Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a year?

[winston53660]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

$83,000 is 4 times the poverty line in this country and I wish I made that much.........

I really think all you liberals that want to give away your money should get together and do it but don't ask the taxpayer to do it...............

By your prefered method the tax payer gives up more of there money for less service.

 

[DeeJayH]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Again, NP, you have failed to take regional cost of living into consideration.

$83,000 is nothing for a single person in New York --- LET ALONE A FAMILY ....

California is pretty much the same.

I suggest you educate yourself regarding the cost of living for the State of New York --- then work your way across the country.

Either way, you generalized, and you showed your neocon colors.

Shame on you sir.

actually 83k is plenty of loot for a single person
and a family can more than get by on it
so your post is BS
83k/yr is called LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS
one may not live on park avenue, but one can surely live on it
I would suggest you do a lil homework yourself

 

[BWG]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

I have been a member of this forum for a couple of years and have never reported a post up to yesterday so this makes the second in 2 days..........Its against the rules to insult or call other member of the forum names........

.........When I was someone important I use to have a flunky like you do the spellcheck...........

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/22461-will-country-elect-black-president-4.html#post605121

Glass houses?

 

[Donc]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

actually 83k is plenty of loot for a single person
and a family can more than get by on it
so your post is BS
83k/yr is called LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS
one may not live on park avenue, but one can surely live on it
I would suggest you do a lil homework yourself

I would suggest you do a little research as well,i,ve posted twice on it after doing a bit of research, I wont get into it again. When you do you will find the $83 thousand is BS.

 

[DeeJayH]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

I would suggest you do a little research as well,i,ve posted twice on it after doing a bit of research, I wont get into it again. When you do you will find the $83 thousand is BS.

born and raised in NY
i dont need research to tell me what i know
a family of 4 has no problem getting by on $83k/year
unless they are foolish with the money

 

[dixon76710]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

I would suggest you do a little research as well,i,ve posted twice on it after doing a bit of research, I wont get into it again. When you do you will find the $83 thousand is BS.

??? Youve not even mentioned the topic in this thread. If you are refering to the "research" in

FactCheck.org: Bush's False Claims About Children's Health Insurance

, their arguement is that on Sept 20 when Bush made his speech, the proposed legislation that was "public" wouldnt allow someone making $83 thousand a year to get gov paid insurance, BUT, they put into parenthesis that the legislation made public a few days later did in fact do just this. It is just as likely that Bush simply had access to proposed legislation a "few days" before the "public" does.

families with incomes up to $83,000 per year....
(The compromise bill that was released a few days after Bush's press conference does rescind an administration effort to block New York state from increasing its eligibility cap to that level.)

 

[Donc]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Your right Dixon I haven’t posted it on this thread, it was on two other threads, should have made myself clearer. What Bush was referring too was that New York a month before his remarks about the bill being too expensive tried to get the $83000 in. He shot that down, but turned around and said a month later that it was in the bill that congress sent to him. Here is the links I was referring to.

2007 Federal Poverty Guidelines

http://www.senate.gov/~finance/sitepages/leg/LEG 2007/Leg 110 071307 Mark.pdf

 

[dixon76710]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

I dont see anything about the 83K. And not sure what you think proposed legislation from July, has to do with Bush's statements about $83K in September, about legislation made Public a few days later.

I do see the poverty level of $20,650. Which is where New York got the figure of $82,600 which is 4 times the Federal poverty level. And even though

Bush administration, in fact, just denied a request by New York to set its income cut-off at $82,600 for a family

(The compromise bill that was released a few days after Bush's press conference does rescind an administration effort to block New York state from increasing its eligibility cap to that level.)
FactCheck.org: Bush's False Claims About Children's Health Insurance

Your right Dixon I haven’t posted it on this thread, it was on two other threads, should have made myself clearer. What Bush was referring too was that New York a month before his remarks about the bill being too expensive tried to get the $83000 in. He shot that down, but turned around and said a month later that it was in the bill that congress sent to him. Here is the links I was referring to.

