Could obama care stimulate the economy

[sawyerloggingon]

I despise obama and his politics but what is going on in my life makes me wonder if obama care will at some level stimulate the economy. I realize the myriad of ways it will suppress economic growth but my case shows it may be at least somewhat mitigated by people in similar situations as me. I am semi retired and own everything I have so my income is extremely low but I live very well on it. Insurance for my wife and I is $600.00 a month but when obama care kicks in we will pay 2K a year or approximately $200.00 a month. This frees up $400.00 a month which I am going to use to buy a side by side with snow tracks to get in and out of my remote home in winter instead of plowing. Cost of this machine will be 17K and I will purchase it from a local business which will stimulate the local economy and the Polaris company and its workers. If other low income people do the same kind of thing with their insurance savings it could make the cost of obama care on the economy be a wash.

 

[Fisher]

It could stimulate the economy generally if premiums are contained. I do not think they will be though. I am expecting healthcare premiums to increase at an even higher rate since the companies cannot rate the high risk, they will now rate everybody.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I despise obama and his politics but what is going on in my life makes me wonder if obama care will at some level stimulate the economy. I realize the myriad of ways it will suppress economic growth but my case shows it may be at least somewhat mitigated by people in similar situations as me. I am semi retired and own everything I have so my income is extremely low but I live very well on it. Insurance for my wife and I is $600.00 a month but when obama care kicks in we will pay 2K a year or approximately $200.00 a month. This frees up $400.00 a month which I am going to use to buy a side by side with snow tracks to get in and out of my remote home in winter instead of plowing. Cost of this machine will be 17K and I will purchase it from a local business which will stimulate the local economy and the Polaris company and its workers. If other low income people do the same kind of thing with their insurance savings it could make the cost of obama care on the economy be a wash.


View attachment 67140298

Where do you suppose the magical $400/month subsidy money comes from for your PPACA exchange plan? Yep - from some other potential Polaris, Toyota or Jaguar customer. Income redistribution simply moves money around, thus changing perhaps on what/where it is spent, but it is not magically created, or new found, money. This is often the nonsense spewed by Pelosi that food stamp (SNAP) funds "create" economic activity, that otherwise would not occur, but ignore that the money taken from citizen A, and given to citizen B (as SNAP, or a PPACA subsidy), also likely a causes an equal and opposite economic reaction.

 

[samsmart]

It could stimulate the economy generally if premiums are contained. I do not think they will be though. I am expecting healthcare premiums to increase at an even higher rate since the companies cannot rate the high risk, they will now rate everybody.

I believe rises in premiums will be somewhat mitigated by legislation that requires a minimum of 80% of premiums be used to provide healthcare to customers.

Also, even though people are required to purchase insurance, private health insurance companies must still compete for customers.

 

[samsmart]

Where do you suppose the magical $400/month subsidy money comes from for your PPACA exchange plan? Yep - from some other potential Polaris, Toyota or Jaguar customer. Income redistribution simply moves money around, thus changing perhaps on what/where it is spent, but it is not magically created, or new found, money. This is often the nonsense spewed by Pelosi that food stamp (SNAP) funds "create" economic activity, that otherwise would not occur, but ignore that the money taken from citizen A, and given to citizen B (as SNAP, or a PPACA subsidy), also likely a causes an equal and opposite economic reaction.

Or the health insurance company is now mandated to use at least 80% of premiums paid for providing healthcare and do health insurance companies don't need such high individual premiums to pay for coverage, administrative costs, employee wages, and executive salaries.

So by having the mandate these insurance companies can attain economies of scale and pass on these savings to their customers.

 

[Fisher]

I believe rises in premiums will be somewhat mitigated by legislation that requires a minimum of 80% of premiums be used to provide healthcare to customers.

Also, even though people are required to purchase insurance, private health insurance companies must still compete for customers.

Competition for customers and limits on what insurance will pay do not seem to have contained premiums much nor healthcare costs. I am not as optimistic as you based upon the history of the industry during my lifetime. What I do foresee happening is insurance companies not containing their costs at all because 20% of $5T is more profit than 20% of $2T.

