The Vette Barn - "Obamacare" explained.

The Vette Barn (https://www.thevettebarn.com/forums/index.php)

- Politics & Religion (https://www.thevettebarn.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)

- - "Obamacare" explained. (https://www.thevettebarn.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36017)

"Obamacare" explained.

Thought I'd put up whats really in it and the time line in which it will be implemented.

What people call "Obamacare" is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, people were calling it "Obamacare" before everyone even hammered out what it would be. It's a term mostly used by people who don't like the PPaACA, and it's become popularized in part because PPaACA is a really long and awkward name, even when you turn it into an acronym like that.

Anyway, the PPaACA made a bunch of new rules regarding health care, with the purpose of making health care more affordable for everyone. Opponents of the PPaACA, on the other hand, feel that the rules it makes take away too many freedoms and force people (both individuals and businesses) to do things they shouldn't have to.

So what does it do? Well, here is everything, in the order of when it goes into effect (because some of it happens later than other parts of it):

Already in effect:

It allows the Food and Drug Administration to approve more generic drugs (making for more competition in the market to drive down prices)

It increases the rebates on drugs people get through Medicare (so drugs cost less)

It establishes a non-profit group, that the government doesn't directly control, to study different kinds of treatments to see what works better and is the best use of money.

It makes chain restaurants like McDonalds display how many calories are in all of their foods, so people can have an easier time making choices to eat healthy.

It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them.

It renews some old policies, and calls for the appointment of various positions.

It creates a new 10% tax on indoor tanning booths.

It says that health insurance companies can no longer tell customers that they won't get any more coverage because they have hit a "lifetime limit". Basically, if someone has paid for insurance, that company can't tell that person that he's used that insurance too much throughout his life so they won't cover him any more. They can't do this for lifetime spending, and they're limited in how much they can do this for yearly spending.

Kids can continue to be covered by their parents' health insurance until they're 26.

No more "pre-existing conditions" for kids under the age of 19.

Insurers have less ability to change the amount customers have to pay for their plans.

People in a "Medicare Gap" get a rebate to make up for the extra money they would otherwise have to spend.

Insurers can't just drop customers once they get sick.

Insurers have to tell customers what they're spending money on. (Instead of just "administrative fee", they have to be more specific).

Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down.

New ways to stop fraud are created.

Medicare extends to smaller hospitals.

Medicare patients with chronic illnesses must be monitored more thoroughly.

Reduces the costs for some companies that handle benefits for the elderly.

A new website is made to give people insurance and health information.

A credit program is made that will make it easier for business to invest in new ways to treat illness.

A limit is placed on just how much of a percentage of the money an insurer makes can be profit, to make sure they're not price-gouging customers.

A limit is placed on what type of insurance accounts can be used to pay for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. Basically, your insurer isn't paying for the Aspirin you bought for that hangover.

Employers need to list the benefits they provided to employees on their tax forms.

8/1/2012

Any health plans sold after this date must provide preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.) without requiring any sort of co-pay or charge.

1/1/2013

If you make over $200,000 a year, your taxes go up a tiny bit (0.9%)

1/1/2014

This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.

No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history.

If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it.

Insurer's now can't do annual spending caps. Their customers can get as much health care in a given year as they need.

Make it so more poor people can get Medicare by making the low-income cut-off higher.

Small businesses get some tax credits for two years.

Businesses with over 50 employees must offer health insurance to full-time employees, or pay a penalty.

Limits how high of an annual deductible insurers can charge customers.

Cut some Medicare spending

Place a $2500 limit on tax-free spending on FSAs (accounts for medical spending). Basically, people using these accounts now have to pay taxes on any money over $2500 they put into them.

Establish health insurance exchanges and rebates for the lower-class, basically making it so poor people can get some medical coverage.

Congress and Congressional staff will only be offered the same insurance offered to people in the insurance exchanges, rather than Federal Insurance. Basically, we won't be footing their health care bills any more than any other American citizen.

A new tax on pharmaceutical companies.

A new tax on the purchase of medical devices.

A new tax on insurance companies based on their market share. Basically, the more of the market they control, the more they'll get taxed.

The amount you can deduct from your taxes for medical expenses increases.

1/1/2015

Doctors' pay will be determined by the quality of their care, not how many people they treat.

1/1/2017

If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPaACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPaACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers).

2018

All health care plans must now cover preventative care (not just the new ones).

A new tax on "Cadillac" health care plans (more expensive plans for rich people who want fancier coverage).

2020

The elimination of the "Medicare gap"

.

Aaaaand that's it right there.

The biggest thing opponents of the bill have against it is the mandate. They claim that it forces people to buy insurance, and forcing people to buy something is unconstitutional. Personally, I take the opposite view, as it's not telling people to buy a specific thing, just to have a specific type of thing, just like a part of the money we pay in taxes pays for the police and firemen who protect us, this would have us paying to ensure doctors can treat us for illness and injury.

