(11-20-2018 01:34 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:27 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Ok so someone tell me how with math you are going to get rid of Obamacare and the individual mandate and still ensure coverage for those with preexisting conditions like Trump and the rest of the GOP says?

Great question. Before this question is tackled, I'd like to hear from those who think medicare for all is doable; i.e., how will it be paid for? And...you must show your work.

Ok good so also a question without an answer because the reality is it’s not possible. I’m not in the single payer camp, it isn’t feasible. I’m in the Bismark camp, and no I won’t show my work on making that happen but that is possible.

(11-20-2018 01:32 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:48 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What was that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

It is just a leftist talking point to dupe the sheeple into thinking they will be getting something for nothing..........ie. - someone else will pay for it.

Bottom line - the tax paying American public will never go for it unless the left lies about it knowingly JUST LIKE THEY DID WITH OBAMACARE.

And the right can’t get rid of Obamacare because there’s no answer for people with preexisting conditions and the tax paying American public wouldn’t fall for the lies being told about how they would have still been covered.

(11-20-2018 01:45 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:34 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:27 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Ok so someone tell me how with math you are going to get rid of Obamacare and the individual mandate and still ensure coverage for those with preexisting conditions like Trump and the rest of the GOP says?

Great question. Before this question is tackled, I'd like to hear from those who think medicare for all is doable; i.e., how will it be paid for? And...you must show your work.

Ok good so also a question without an answer because the reality is it’s not possible. I’m not in the single payer camp, it isn’t feasible. I’m in the Bismark camp, and no I won’t show my work on making that happen but that is possible.

I meant 'you' in the plural sense - specifically those who advocate single payer thru medicare.

"Progressive" states need to put up or shut up, and prove they can make it work before they attempt to sabotage an entire industry.

Oh that's right, california has put it on the back burner. Turns out virtue signaling about it is easier than actually making the numbers work.

Vermont scrapped it completely, and gillum in Florida says he needs a "confederation" of states to come together, essentially admitting that it's a giant pyramid scheme -- "I need Alabama tax dollars to pay for Floridians".

Also, do you know by what percentage you'd have to cut payments to providers? FORTY PERCENT. That's why I laugh at "Nurses for Medicare 4 all". Where do you think that 40% is going to come from? You're literally advocating yourselves out of a job.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/...18bc1b086b

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:48 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  We will provide the answer you desire just as soon as you provide the answer that was requested of you earlier in the thread.

What was that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:48 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What was that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

(11-19-2018 09:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Your taxes would go up but your healthcare premium would go away... which would likely be a net gain.

That's how it will get marketed and pitched to masses.

Sure you will pay an additonal 8 to 10% tax on your gross income but you're already doing that now with premiums and FSA/HSA funds

For lower middle class people it probably will result in initial savings per paycheck until the tax must go up or beneifts must be cut.

Just like with Obamacare it will sound great until you raef the details. But you will have to pass the bill to find out what's in it...just like last time

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:48 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  We will provide the answer you desire just as soon as you provide the answer that was requested of you earlier in the thread.

What was that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

isn't accusing someone of parroting a talking point just another parrotted talking point?

the point I make is there is no need to generate more money but there is a need to reallocate how its currently being split. Obviously, our current healthcare system is terribly inefficient and eats up more of our GDP than competing countries, so changes need to be made. The problem is the people who benefit the most are also the people who pay for the right to draft the legislation. Yes, I'd like to see a single payer system for basic care.

(11-20-2018 01:48 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:32 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

It is just a leftist talking point to dupe the sheeple into thinking they will be getting something for nothing..........ie. - someone else will pay for it.

Bottom line - the tax paying American public will never go for it unless the left lies about it knowingly JUST LIKE THEY DID WITH OBAMACARE.

And the right can’t get rid of Obamacare because there’s no answer for people with preexisting conditions and the tax paying American public wouldn’t fall for the lies being told about how they would have still been covered.

I'll freely admit that I have a problem with FORCING a company to sell their product/service to people regardless. We don't require any other type of business to offer their product/service no matter the cost or risk. I don't see how the court can rule that someone doesn't have to bake a cake due to "religious" objections but can turn around and tell another they MUST cover expensive, high-risk customers. Then again, I come from the camp that doesn't believe healthcare is a right.

I freely admit that this isn't a popular position and I'm in the minority.

That being said, you CAN come up with plans/alternatives to Barrycare that will cover preexisting conditions and STILL kill the Frankenstein's Monster known as the ACA.

(11-20-2018 03:00 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:48 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What was that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

isn't accusing someone of parroting a talking point just another parrotted talking point?

the point I make is there is no need to generate more money but there is a need to reallocate how its currently being split. Obviously, our current healthcare system is terribly inefficient and eats up more of our GDP than competing countries, so changes need to be made. The problem is the people who benefit the most are also the people who pay for the right to draft the legislation. Yes, I'd like to see a single payer system for basic care.