 

[GottaGo]

I believe rises in premiums will be somewhat mitigated by legislation that requires a minimum of 80% of premiums be used to provide healthcare to customers.

Also, even though people are required to purchase insurance, private health insurance companies must still compete for customers.

With nothing being done regarding the driving costs of healthcare, the actual costs of healthcare will continue to rise at a rapid rate and premiums will continue to increase.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Or the health insurance company is now mandated to use at least 80% of premiums paid for providing healthcare and do health insurance companies don't need such high individual premiums to pay for coverage, administrative costs, employee wages, and executive salaries.

So by having the mandate these insurance companies can attain economies of scale and pass on these savings to their customers.

Nonsense. In fact, large insurers must have 85% returned as direct services provided. Insurance companies profits are not being reduced (yet) or their overhead reduced, in fact, it went UP due to PPACA, as many things are now mandated as "at no cost to the insured", meaning that now insurance paperwork is required simply to get birth control pills costing $9; how cost efficient is that? Can you show me link(s) to support this 2/3 premium reduction assertion?

 

[274ina]

It could stimulate the economy generally if premiums are contained. I do not think they will be though. I am expecting healthcare premiums to increase at an even higher rate since the companies cannot rate the high risk, they will now rate everybody.

Premiums are capped at 2% or 4-8% of a persons income. (yes the gov subsidy will pay the rest but this is not relivant to the people)

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Where do you suppose the magical $400/month subsidy money comes from for your PPACA exchange plan? Yep - from some other potential Polaris, Toyota or Jaguar customer. Income redistribution simply moves money around, thus changing perhaps on what/where it is spent, but it is not magically created, or new found, money. This is often the nonsense spewed by Pelosi that food stamp (SNAP) funds "create" economic activity, that otherwise would not occur, but ignore that the money taken from citizen A, and given to citizen B (as SNAP, or a PPACA subsidy), also likely a causes an equal and opposite economic reaction.

Good point and I will also pay more taxes like the new 3.5% tax when I sell my rental in town.

 

[Fisher]

Premiums are capped at 2% or 4-8% of a persons income. (yes the gov subsidy will pay the rest but this is not relivant to the people)

It is relevant to We, The People, who will be paying those subsidies. If we we're going to do this, UHC would have made more sense.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Maybe my OP is just a way to ease my conscience about being so happy I can afford the machine I wanted but couldn't afford before my insurance windfall. :lol:

 

[iliveonramen]

It is relevant to We, The People, who will be paying those subsidies. If we we're going to do this, UHC would have made more sense.

I agree...I would of preferred paying into UHC and never worrying about having insurance. We already insure the most costly demographic in the country.

 

[iliveonramen]

Maybe my OP is just a way to ease my conscience about being so happy I can afford the machine I wanted but couldn't afford before my insurance windfall. :lol:

Why should you have to ease your conscience? Working as intended.

 

[Fenton]

It would have to make up first for the damage its done for the last four years just to break even.

In this economy when the madate is implemented who's going to have the money to pay the forced premiums ?

People are already struggling to make ends meet and your average Democrat could give a rats ass.

Lets say they cant afford it ans now have to pay a fine.

Its money out of the pocket of a struggling worker and its less moeny he can put back into the economy.

You guys have GOT TO realize how bad this law is and the devastating effects its going to continue having on our economy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Premiums are capped at 2% or 4-8% of a persons income. (yes the gov subsidy will pay the rest but this is not relivant to the people)

Are you kidding me? Even under the fictional spell that Obamanomics will continue forever, that is insane. The people, in case you missed the memo, are taxed to support not only the amount now spent by the federal gov't but the $16 trillion+ that it has already borrowed in our names. You may believe that spending $3.8 trillion/year and only taxing $2.5 trillion/year "works" and that adding a few hundred billion more in borrowing for PPACA is "irrelivant" but, as the good folks in Greece recently learned, even that gravy train needs track maintanence (taxes).