Plus, as previously mentioned, it's necessary if you're doing away with "pre-existing conditions" because otherwise no one would get insurance until they needed to use it, which defeats the purpose of insurance.

"unconstitutional government power grab" says it in so many fewer words.

It places a non-doctor in between you and your doctor, who will not allow your doctor to make decisions regarding your health care if he doesn't agree with your doctor's decisions.

Beginning January 1, 2013 penalties for the doctor doing the right thing for his patient will cost the doctor $100,000 for the first offense and jail for the second offense.

http://www.ice-news.net/2011/01/06/o...e-regulations/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joecooool (Post 692617)

Thought I'd put up whats really in it and the time line in which it will be implemented.

What people call "Obamacare" is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, people were calling it "Obamacare" before everyone even hammered out what it would be. It's a term mostly used by people who don't like the PPaACA, and it's become popularized in part because PPaACA is a really long and awkward name, even when you turn it into an acronym like that.

Anyway, the PPaACA made a bunch of new rules regarding health care, with the purpose of making health care more affordable for everyone. Opponents of the PPaACA, on the other hand, feel that the rules it makes take away too many freedoms and force people (both individuals and businesses) to do things they shouldn't have to.

So what does it do? Well, here is everything, in the order of when it goes into effect (because some of it happens later than other parts of it):

Already in effect:

It allows the Food and Drug Administration to approve more generic drugs (making for more competition in the market to drive down prices)

It increases the rebates on drugs people get through Medicare (so drugs cost less)

It establishes a non-profit group, that the government doesn't directly control, to study different kinds of treatments to see what works better and is the best use of money.

It makes chain restaurants like McDonalds display how many calories are in all of their foods, so people can have an easier time making choices to eat healthy.

It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them.

It renews some old policies, and calls for the appointment of various positions.

It creates a new 10% tax on indoor tanning booths.

It says that health insurance companies can no longer tell customers that they won't get any more coverage because they have hit a "lifetime limit". Basically, if someone has paid for insurance, that company can't tell that person that he's used that insurance too much throughout his life so they won't cover him any more. They can't do this for lifetime spending, and they're limited in how much they can do this for yearly spending.

Kids can continue to be covered by their parents' health insurance until they're 26.

No more "pre-existing conditions" for kids under the age of 19.

Insurers have less ability to change the amount customers have to pay for their plans.

People in a "Medicare Gap" get a rebate to make up for the extra money they would otherwise have to spend.

Insurers can't just drop customers once they get sick.

Insurers have to tell customers what they're spending money on. (Instead of just "administrative fee", they have to be more specific).

Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down.

New ways to stop fraud are created.

Medicare extends to smaller hospitals.

Medicare patients with chronic illnesses must be monitored more thoroughly.

Reduces the costs for some companies that handle benefits for the elderly.

A new website is made to give people insurance and health information.

A credit program is made that will make it easier for business to invest in new ways to treat illness.

A limit is placed on just how much of a percentage of the money an insurer makes can be profit, to make sure they're not price-gouging customers.

A limit is placed on what type of insurance accounts can be used to pay for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. Basically, your insurer isn't paying for the Aspirin you bought for that hangover.

Employers need to list the benefits they provided to employees on their tax forms.

8/1/2012

Any health plans sold after this date must provide preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.) without requiring any sort of co-pay or charge.

1/1/2013

If you make over $200,000 a year, your taxes go up a tiny bit (0.9%)

1/1/2014

This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.

No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history.

If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it.

Insurer's now can't do annual spending caps. Their customers can get as much health care in a given year as they need.

Make it so more poor people can get Medicare by making the low-income cut-off higher.

Small businesses get some tax credits for two years.

Businesses with over 50 employees must offer health insurance to full-time employees, or pay a penalty.

Limits how high of an annual deductible insurers can charge customers.

Cut some Medicare spending

Place a $2500 limit on tax-free spending on FSAs (accounts for medical spending). Basically, people using these accounts now have to pay taxes on any money over $2500 they put into them.[b/]

Establish health insurance exchanges and rebates for the lower-class, basically making it so poor people can get some medical coverage.

Congress and Congressional staff will only be offered the same insurance offered to people in the insurance exchanges, rather than Federal Insurance. Basically, we won't be footing their health care bills any more than any other American citizen.

A new tax on pharmaceutical companies.

A new tax on the purchase of medical devices.

A new tax on insurance companies based on their market share. Basically, the more of the market they control, the more they'll get taxed.

The amount you can deduct from your taxes for medical expenses increases.

1/1/2015

Doctors' pay will be determined by the quality of their care, not how many people they treat. [i]that's not vague at all

1/1/2017

If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPaACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPaACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers).