2007 Federal Poverty Guidelines

http://www.senate.gov/~finance/sitepages/leg/LEG 2007/Leg 110 071307 Mark.pdf

 

[Vader]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

I think you should have to foot the bill my left wing socialist friend..If you like Universal health care so bad why not move to France or Canada
thye have it....One thing though when they get sick they come here for treatment.........

The ultra spoiled right-wing neocon-nazi greedmongers need to be taxed so that health care can be made affordable.

I realize you neocons have serious issues with the idea of having to pay for welfare. I understand that you neoconazis firmly believe the middle class should have to pay for everything and you should have to pay for nothing. (This is a disease called GREED)

However, healthcare is important and EVERYBODY should be able to afford it. If not for your greedy friends in the medical insurance business, and the drug manufacturing business, this conversation would be moot. However, you and your uber-wealthy insurance rapist friends as well as their phamacriminal co-conspirators have taken advantage of the American public for so long that most Americans are no longer able to afford even BASIC health care.

That being said ... it's time for the greedy to be punished for their crimes. Healthcare and medicine needs to be AFFORDABLE for EVERYBODY not just a few snotty rich people. As such, the greedy profitmongering insurance-rapists can now accept higher taxes (for their class only) and the middle class and the poor can reap the benefits those taxes will bring.

If you don't like it, MOVE TO RUSSIA!

:mrgreen:

 

[Donc]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Maybe this link and a few snips from the link will help clarify my position. I hope so anyway.

<The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment.


Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), senior Republican on the Finance Committee, had implored Bush to reconsider his veto vow. But after Bush incorrectly described the children’s health bill as providing coverage for families earning up to $80,000 a year, Grassley fired back.

“The president’s understanding of our bill is wrong,” Grassley said, his voice rising with anger. “I urge him to reconsider his veto message based on a bill we might pass, not something someone on his staff told him wrongly is in my bill.”

The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment. The administration denied that request earlier this month, following with a directive that prevents states from offering SCHIP to families that make more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level without demonstrating 95 percent coverage of children from lower income brackets.>

TheHill.com - Bush renews threat to veto children’s health legislation

 

[Vader]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

actually 83k is plenty of loot for a single person
and a family can more than get by on it
so your post is BS
83k/yr is called LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS
one may not live on park avenue, but one can surely live on it
I would suggest you do a lil homework yourself

Ok... It's clear that you're unfarmilar with basic economics and the fact that the cost of living varies from place to place.

You must understand that a SMALL apartment in New York (1 bedroom) is known to rent for as much as $2,000 per month. If you consider the fact that this a ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT, you should quickly gather that New York is an expensive place to live... REGARDLESS.

A family of four -- would probably pay $5,000 per month for a large apartment or possibly $3000 per month for a suitable sized house in the burbs. Right there --- we're looking at a minmum of $36,000 and a maximum of $60,000 per year FOR HOUSING ALONE.

This does not include water, sewer, trash, FOOD, school supplies, gas (for the burbs), tokens (for the subway), telephone service, gas (household) clothing, diarpers, and whatever other expenses may occur.

As such, $83,000 may be plenty for a SINGLE person but it doesn't cover basic expenses for a family... in New York or anywhere else (except for places like Arkansas and Kentucky.)


:mrgreen:

 

[DeeJayH]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Ok... It's clear that you're unfarmilar with basic economics and the fact that the cost of living varies from place to place.

You must understand that a SMALL apartment in New York (1 bedroom) is known to rent for as much as $2,000 per month. If you consider the fact that this a ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT, you should quickly gather that New York is an expensive place to live... REGARDLESS.

A family of four -- would probably pay $5,000 per month for a large apartment or possibly $3000 per month for a suitable sized house in the burbs. Right there --- we're looking at a minmum of $36,000 and a maximum of $60,000 per year FOR HOUSING ALONE.