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Why should you have to ease your conscience? Working as intended.

What about the point Twitt made, I can afford the Ranger now but the guy that has to pay more taxes for obama care can't afford one any more.

 

[274ina]

It is relevant to We, The People, who will be paying those subsidies. If we we're going to do this, UHC would have made more sense.

Do you make over $250k ? Then you not paying for it........only the 1% (OWS) is. (really 5%)

 

[274ina]

Are you kidding me? Even under the fictional spell that Obamanomics will continue forever, that is insane. The people, in case you missed the memo, are taxed to support not only the amount now spent by the federal gov't but the $16 trillion+ that it has already borrowed in our names. You may believe that spending $3.8 trillion/year and only taxing $2.5 trillion/year "works" and that adding a few hundred billion more in borrowing for PPACA is "irrelivant" but, as the good folks in Greece recently learned, even that gravy train needs track maintanence (taxes).

Then eliminate the Healthcare

CEO
yachts
jets
mansions
profits
extorsion
$500k scum Dr's

Then you will have cheap affordable and for all HC at about 20% of current Gov spending.

 

[274ina]

It would have to make up first for the damage its done for the last four years just to break even.

In this economy when the madate is implemented who's going to have the money to pay the forced premiums ?

People are already struggling to make ends meet and your average Democrat could give a rats ass.

Lets say they cant afford it ans now have to pay a fine.

Its money out of the pocket of a struggling worker and its less moeny he can put back into the economy.

You guys have GOT TO realize how bad this law is and the devastating effects its going to continue having on our economy.

____________________

If you cant afford it - you get medicaid. Watching to much FAUX news I see.

It is capped at 2% of my pay. Are you saying millions at low wage jobs cant afford $20 month?

If my emplyer keeps coverage, its capped at 9.5% of our pay..........

As for the employer penaltys, Wall street profits are at record levels.........so PAY UP!

 

[iguanaman]

Where do you suppose the magical $400/month subsidy money comes from for your PPACA exchange plan? Yep - from some other potential Polaris, Toyota or Jaguar customer. Income redistribution simply moves money around, thus changing perhaps on what/where it is spent, but it is not magically created, or new found, money. This is often the nonsense spewed by Pelosi that food stamp (SNAP) funds "create" economic activity, that otherwise would not occur, but ignore that the money taken from citizen A, and given to citizen B (as SNAP, or a PPACA subsidy), also likely a causes an equal and opposite economic reaction.

That is wrong. Income distribution from the top to the bottom stimulates the economy by taxing money NOT spent at a higher rate. Handng that money out in the form if lower premiums means it will get spent increasing GDP. The reverse is also true. Taking money from those that spend all their income comes right out of GDP.

 

[poweRob]

I despise obama and his politics but what is going on in my life makes me wonder if obama care will at some level stimulate the economy. I realize the myriad of ways it will suppress economic growth but my case shows it may be at least somewhat mitigated by people in similar situations as me. I am semi retired and own everything I have so my income is extremely low but I live very well on it. Insurance for my wife and I is $600.00 a month but when obama care kicks in we will pay 2K a year or approximately $200.00 a month. This frees up $400.00 a month which I am going to use to buy a side by side with snow tracks to get in and out of my remote home in winter instead of plowing. Cost of this machine will be 17K and I will purchase it from a local business which will stimulate the local economy and the Polaris company and its workers. If other low income people do the same kind of thing with their insurance savings it could make the cost of obama care on the economy be a wash.


View attachment 67140298

Well there's that and then there's this as well:

Medical bills cause 62 percent of bankruptcies​

With dwindling numbers of people that won't be covered anymore... it should put a nice dent in bankruptcy claims.

 

[iliveonramen]

What about the point Twitt made, I can afford the Ranger now but the guy that has to pay more taxes for obama care can't afford one any more.

I don't know about that. Government is just the pooling of our resources. The money comes from everyone at much smaller levels than the benefit you receive.