Obama on Healthcare
Find a Conversation
Obama on Healthcare
| Thu, 10-16-2008 - 9:16am |
I noticed something last night and wondered if anyone else noticed it.
Barack Obama said that the average healthcare cost for families is $12,000 a year.


It DOES make sense. Our 25 yo son would get a $2,500 tax credit, and because he's young and healthy, he could drop the insurance his employer provides and go out and purchase a private insurance policy for around $1,500. He would have a financial incentive to do so. On the contrary, if DH and I were to drop our employer group policy coverage and purchase a private family policy, we'd likely have to pay the $12,000--we wouldn't do it.
So, who's left in the employer group insurance pools? The older workers and the younger ones with chronic health problems, for whom a private policy would be cost prohibitive. The cost of the employer group insurance would then rise because of the greater risk, and employers would raise the % employees are required to contribute, if they do not decide to stop providing health benefits altogether.
WHO BENEFITS UNDER MCCAIN'S PLAN? THE INSURANCE COMPANIES!!!
"McCain wants to tax employer-sponsored health insurance as income, removing the tax exemptions currently granted to the 177 million Americans covered through their workplaces. If employees kept their employer-based insurance policy (the average value of which is now $12,000), it would be considered income. To offset the tax burden, a tax credit would be granted, up to $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families. Employees could apply the tax credit toward the insurance, thus offsetting the tax hit. Or they could drop their employer-provided insurance altogether, avoid the tax penalty, and then combine the tax credit with any money they were contributing to the policy, and buy insurance on the open market."
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/oct2008/db20081013_312433.htm
"Harvard Business School professor Regina Herzlinger, a proponent of consumer choice in health care and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, says McCain's plan is both "not enough and too much." That is, the tax credit is too high for healthy individuals and too low for those with chronic illnesses. She also feels the plan does little to address the high cost of health care."
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/apr2008/db20080429_854428.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/us/politics/01mccain.html
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
The issue both candidates claim they want to fix is the issue with the uninsured. Well the uninsured by definition DON'T HAVE employer provided benefits. If you don't have them, then McCain can't tax them. But he can give you money to help you buy them. He can give you more options by letting you have more than 1-2 employer plans or a government plan to choose from.
By contrast Obama's plan will do nothing for those unemployed, uninsured students, stay at home parents or people who are laid off. He hasn't said what the government insurance costs you, and if you don't buy it for your children you can be fined. If you work for a small business he's not going to force them to provide coverage for you. If you work for a larger business he will force them to provide coverage to YOU but not to your family, he can't force them to provide a good plan (a huge problem with under insured in this country) and he won't ensure you can afford the plan (only that the employer pays some of the cost).
Pennsylvania Mom
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
He doesn't seem to pay much attention to the illogic of the things his "advisors" tell him to say on these subjects.
We need to make sure that we disagree without being disagreeable and in order to do so it is important to know the facts. He clearly stated in the last two debates his views on health insurance. He believes health insurance is a RIGHT, here are a few things he said during the second debate:
"His cold callous disregard for human life scare me especially given his close ties to Africa where the life of other tribe members has meant nothing for centuries."
With all due respect because someone has close ties to Africa this does not mean that they have no regard for life. I myself have close ties to Africa so for you to say this means that myself, and my family have no regard for life and this is simply not true. If you have a problem with his policies that is fine but what does his lineage have to do with anything? If you took a look back at your family tree I am sure you will find things that you are not proud of. I think that is the case for any person.
Keesha
Proud mom of Trevor and loving wife to Luke
Me (32)
DH (28)
Laparascopy 11/27 found endometriosis and scarred, blocked
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
>>His cold callous disregard for human life scare me especially given his close ties to Africa where the life of other tribe members has meant nothing for centuries.<<
I found this especially intriguing. Can you elaborate further or maybe post a link where I can read up on this? When you write of tribe members are you speaking of the conflicts in So Africa or Africa in general? There are about 25 tribes in Africa so could you please be more specific about which ones you are speaking of?