It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush's Plan for Healthcare: Tax Your Existing Benefits.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 11:00 AM
link   



www.ilovemontecarlo.com..." border=0>


Plan would tax some benefits

President Bush will propose deep tax breaks for Americans who purchase their own medical insurance and would finance the plan with an unprecedented tax on a portion of the healthcare plans that workers receive from their employers, according to the White House.

...

"Today, the tax code unfairly penalizes people who do not get health insurance through their job," Bush said. "It unwisely encourages workers to choose overly expensive, gold-plated plans. The result is that insurance premiums rise and many Americans cannot afford the coverage they need."

...

The basic concept of the plan is that employer-provided health insurance, now treated as a fringe benefit exempt from taxation, would no longer be entirely tax-free. Workers could be taxed if their coverage exceeded limits set by the government. But the government would also offer a new tax deduction for people buying health insurance on their own.

More...




Dumbest plan I've heard in a long time.

Is there anybody left who thinks this President is a true "conservative"?

What a crock!



[edit on 22-1-2007 by loam]




posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Wow, I do think this is rediculous! What the heck is this guy thinking? I'm getting tired of the government thinking the only way we can fund things is by raising taxes rather than being fiscally responsible. Why don't we cut some of the benefits the do-nothing government workers receive?



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 12:36 PM
link   
What is so stupid about this plan?

He is trying to health more affordable for people who do not receive it through their job.

Companies which do provide company healthcare plans will be taxed accordingly.

Having worked in 'coporate America' and now being self-employeed, coporate insurance was great.....I had excellent coverage at a very low cost...it was very nice.

Now that I'm self employed my insurance costs ~$6,000/yr..........and that only covers major medical issues......mainly my heart has to leap out of my chest, smack me in the face a few times and then burst into flames
and then..........I'd be covered....maybe.

I'd like a break. Insurance companies should have to be more competetive.

If this is so stupid........what is your idea

[edit on 22-1-2007 by ferretman2]



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   


If this is so stupid........what is your idea

Come to Canada, our system ain't perfect (wait times etc.) but at least we don't have to buy health insurance (buy health insurance, sounds ridiculous!:lol


Everybody is covered, even the beggar can get that bypass he needs.

Feels good to know I don't have to worry about insurance, especially if I get hurt and don't have it, and then be in debt for the rest of my life.

Imagine what those Iraq war billions could have done to better the USA, like Universal healthcare and other social programs, just imagine.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ferretman2

I'd like a break. Insurance companies should have to be more competetive.

If this is so stupid........what is your idea

[edit on 22-1-2007 by ferretman2]


I did offer a suggestion. Let's have government be more fiscally responsible and look at their spending to fund these programs rather than just raising taxes all the time.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Toad.............if the wait time was days......it could maybe considered.

But I believe in Canada the wait time could be months.

Also the US has a much larger population than Canada so a soicalized system would not work.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by closettrekkie

Originally posted by ferretman2

I'd like a break. Insurance companies should have to be more competetive.

If this is so stupid........what is your idea

[edit on 22-1-2007 by ferretman2]


I did offer a suggestion. Let's have government be more fiscally responsible and look at their spending to fund these programs rather than just raising taxes all the time.


Exactamundo. The rate of spending growth should match the rate of inflation/funds coming in. Pork projects need to be cut and/or have the author of the bill prominently noted, for scrutiny and shame. A line item veto would be a nice tool, and more oversight on entitlement spending as well. Tort reform would help keep some costs down too, with regards to medical care.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Proposal would make it easier for people without employer-provided insurance plans to buy coverage on their own. And, there is not much of a significant tax increase. I don't see the huge issue. CHECK THIS ARTICLE: money.cnn.com...



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Dems and Libs denied the President line item Veto power.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
somehow, I get the idea from the posts here that this would be a tax on the businesses that provide insurance benefits? I didn't get that impression from the news story I read...
but, if this is the case, it is a very, very, bad idea!! companies are having a hard time now providing affordable insurance to the employees, add a tax to it, and well, it might just make more now insured people uninsured!

I also remember reading something that the tax would only be after a certain amount of coverage. before that, even if it is employee based insurance, it would be untaxed. if it is a tax on the employees, wouldn't that be an incentive to opt for the cheaper plans that don't deliver much of anything?

all in all though, it would be a good idea to get the employer out of the health insurance picture I think, but, how to do it in a way that doesn't cause too much upheaval is another story all together.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Get the feds out of healthcare all together as they only listen to the HMO lobbiest. And this "new" plan is orchestrated by them also.

Put competition back in healthcare with the States overseeing the plans.

If anyone thinks the Presidents plan will help anyone other than the providers; they are so out of touch with the reality of the situation it borders on comedy.

This is nothing more than a transparent attempt to try and regain a little public support so the GOP won't get another "thumpin" in 08. Too little too late.



[edit on 22-1-2007 by whaaa]

[edit on 22-1-2007 by whaaa]



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   
well i see this a little different. it appears bush is trying to set up a system that will discourage the use of employer based insurance.


i for one think this is a good thing. it high time people started taking care of them selves.


maybe the next step is removal of insurance ....... mmmmm that sounds good.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Well, I'm going to add my $.02 and throw in a bit of a rant.