2018

All health care plans must now cover preventative care (not just the new ones).

A new tax on "Cadillac" health care plans (more expensive plans for rich people who want fancier coverage).

2020

The elimination of the "Medicare gap"

.

Aaaaand that's it right there.

The biggest thing opponents of the bill have against it is the mandate. They claim that it forces people to buy insurance, and forcing people to buy something is unconstitutional. Personally, I take the opposite view, as it's not telling people to buy a specific thing, just to have a specific type of thing, just like a part of the money we pay in taxes pays for the police and firemen who protect us, this would have us paying to ensure doctors can treat us for illness and injury.

Plus, as previously mentioned, it's necessary if you're doing away with "pre-existing conditions" because otherwise no one would get insurance until they needed to use it, which defeats the purpose of insurance.

the bold parts are big problems

Unconstitutional intrusion into my freedoms.

If we are short on doctors, make more doctors.

I'm sorry Phil, I didn't see where you mentioned medical devices/equipment/technology suppliers/developers/manufactures would lose their R & D tax deductions which will increase their bottom lines; thus, paying higher taxes. Where is the incentive to forge ahead in those businesses? Why would a company spend millions of dollars to create a device and be penalized by paying higher taxes??

And can you please tell me where healthcare has anything to do with college education and making the Dept of Education the sole note holder of student loans? That too was passed in Obamacare.

If you are going to point things out...lets point out this kind of information too. :cert:

If Obamacare is so great, why is Obama passing out over 1,200 waivers?

And why would any of the recipients want them, much less accept them in the first place? And the Final Number of ‘Obamacare’ Waivers is… | TheBlaze.com

And why did the Democratic supermajority of the 111th congress reject a Republican sponsored bill that would require all members of the legislative branch to participate in it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joecooool (Post 692617)

Aaaaand that's it right there.

The biggest thing opponents of the bill have against it is the mandate. They claim that it forces people to buy insurance, and forcing people to buy something is unconstitutional. Personally, I take the opposite view, as it's not telling people to buy a specific thing, just to have a specific type of thing, just like a part of the money we pay in taxes pays for the police and firemen who protect us, this would have us paying to ensure doctors can treat us for illness and injury.

Plus, as previously mentioned, it's necessary if you're doing away with "pre-existing conditions" because otherwise no one would get insurance until they needed to use it, which defeats the purpose of insurance.

How can I have it if I don't buy it? Who would I get it from? Let's say I don't want it Will you pay for it so I can "have" it?

I'll wait for the Supreme Court's decision about the mandate. My feeling it will be struck down.

So, Joecooool, would you like to explain to everyone why you didn't give credit to the original author of that piece?
What exactly is Obamacare and what does it change?

The least you could do if you're going to regurgitate bullshit from somewhere else is give credit where credit is due. Otherwise people might think you actually came up with all of that yourself and typed it out just for us.

My apologies if you are CaspianX2, the original disseminator of that garbage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joecooool (Post 692617)

Thought I'd put up whats really in it and the time line in which it will be implemented.

What people call "Obamacare" is actually ...

Folks; don't waste your time reading this "infomercial". It's sugar-coating something that isn't great, and trying to convince you to buy something you don't need; nor would want.

This newest attempt at renaming socialism... has only fooled a scant few in this country; sadly... some of them are on this forum.

Too bad we dont have a section for this type of discussion.

I make over $200,000 (which I praise God for every day)--why the fcuk should I have to pay another .9% ($1,800)? If I have to pay, everyone has to pay. If it's healthcare for EVERYONE, EVERYONE should share the tax burden EQUALLY. Enough of this tax the rich bullshit. I make good money but by no means am I rich or on easy street with today's costs :g8r:

Quote:

Originally Posted by C5Nate (Post 692667)

Too bad we dont have a section for this type of discussion.

Yep. Too bad.

And for the record, I do agree that our health care system needs some sort of overhaul. I don't know what the solution is. Regulation of insurance companies would be a good place to start. But just blindly saying someone has to pay more, or if you don't do this you pay a penalty, or you HAVE to do this by law or else gets on my nerves as a freedom-loving American. Deport illegals who sap our health care dollars, restructure medicaid and insurance. I don't know how or else I'd be running for government :seasix:

Soooo.... yesterday you blow up Spence's thread saying it is an evil conservative program and today you copy and paste some libtard blog that very clearly defends it? :shrug:

Without the mandate (and maybe WITH it) it can only be financed through increased debt and/or higher taxes for all. It is an economical poison pill.

We need to get over the fact that all old people and some sick people die. And the shit of it is once you're dead, no one really gives a rats ass anyway.

Why was my thread moved here when this one has been in OT for three days now?

https://www.thevettebarn.com/forums/o...ruck-down.html