This does not include water, sewer, trash, FOOD, school supplies, gas (for the burbs), tokens (for the subway), telephone service, gas (household) clothing, diarpers, and whatever other expenses may occur.

As such, $83,000 may be plenty for a SINGLE person but it doesn't cover basic expenses for a family... in New York or anywhere else (except for places like Arkansas and Kentucky.)


:mrgreen:

:roll: when you decide to rejoin us in reality, i will get back to ya

http://www.apartments.com/partner/R...a8=y&prvpg=5&Rent_Minimum=0&Rent_Maximum=1000

 

[Vader]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

:roll: when you decide to rejoin us in reality, i will get back to ya

http://www.apartments.com/partner/R...a8=y&prvpg=5&Rent_Minimum=0&Rent_Maximum=1000

1.) You've obviously never lived in New York.

2.) Most of those apartments are NOT family sized.

3.) I am not the one who is living in an alternate reality.

 

[dixon76710]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Maybe this link and a few snips from the link will help clarify my position. I hope so anyway.

<The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment.


Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), senior Republican on the Finance Committee, had implored Bush to reconsider his veto vow. But after Bush incorrectly described the children’s health bill as providing coverage for families earning up to $80,000 a year, Grassley fired back.

“The president’s understanding of our bill is wrong,” Grassley said, his voice rising with anger. “I urge him to reconsider his veto message based on a bill we might pass, not something someone on his staff told him wrongly is in my bill.”

The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment. The administration denied that request earlier this month, following with a directive that prevents states from offering SCHIP to families that make more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level without demonstrating 95 percent coverage of children from lower income brackets.>

TheHill.com - Bush renews threat to veto children’s health legislation

AND, the new legislation reversed this "directive". From your site

The SCHIP deal would raise cigarette taxes by 61 cents per pack to pay for expanded health coverage while taking aim at a Bush administration directive that would restrict states’ ability to raise income eligibility levels for the program.

and from the factcheck.org site

(The compromise bill that was released a few days after Bush's press conference does rescind an administration effort to block New York state from increasing its eligibility cap to that level.)
FactCheck.org: Bush's False Claims About Children's Health Insurance

 

[DeeJayH]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

1.) You've obviously never lived in New York.

2.) Most of those apartments are NOT family sized.

3.) I am not the one who is living in an alternate reality.

believe what you want
you will only make a fool of yourself
not only did i live there, i was a business man there
and your 'figures' are grossly out of perspective
if i wanted to, i could show an apartment that goes for $10k per month
but instead I showed you a fact
those apartements are a range from 1 bedrooms up
so as you, maybe not you but anybody else can see, you can live in NYC in a 3/2 for under $2000/mo
yes there are studios that cost about that much, but there are plenty of places a train ride away where one can affordably live
if you do not speak about things you have no clue about, you will not appear teh babbling fool
word to teh wise(or should i say fool)

 

[winston53660]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

but there are plenty of places a train ride away where one can affordably live

Yeah living in Greenpoint next to the sewage treatment plant:roll:

 

[Vader]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

believe what you want
you will only make a fool of yourself
not only did i live there, i was a business man there
and your 'figures' are grossly out of perspective
if i wanted to, i could show an apartment that goes for $10k per month
but instead I showed you a fact
those apartements are a range from 1 bedrooms up
so as you, maybe not you but anybody else can see, you can live in NYC in a 3/2 for under $2000/mo
yes there are studios that cost about that much, but there are plenty of places a train ride away where one can affordably live
if you do not speak about things you have no clue about, you will not appear teh babbling fool
word to teh wise(or should i say fool)

How very .... neo-conistic of you ....

Of course, you don't want a struggling family of four to be able to afford insurance... simply because each parent makes $41,500 per year while living in the most expensive city in the United States of America.

..|.. ..|..

:mrgreen:

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

A family of four -- would probably pay $5,000 per month for a large apartment or possibly $3000 per month for a suitable sized house in the burbs.