I have not had health insurance for over 6 years. I cannot afford it. It's outrageous!

Now the rant. Because I am of child bearing years I get to pay A LOT more for that. Doesn't matter I had my tubes tied when I was 28. I still HAVE to pay it (you can thank the illegals for that, for having millions of babies that we get to pay for because they cannot/have not).

Also, if I were to have surgery, I now get to pay double what it was 5 years ago because the illegals have literally bankrupt hospitals. I was talking to one of my friends who is a doctor in Colorado Springs and he said that is just the way it is right now.

The government should be making sure we all have health insurance or that it is a least affordable for the average blue color family.

It makes my blood boil just thinking about it. Most Americans do not have health insurance and one major illness would wipe them out financially and ruin the rest of their life.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I don't get it . . . what he is proposing is to have American going out their companies provided insurance and let them buy it for themselves . . .

But what about the people that can not afford insurance?

I don't get it.

How can this be competitive? you either can afford it or not.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Glyph - why do you think it's a good idea for people to get off of their employer's insurance? I have insurance through my company and I dont' see anything wrong with that. I work hard for the company and it's part of the reward I get for getting a good education and working full time. What's the harm in that????



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Such a short-sighted proposal and worthy of those who say GWB has a sort of Curious George look to him.

If true, this is the last (Bush) straw for me. What this will do is force many to cut back on the health insurance they get through their employers. Both my wife and I already pay a pretty big chunk of change out of our monthly salary for our portion, plus all the high deductibles we have to pay when we need to get health care or medicine. This will have the effect of a pay cut on me if adopted.

Why not start to fix things where the problem starts - the high cost of malpractice insurance, which drives the high cost of health care, which drives the high cost of health insurance. Maybe a reasonable limit on malpractice judgements would be in order to start the process of bringing costs down.

And for the Canadian poster, I'm sure anyone can get a bypass operation in Canada, but isn't the real question whether they can survive long enough to reach the front of the line?

[edit on 1/22/2007 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Why not start to fix things where the problem starts - the high cost of malpractice insurance, which drives the high cost of health care, which drives the high cost of health insurance. Maybe a reasonable limit on malpractice judgements would be in order to start the process of bringing costs down.

[edit on 1/22/2007 by centurion1211]


Agreed, that this is part of the problem but where the problem STARTS is because health Care, Drugs, Testing procedures etc. are driven by the profit motive by HMOs, drug companys and their stock holders and no real competition between companys as they have the white house blessing to price fix.

Just because Canadas' health care is slow doesn't mean it needs to be that way In the USA.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
Just because Canadas' health care is slow doesn't mean it needs to be that way In the USA.


Wish I could be sure of that. But I'm at a loss to think of any government bureaucracy (and national health care would be the largest one in the government) that operates with anything close to speed and efficiency. Been to a DMV office in a larger city lately?

The reason for that is simple, there's absolutely no incentive to work faster or better when the government runs the operation. The health care workers get paid the same salary no matter how many people they treat and whether the treatment actually helps the patient. It would be like an assembly line job.

With no incentive, who develops the new and better procedures for treating people? The scariest part for me would be knowing that the decision to treat you or not - whether you lived or died - would be decided by some faceless bureaucrat in a little cubicle who most likely would look at you as only a number. Sure, there are HMO's in the U.S. that work like that now. But you still have some choice to seek other treatment if you don't like what they say.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Wish I could be sure of that. But I'm at a loss to think of any government bureaucracy (and national health care would be the largest one in the government) that operates with anything close to speed and efficiency. Been to a DMV office in a larger city lately?



Yeah, like bureaucrats don't micromanage our lives as it is. Ever try to get a building permit?

If I have to choose between a national health agency and no medical insurance at all [like is my current situation, because my employer dropped the med. ins.] I'll go with the bureaucracy for my familys sake.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by closettrekkie
Glyph - why do you think it's a good idea for people to get off of their employer's insurance? I have insurance through my company and I dont' see anything wrong with that. I work hard for the company and it's part of the reward I get for getting a good education and working full time. What's the harm in that????




in short i think insurance is a fraud.



the reason health care is so high is becuase of employer-insurance alliances. the rates are adjusted to the wages of the employees. then people without good wages get left behind.

its what bush is trying to address. first taxing the health care from employers to employees, then giving taxbreaks to those that choose to get health care without corporate involvement. im sure the hope is it will create more reasonable insurance companies, that deal with citizens and their demographic as apposed to corporate favoritism.


if you enjoy your current insurance policy, thats fine. but some people cant afford it. and they will need the "breaks" to get by.


personally i never got health care from my job, becuase the rates were not the best, nor did they stay around for long. nearly every 6 months there would be new rates and policies:/. im sure this doesnt happen every where but... the biggest thing is if you have children. and becuase i do not have children i havent the scope to decide whether it is necessary or not.


time will tell, but i think bush is actually trying to do the right thing here.

or it could be just as whaaa stated



This is nothing more than a transparent attempt to try and regain a little public support so the GOP won't get another "thumpin" in 08. Too little too late.




[edit on 22/1/07 by Glyph_D]




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join