Will Obamacare destroy jobs?

[Mr X]

then explain. if Obama care is more efficient then what is currently happening then why are insurance cost going up?

Obamacare is not UHC.
The American system of private insurance is the most expensive in the developed world, and it is the only one which has no UHC.

 

[VanceMack]

You may be on to something big. Why did California hospitals close?
How does the state of Alabama help their uninsured residents?

Because they overloaded their system paying for illegal immigrants, have huge levels of waste, and had become a haven for irresponsible people. And your 'solution' is to create a FED program so you can just bury and hide annual cost overruns and dump them onto future generations. Brilliant.

 

[mak2]

I dont understand why a hospital would go broke caring for illegal immigrants. All they legally have to do is stablize and ship.

Because they overloaded their system paying for illegal immigrants, have huge levels of waste, and had become a haven for irresponsible people. And your 'solution' is to create a FED program so you can just bury and hide annual cost overruns and dump them onto future generations. Brilliant.

 

[VanceMack]

I dont understand why a hospital would go broke caring for illegal immigrants. All they legally have to do is stablize and ship.

Private hospitals have that 'luxury'. Hospitals that accept any amount of state funding do not. And of course you just can't FATHOM how providing services without paying for them will have an adverse impact on businesses. That's...kinda why we are 17 trillion in debt and counting.

 

[mak2]

I have never heard that state hospitals cant stabilize and ship, I really did not know that. The only people who really get "free" and never pay for services and medical care are those that never pay into the system, get the healthcare and never pay for it. It happens all the time, has happened for a long time, and continues to happen. Why hasnt it bothered the RWers before? The only way to stop it is UHC and tax based system.

Private hospitals have that 'luxury'. Hospitals that accept any amount of state funding do not. And of course you just can't FATHOM how providing services without paying for them will have an adverse impact on businesses. That's...kinda why we are 17 trillion in debt and counting.

 

[greengirl77]

then explain. if Obama care is more efficient then what is currently happening then why are insurance cost going up?

Because I has not gone into full effect and with the fear mongering that has gone on, pretty much in a couple of years there will be egg on many peoples faces. Gee just think a decade ago Republicans thought this was a great idea. Now it is let them die, do it quickly, the only rights that matter are what we think. Obama caused the debt, wars, and the ticket prices to raise a Disney World. Did I cover everything the right is upset about??

 

[VanceMack]

I have never heard that state hospitals cant stabilize and ship, I really did not know that. The only people who really get "free" and never pay for services and medical care are those that never pay into the system, get the healthcare and never pay for it. It happens all the time, has happened for a long time, and continues to happen. Why hasnt it bothered the RWers before? The only way to stop it is UHC and tax based system.

all that will do is create massive debt which will continue to be dumped on generations down the road. Make no mistake...I BELIEVE we are headed to universal healthcare. Obamacare is crap and everyone knows it. The employer mandate WILL cause unemployment (how completely ****ing stupid making employers responsible for individuals health care) and within a few years the government will announce that gosh...it's just not working. I guess we have to kill Medicare/Medicaid/social security and military health care and go to a 'universal' health care. It's coming. And so is the debt that will accompany it. Cities...heck...entire states have already announced their 'solution' to their debt problem by defaulting to Obamacare. Yeah...it's not going to cause problems.

 

[mak2]

We are paying for the most expensive healthcare in the world...right now. In every other case worldwide when they have went to UHC the overall cost have gone down because UHC utilizes evidnce based principals instead of a profit based system. If we are spending more money now, how does spending less money for a better result not help? Just think about it rationally for a minute, there is no country in the world trying to emulate our system, none. Your fear of this being a financial is base simply on the notion the government is bad. It might be, but our current system is worse.

all that will do is create massive debt which will continue to be dumped on generations down the road. Make no mistake...I BELIEVE we are headed to universal healthcare. Obamacare is crap and everyone knows it. The employer mandate WILL cause unemployment (how completely ****ing stupid making employers responsible for individuals health care) and within a few years the government will announce that gosh...it's just not working. I guess we have to kill Medicare/Medicaid/social security and military health care and go to a 'universal' health care. It's coming. And so is the debt that will accompany it. Cities...heck...entire states have already announced their 'solution' to their debt problem by defaulting to Obamacare. Yeah...it's not going to cause problems.

 

[VanceMack]

We are paying for the most expensive healthcare in the world...right now. In every other case worldwide when they have went to UHC the overall cost have gone down because UHC utilizes evidnce based principals instead of a profit based system. If we are spending more money now, how does spending less money for a better result not help? Just think about it rationally for a minute, there is no country in the world trying to emulate our system, none. Your fear of this being a financial is base simply on the notion the government is bad. It might be, but our current system is worse.

I have experience the 'economy' healthcare in the UK. Worked with healthcare providers in Germany and Canada. You know who doesn't take advantage o their healthcare programs? EVERYONE that can afford not to.

 

[mak2]

I cant afford our healthcare system and I make great money. I know not every family has a million dollar event, but our healthcare system should not cause so many to go bankrupt. We all pay for that too.

I have experience the 'economy' healthcare in the UK. Worked with healthcare providers in Germany and Canada. You know who doesn't take advantage o their healthcare programs? EVERYONE that can afford not to.

 

[lolabird]

Dont they call it Romney care there?

Isn't Romney care a model for Obamacare?

 

[lolabird]

I believe so and in not sure if you think you are scoring points or not. I have long held that STATES should mandate and provide health care reform. STATE run. State funded. State paid.

Yeah, I'm scoring points. Are you?