This is completely false. No family of four making $83k is going to be living in a 5k/month apartment. Families making 83k in NYC generally live in one of the outer boroughs and pay around 2k a month. You can live in Forest Hills, a nice middle class neighborhood, and get a 2br (what most families of 4 live in) for under 2k.

The average weekly wage in Queens is $792. This compares to $760, $708 and $691 in The Bronx, Staten Island and Brooklyn, respectively.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/0221200..._y__hits_paydirt_regionalnews_andy_geller.htm

The vast majority of people in NYC are living on far less than 83k.

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Yeah living in Greenpoint next to the sewage treatment plant:roll:

Or in Astoria. Or Forest Hills. Or Park Slope. or Prospect Heights. Or any of the other dozens of neighborhoods with affordable family housing.

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

Maybe this link and a few snips from the link will help clarify my position. I hope so anyway.

<The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment.


Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), senior Republican on the Finance Committee, had implored Bush to reconsider his veto vow. But after Bush incorrectly described the children’s health bill as providing coverage for families earning up to $80,000 a year, Grassley fired back.

“The president’s understanding of our bill is wrong,” Grassley said, his voice rising with anger. “I urge him to reconsider his veto message based on a bill we might pass, not something someone on his staff told him wrongly is in my bill.”

The $80,000 eligibility figure cited by Bush was taken from a request filed by New York to add higher-income families to its SCHIP enrollment. The administration denied that request earlier this month, following with a directive that prevents states from offering SCHIP to families that make more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level without demonstrating 95 percent coverage of children from lower income brackets.>

TheHill.com - Bush renews threat to veto children’s health legislation

You're missing the main point:

The administration denied that request earlier this month, following with a directive that prevents states from offering SCHIP to families that make more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level without demonstrating 95 percent coverage of children from lower income brackets.

Democrats, particularly those from wealthier states, have condemned the SCHIP directive and promised to overturn it. Grassley and Hatch said Thursday that the issue remains one of a few still under discussion among SCHIP conferees.

The point is that if Bush signs the law granting this extra $35 billion, the states are just going to do what they want with it. Which in NY translates to providing free insurance to all kids in households making less than 83k.

 

[dixon76710]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

A transcript of the Democratic radio response to President Bush's radio address on Sept. 29:

Hi, my name is Graeme Frost. I'm 12 years old and I live in Baltimore, Maryland. Most kids my age probably havent heard of CHIP, the Childrens Health Insurance Program. But I know all about it, because if it weren't for CHIP, I might not be here today.

CHIP is a law the government made to help families like mine afford healthcare for their kids. Three years ago, my family was in a really bad car accident. My younger sister Gemma and I were both hurt. I was in a coma for a week and couldn't eat or stand up or even talk at first. My sister was even worse.

I was in the hospital for five-and-a-half months and I needed a big surgery. For a long time after that, I had to go to physical therapy after school to get stronger. But even though I was hurt badly, I was really lucky. My sister and I both were.

My parents work really hard and always make sure my sister and I have everything we need, but the hospital bills were huge. We got the help we needed because we had health insurance for us through the CHIP program. But there are millions of kids out there who don't have CHIP,
FOXNews.com - Transcript: Democratic Response to President Bush's Radio Address - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

..............

Graeme Frost, who gave the democrat rebuttal to George Bush’s reasons for vetoing the SCHIP Bill, is a middle school student at the exclusive$20,000 per year Park School in Baltimore, MD...

His sister Gemma, also severely injured in the accident, attended the same school prior to the accident meaning the family was able to come up with nearly $40,000 per year for tuition for these 2 grade schoolers. ...

Here are photos of the school's 44,000 square foot Wyman Arts Center: two galleries, an outdoor ampitheater, Meyerhoff Theater, Macks-Fidler Black Box Theater, practice rooms, rehearsal space, and ceramics, 3-D sculpture, woodworking, jewelry, painting, photography, digital graphics studios, recording studio, and keyboard lab. ...

