forever.... -
Shane Falco
All true and I can't disagree. But if you do take the cell phone and all the rock star parties, (lack of better way to phrase it) don't expect someone else to cover YOUR health bills should you have any, whether that be mom and dad or the gov. You made YOUR decision you should have to live with it!BoatShoes;564696 wrote:Your position is that people ought to prioritize and be responsible. That, a responsible mid twenties adult when weighing the cost/benefit analysis of choosing between A. $100+ cell phone and B. $100+ high deductible catastrophic injury health insurance will choose the health insurance. Even though, being young and healthy, odds are this person will never use his insurance and would almost certainly use his cell phone...he will choose the insurance because it's the right thing to do, the responsible thing to do and he doesn't want to pass his burden to insure his health onto his fellow citizens.
Bill O'Reilly likes to say lefties live in a world of theory. You're living in a world of theory. The reality is that the cell phone will win out every time...and it has.
Maybe it's true that people ought to be responsible in the normative sense....but this isn't what's really going on....and it's not just generation y either.
I do think 27 is to old to be on some one else's insurance. 23 at the max! That's 5 years after high school graduation. -
Ty Webb
Not shocking the responses by you Republicans on this thread... -
Shane FalcoYea..... How could I have ever have thought people would actually be responsible for their own actions!
Guess I should have known better!
And don't ever refer to me as a Republican. They bend alittle left for my taste -
Ty Webb
So you're a hardcore right winger ala Beck,Hannity,Rush,Belly,and Savage?
-
iclfan2
BoatShoes;564696 wrote:Maybe it's true that people ought to be responsible in the normative sense....but this isn't what's really going on....and it's not just generation y either.
That doesn't make it ok though. Regardless of what people will choose, there is a right and a wrong way to do it. Having a $150 car payment is stupid if you can't afford health insurance or rent. There is no reason to be on our parents insurance after age 24 unless you are in a PHD program. Why haven't you graduated in 5 or 6 years? I went for 5 years, understandable for a MASTERS degree. Regardless, personal responsibility should rule. Is it a surprise that it is the democrats on here ok with being on their parents health insurance? Why are handouts ok in democrat's eyes?
Boatshoes, it is like you think it is ok, even normal, for people to spend their money on luxuries rather than essentials. Well it isn't. I have a lot of money in the bank, have a roomate for less costs, don't go spend $100 at the bar each weekend, dive a $4500 old honda civic, etc. This should be more the norm and not the exception for 24 year olds. Not buying the flashy cars, making it rain at bars, having the most expensive tv, etc. Live within your means! -
LJ
CenterBHSFan;564666 wrote:Trend:
Most of the people who are out of/have been out of college and have more lifetime experience are against grown adults being on their parents' insurance until their practically 27.
Most of the people who are still young enough to be financially involved in college are all for it.
hmmm....
I have been on my own for years and am for it. I saw what it did to my fiancee's student debt when she had to add $6500 to her loans to pay for health insurance because she couldn't be on her parent's throughout vet school because she was too old. You show me someone in vet school who has time to work a job to be able to afford health insurance. -
BoatShoesiclfan2;564810 wrote:
Boatshoes, it is like you think it is ok, even normal, for people to spend their money on luxuries rather than essentials. Well it isn't.
I do not think it is ok to spend your money on luxuries rather than essentials. But I do believe it is normal for Americans to do this. Look around. Consequently, I believe it justified for the people at large to tax individual citizens who are able to afford private health insurance and do not in order to properly shift their burden to insure their health back to them.
It is conservatives who are against the provision in ObamaCare that would demand people be self-reliant. -
I Wear PantsNo LJ. Your fiancee was clearly just a lazy person trying to mooch off her parents. Disgusting.
-
CenterBHSFan
Yeah, that ties right into what I said. She's still financially involved in her college matters.LJ;564815 wrote:I have been on my own for years and am for it. I saw what it did to my fiancee's student debt when she had to add $6500 to her loans to pay for health insurance because she couldn't be on her parent's throughout vet school because she was too old. You show me someone in vet school who has time to work a job to be able to afford health insurance. -
LJ
CenterBHSFan;564919 wrote:Yeah, that ties right into what I said. She's still financially involved in her college matters.
What does her opinion have to do with this? This is MY opinion. And yes, she will be financially involved in college matters for 25 years. And that $6500 for health insurance will end up costing her $13,533.
Now, tell me. How would the option for her parents to keep a family plan and keep her on it a bad thing? -
BGFalcons82
The debate was shifted by the Obama/Reid/Pelosi-ites from "reform" health care to making it a right. When something is a right, then it should be available for all...at no cost if at all possible. This mind-set has seemed to set in, as young people now no longer want to pay for their insurance as they view it as something ordained by God for their use and no one can force them to pay for anything beyond their "reasonable" means....which is however they wish to define it. The Tea Party and fiscal conservatives want to move the debate back to the core needs for healthcare reform...and hence we are at the crossroads.