So you can't show your work and are just parroting a leftist talking point.

So noted.

(11-20-2018 03:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:00 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

isn't accusing someone of parroting a talking point just another parrotted talking point?

the point I make is there is no need to generate more money but there is a need to reallocate how its currently being split. Obviously, our current healthcare system is terribly inefficient and eats up more of our GDP than competing countries, so changes need to be made. The problem is the people who benefit the most are also the people who pay for the right to draft the legislation. Yes, I'd like to see a single payer system for basic care.

So you can't show your work and are just parroting a leftist talking point.

So noted.

I'm no economist... just a guy on a messageboard. I haven't devoted my professional life to solving the boondoggle that inefficiently impacts 18-20% of our GDP and I doubt you have either.

Show your work? What a f'n cop out.

(11-20-2018 03:16 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:00 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

isn't accusing someone of parroting a talking point just another parrotted talking point?

the point I make is there is no need to generate more money but there is a need to reallocate how its currently being split. Obviously, our current healthcare system is terribly inefficient and eats up more of our GDP than competing countries, so changes need to be made. The problem is the people who benefit the most are also the people who pay for the right to draft the legislation. Yes, I'd like to see a single payer system for basic care.

So you can't show your work and are just parroting a leftist talking point.

So noted.

I'm no economist... just a guy on a messageboard. I haven't devoted my professional life to solving the boondoggle that inefficiently impacts 18-20% of our GDP and I doubt you have either.

Show your work? What a f'n cop out.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-746084.html

Quote:2. You are expected to defend your position

(11-20-2018 03:16 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:00 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:21 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

Another question isn't an answer. As was requested show your work.

Or admit you are just parroting a leftist talking point.

isn't accusing someone of parroting a talking point just another parrotted talking point?

the point I make is there is no need to generate more money but there is a need to reallocate how its currently being split. Obviously, our current healthcare system is terribly inefficient and eats up more of our GDP than competing countries, so changes need to be made. The problem is the people who benefit the most are also the people who pay for the right to draft the legislation. Yes, I'd like to see a single payer system for basic care.

So you can't show your work and are just parroting a leftist talking point.

So noted.

I'm no economist... just a guy on a messageboard. I haven't devoted my professional life to solving the boondoggle that inefficiently impacts 18-20% of our GDP and I doubt you have either.

Show your work? What a f'n cop out.

First off, you can easily do some very broad based calculations just by downloading data

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statisti...ts-outlays

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651

You can justify your claims by doing some of your own work for starters. As you point out, many of you are incapable of taking on an endeavor that requires this type of thinking and analysis. Fair enough. In that case, you can easily find links that would do the calculations for you.

Here is a link you can utilize - if you wish - to pull out cost analysis for the single payer system. I'll let you take the link and run with it.

https://www.urban.org/research/publicati...ull_report

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 12:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  https://csnbbs.com/thread-864024-post-15...id15683890

Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:10 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Do you think between employee premiums, employer premiums and government payments there is not enough money in our current system to reallocate without raising costs for individuals?

What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit

(11-20-2018 03:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit

Now show your work for sarcastically calling him "Mensa"....

(11-20-2018 03:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit

(11-20-2018 03:35 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit

Now show your work for sarcastically calling him "Mensa"....

He did in the post you quoted. Mensa is just butthurt over getting called out for being a talking point parrot and lashed out.

(11-20-2018 03:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 01:18 PM)Crebman Wrote:  What makes you believe this isn't just another take more from the payers and give to the non-payers in return for votes?? Another redistribution attempt, with of course the government eating up half of the money or more in administration costs.

Yeah, let's grow the federal government bigger.........because they do such a bang up job with everything now....

Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit

Thank you but I was referring to eligibility for Medicaid... not tax credits for people trying to afford private insurance through exchanges... apples and oranges.

That being said, businesses who offer health insurance to their employees are able to deduct those expenses... does that then make them takers, too? Surely if you consider a family of 4 making 100k or less, a taker for getting a tax break, then the employer who is afforded a similar break on a larger scale is also considered a taker?

(11-20-2018 03:45 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 03:28 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-20-2018 02:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Are most "takers" already on Medicaid?

Nope, premiums are currently being subsidized for people all the way up to 400% the federal poverty line.

"mensa"

show work please

Quote: Income Criteria

To be eligible for the premium tax credit, your household income must be at least 100 – but no more than 400 – percent of the federal poverty line for your family size, although there are two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the applicable federal poverty line. Remember that simply meeting the income requirements does not mean you’re eligible for the premium tax credit. You must also meet the other eligibility criteria.

For information about the two exceptions for individuals with household income below 100 percent of the federal poverty line, see the instructions to Form 8962.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals-and-fami...tax-credit