What the article does not mention is that Halsey Frost has owned his own company "Frostworks",since this marriage announcement in the NY Times in 1992 so he chooses to not give himself insurance. He also employed his wife as "bookkeeper and operations management" prior to her recent 2007 hire at the "medical publishing firm". As her employer, he apparently denied her health insurance as well.


His company, Frostworks, is located at 3701 E BALTIMORE ST. A building that was purchased for $160,000 in 1999. The buildings owner is listed as DIVERSIFIED INDUSTRIAL DESIGN CENTER, LLC whose mailing address is listed as 104 S Collington Ave which is the Frost's home. The commercial property he owns is also listed as the business address for another company called Reillys Designs which leads to the question of whether rental income is included in the above mentioned salary total


The current market value of their improved 3,040 SF home at 104 S Collington Ave is unknown but 113 S COLLINGTON AVE, also an end unit, sold for $485,000 this past March and it was only 2,060 SF. A photo taken in the family's kitchen shows what appears to be a recent remodeling job with granite counter tops and glass front cabinets
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907687/posts

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

..............

wow.

just wow.

That's absolutely pathetic. This is EXACTLY why this bullshit should not be expanded.

Bonnie Frost works for a medical publishing firm; her husband, Halsey, is a woodworker. They are raising their four children on combined income of about $45,000 a year. Neither gets health insurance through work.

Having priced private insurance that would cost more than their mortgage - about $1,200 a month - they continue to rely on the government program.

An income of $45,000 a year? Oh really? Then how the hell are they paying 40k a year in private school tuition?

This is just proof that if you design a program to help this type of people, more and more middle-upper class people will forego paying for their own insurance and just rely on the government dole that should be reserved for the poorest.

 

[dixon76710]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

About 25% to 50% of CHIP's children, or 1.5 million to 3 million, previously had private insurance, the Congressional Budget Office says. They now cost taxpayers $1.25 billion to $2.5 billion a year.
Children's health insurance: How much aid is enough? - USATODAY.com

 

[BWG]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

LOL...An anonymous freeper, nicked 'icwhatudo', posted what he found about the Frost's on goggle with no fact checking and the cons (including wingnut pundits) swallowed the bait, hook line and sinker.

Here are the facts that the right-wing distorted in order to attack young Graeme:

1) Graeme has a scholarship to a private school. The school costs $15K a year, but the family only pays $500 a year.

2) His sister Gemma attends another private school to help her with the brain injuries that occurred due to her accident. The school costs $23,000 a year, but the state pays the entire cost.

3) They bought their “lavish house” sixteen years ago for $55,000 at a time when the neighborhood was less than safe.

4) Last year, the Frosts made $45,000 combined. Over the past few years they have made no more than $50,000 combined.

5) The state of Maryland has found them eligible to participate in the CHIP program.

 

[DeeJayH]

Re: Should the tax payer have to pay for ins for a child whose parents make $83K a ye

LOL...An anonymous freeper, nicked 'icwhatudo', posted what he found about the Frost's on goggle with no fact checking and the cons (including wingnut pundits) swallowed the bait, hook line and sinker.

Here are the facts that the right-wing distorted in order to attack young Graeme:

1) Graeme has a scholarship to a private school. The school costs $15K a year, but the family only pays $500 a year.

2) His sister Gemma attends another private school to help her with the brain injuries that occurred due to her accident. The school costs $23,000 a year, but the state pays the entire cost.

3) They bought their “lavish house” sixteen years ago for $55,000 at a time when the neighborhood was less than safe.

4) Last year, the Frosts made $45,000 combined. Over the past few years they have made no more than $50,000 combined.

5) The state of Maryland has found them eligible to participate in the CHIP program.

good for you for not swallowing what is posted without skepticism
but do you mind posting a link to your source, because i do not see one