 

[lolabird]

Because they overloaded their system paying for illegal immigrants, have huge levels of waste, and had become a haven for irresponsible people. And your 'solution' is to create a FED program so you can just bury and hide annual cost overruns and dump them onto future generations. Brilliant.

But we had the Terminator as our Governor. What is a haven for irresponsible people? Anything like Detroit?

 

[274ina]

If you do nothing I will get full real affordable HC.

If you cut my hours to 30 a week, I will get full real affordable HC.

if you fire me, I will get full real affordable HC..............

Your threat is empty.

Learn from Loius the 16th. The threat to him was not empty........................

 

[cpwill]

She doesn't qualify for Medicaid in her state because she earns more than 24% of poverty; i.e., $4395 for a family of three.

You might benefit from some reading.

 

[imagep]

John Schnatter has said he will cut employee's hours in order to avoid having to pay their insurance coverage. Now that's the definition of altruism.

he might do that, but he will have to hire more employees, because businesses need every labor hour that they have. So we end up with a lower unemployment rate, which leads to more competition for employees, which leads to companies having to compete harder for employees. Since the deduction for insurance makes it less expensive for companies to compete for labor based upon insurance and not pay raises, more companies will start offering insurance. companies that don't offer good compensation will get the bottom of the barrel employees, and will fail.

 

[imagep]

that is an avgerage 13% per year with Obama care it has gone up 20 to 50%



Obamacare Guarantees Higher Health Insurance Premiums -- $3,000+ Higher - Forbes

My insurance dropped in cost during the past two years.

 

[imagep]

I believe so and in not sure if you think you are scoring points or not. I have long held that STATES should mandate and provide health care reform. STATE run. State funded. State paid.

What's the difference between the state doing it and the fed gov doing it?

 

[imagep]

It already is hurting jobs, and it will get worse. Much worse.

Statements like that are EXACTLY why conservatives will have no chance of winning the next two major elections.

I'm not a supporter of Obamacare at all, but truthfully, it's going to have very little effect on our overall economy. It's going to effect less than 2% of businesses, as most businesses that will be required to provide insurance already do so.

Yes, some businesses will reduce employee hours to less than thirty as to avoid having to provide insurance, but they will have no choice other than to hire more employees to make up for the reduction of employee work hours. this will reduce our unemployment rate, cause employers to compete harder for employees, and in many cases the way they will compete harder is by increasing work hours or by providing benefits. Due to the deductablility of employee provided insurance, many companies will decide to compete for employees by offering insurance.

100 years ago, in agriculture, manufacturing, and many other industries, the 40 hour workweek was consider a "part time job". I suspect that 29 hours may soon become the standard workweek. This is something that is going to happen with or without Obamacare. As we become more and more productive per worker hour, we will either need fewer workers, or we will decide to require fewer work hours per employee. Many people will love to have a shorter work week (or more vacation time), because leisure time is one of the things that we demand. A very large percentage of part time workers are part time workers due to choice.

In a few months, when our economy doesn't collapse, conservatives who have been making these wild claims are going to be made to look like fools.

 

[mak2]

That seems to have no effect, or at least they are used to it by now.

Statements like that are EXACTLY why conservatives will have no chance of winning the next two major elections.

I'm not a supporter of Obamacare at all, but truthfully, it's going to have very little effect on our overall economy. It's going to effect less than 2% of businesses, as most businesses that will be required to provide insurance already do so.

In a few months, when our economy doesn't collapse, conservatives who have been making these wild claims are going to be made to look like fools.

 

[VanceMack]

What's the difference between the state doing it and the fed gov doing it?

states are best suited to identify and respond to the needs of their citizens. States and their citizens should be tasked to identify need and pay for them. The fed has demonstrated time and time again they have no problem running up massive debt and dumping the debt on future generations. That kind of behavior has to end.

 

[imagep]

states are best suited to identify and respond to the needs of their citizens. States and their citizens should be tasked to identify need and pay for them. The fed has demonstrated time and time again they have no problem running up massive debt and dumping the debt on future generations. That kind of behavior has to end.

States don't run up debt? Ever hear of California?

And people in Texas don't get cancer, and people in Alaska don't have automobile wrecks? I think that people all over the country pretty much have the same medical needs.

 

[VanceMack]

States don't run up debt? Ever hear of California?

And people in Texas don't get cancer, and people in Alaska don't have automobile wrecks? I think that people all over the country pretty much have the same medical needs.

Statres should be responsible for their own debt. California wants to provide services without regard to cost...fine. When they go broke...**** them. But thats kinda the point. Every state should be RESPONSIBLE for their own debts. The absolute reality is that people that clamor for fed health care do so because they know its going to be a debt nightmare and figure as long as the fed runs it up...meh...someone elses problem. That mentality HAS to change.

 

[imagep]

Statres should be responsible for their own debt. California wants to provide services without regard to cost...fine. When they go broke...**** them. But thats kinda the point. Every state should be RESPONSIBLE for their own debts. The absolute reality is that people that clamor for fed health care do so because they know its going to be a debt nightmare and figure as long as the fed runs it up...meh...someone elses problem. That mentality HAS to change.

As an individual, I really couldn't care less whether it is the state or the fed government running up debt. it effects me just the same either way, and yes, as long as it isn't me running up my personal debt, it is someone else's problem. There is little, if any, difference.

 

[VanceMack]

As an individual, I really couldn't care less whether it is the state or the fed government running up debt. it effects me just the same either way, and yes, as long as it isn't me running up my personal debt, it is someone else's problem. There is little, if any, difference.

There absolutely IS a difference if that debt is being run up and paid for at a state level. Citizens would be far more likely to be involved, engaged, and maybe even insist on RESPONSIBLE spending.