The key to healthcare cost reduction is to eliminate the 3rd party from the transaction between the healthcare provider (a/k/a the doctor) and the healthcare purchaser (a/k/a the patient). When the 3rd party payer (previously the insurance carrier and now Uncle Sam) gets involved, costs soar, the end user suffers, and neither side is satisified with their transaction. Real healthcare is for catastrophic cost prevention, not for sniffle/cough/broken pinkies. But, that is where we are....free services for all because no one should be denied being healthy...unless they are in their last 6 months of life and they just need a pill and not surgery to prolong their life another year. -
CenterBHSFan
Are ya thinking I'm deriding her or you? I don't believe I even alluded to that, much less posted anything close.LJ;564924 wrote:What does her opinion have to do with this? This is MY opinion. And yes, she will be financially involved in college matters for 25 years. And that $6500 for health insurance will end up costing her $13,533.
Now, tell me. How would the option for her parents to keep a family plan and keep her on it a bad thing?
It's not something I did or would do and I've stated that before on another thread. I also realize that not everybody is like me, and I've stated that before on another thread also.
Never said anything for you to pucker about. -
Writerbuckeye
BoatShoes;564839 wrote:I do not think it is ok to spend your money on luxuries rather than essentials. But I do believe it is normal for Americans to do this. Look around. Consequently, I believe it justified for the people at large to tax individual citizens who are able to afford private health insurance and do not in order to properly shift their burden to insure their health back to them.
It is conservatives who are against the provision in ObamaCare that would demand people be self-reliant.
And you fail to see why. It's a major step toward further intrusion into our already overly intruded upon lives. It is LOSS of freedom.
You can't force people to be responsible. In the end, they'll be as irresponsible as they are. Let them face the consequences of their decisions and actions.
That is what real freedom is about. -
I Wear Pants
This sounds like you want to get rid of insurance all together. Though I'm probably incorrectly reading into things.BGFalcons82;564938 wrote:The debate was shifted by the Obama/Reid/Pelosi-ites from "reform" health care to making it a right. When something is a right, then it should be available for all...at no cost if at all possible. This mind-set has seemed to set in, as young people now no longer want to pay for their insurance as they view it as something ordained by God for their use and no one can force them to pay for anything beyond their "reasonable" means....which is however they wish to define it. The Tea Party and fiscal conservatives want to move the debate back to the core needs for healthcare reform...and hence we are at the crossroads.
The key to healthcare cost reduction is to eliminate the 3rd party from the transaction between the healthcare provider (a/k/a the doctor) and the healthcare purchaser (a/k/a the patient). When the 3rd party payer (previously the insurance carrier and now Uncle Sam) gets involved, costs soar, the end user suffers, and neither side is satisified with their transaction. Real healthcare is for catastrophic cost prevention, not for sniffle/cough/broken pinkies. But, that is where we are....free services for all because no one should be denied being healthy...unless they are in their last 6 months of life and they just need a pill and not surgery to prolong their life another year. -
I Wear Pants
That and a TSA agent getting a feelsy when you try to fly somewhere.Writerbuckeye;564954 wrote:[/B]
And you fail to see why. It's a major step toward further intrusion into our already overly intruded upon lives. It is LOSS of freedom.
You can't force people to be responsible. In the end, they'll be as irresponsible as they are. Let them face the consequences of their decisions and actions.
That is what real freedom is about. -
LJ
CenterBHSFan;564950 wrote:Are ya thinking I'm deriding her or you? I don't believe I even alluded to that, much less posted anything close.
It's not something I did or would do and I've stated that before on another thread. I also realize that not everybody is like me, and I've stated that before on another thread also.
Never said anything for you to pucker about.
Huh? I don't even know what this has to do with what we were talking about. You said that everyone that is for this is in college. I said that I am not in college, and my Fiancee's situations has allowed me to realize the benefits of this law. -
CenterBHSFan
CenterBHSFan;564666 wrote:Trend:
Most of the people who are out of/have been out of college and have more lifetime experience are against grown adults being on their parents' insurance until their practically 27.
Most of the people who are still young enough to be financially involved in college are all for it.
hmmm....
Just so everyone knows exactly what I posted. It was NOT meant for anybody specifically. Just something that I realized while reading THIS PARTICULAR THREAD.
Older folks: myself, Writer, Believer, etc.
Younger folks perhaps still tied to college financially: Pants, Gibby, BS
^^ Those are the people who have said the most in this thread about this particular subject.
Those were the people that came to mind while reading this particular thread. If anybody wants to take it as a personal wedge towards them, that's nothing I can do about that.
*EDIT
I did NOT say "everyone". -
LJ
CenterBHSFan;564967 wrote:Just so everyone knows exactly what I posted. It was NOT meant for anybody specifically. Just something that I realized while reading THIS PARTICULAR THREAD.
Older folks: myself, Writer, Believer, etc.
Younger folks perhaps still tied to college financially: Pants, Gibby, BS
^^ Those are the people who have said the most in this thread about this particular subject.
Those were the people that came to mind while reading this particular thread. If anybody wants to take it as a personal wedge towards them, that's nothing I can do about that.
I am not taking it personally at all. All I am saying is that there are people who are financially independant and have been for a while that find this law to be good and realizes the upside is more than the downside. THIS PORTION ONLY.