Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > USA
Reload this Page >

Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Old Mar 26th 2012, 3:55 pm
  #1  
The worse half of Weeze
Thread Starter
 
Mr Weeze's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Back in TX
Posts: 3,014
Mr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond repute
Default Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Well at least this will provide some distraction to the presidential race:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17513609

I don't know why, but I found the map of %uninsured by state interesting. I'm guessing some of that is driven by immigration trends, but Oregon & Montana?
Mr Weeze is offline  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 4:01 pm
  #2  
Rootbeeraholic
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 2,280
Bink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond reputeBink has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Yeah, I just saw that and noticed Texas was in the >25% uninsured level.
It really is a dividing line between the poor and everyone else. Individual plans are way more expensive that group plans and chances are that those that are considered 'middle class' or above are likely to be in jobs that offer group insurance policies and the accompanying rates.
Bink is offline  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 4:26 pm
  #3  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,592
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Mr Weeze View Post
Well at least this will provide some distraction to the presidential race:
On the contrary, this case could well define the presidential race.
Giantaxe is online now  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 4:28 pm
  #4  
The worse half of Weeze
Thread Starter
 
Mr Weeze's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Back in TX
Posts: 3,014
Mr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond reputeMr Weeze has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Giantaxe View Post
On the contrary, this case could well define the presidential race.
Sorry, you're right. I meant the nomination race!
Mr Weeze is offline  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 5:14 pm
  #5  
Bob
BE Site Lead
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 91,773
Bob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

I do like how having to have medical insurance is a intrusion to ones civil liberties, but most people don't have a problem being forced into the same for car insurance.

Some people, they're just to dumb to be allowed outside of their basements.
Bob is offline  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 6:22 pm
  #6  
 
lansbury's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 9,543
lansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond reputelansbury has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Mr Weeze View Post
I'm guessing some of that is driven by immigration trends, but Oregon & Montana?
I'm surprised at the Oregon figure and wonder if it is right. What do they include as uninsured. This State is one of the more progressive in setting up heath cover. We have a high risk pool for those that can pay, but the insurance companies refuse cover to. We have an insurance program for those that can't pay, there is a waiting list for the places but if covers a lot of residents, which includes all children whose families can't pay. The State Legislator at its session earlier this year passed a bill to set up our own insurance exchange.
lansbury is online now  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 6:30 pm
  #7  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,592
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Bob View Post
I do like how having to have medical insurance is a intrusion to ones civil liberties, but most people don't have a problem being forced into the same for car insurance.
You don't have to drive a car so I'm unconvinced this is an equivalent. Additionally, some states allow you to post a bond in lieu of insurance.
Giantaxe is online now  
Old Mar 26th 2012, 6:52 pm
  #8  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 904
cranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond reputecranston has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

betting site Intrade is currently predicting Supreme's will not find the law unconstitutional.

Link
cranston is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 12:11 am
  #9  
BE Enthusiast
 
SATX John's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 899
SATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really nice
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Giantaxe View Post
You don't have to drive a car so I'm unconvinced this is an equivalent. Additionally, some states allow you to post a bond in lieu of insurance.
Concur. I do not need airplane insurance, yet I fly or vacation insurance when I take a vacation.

I think some parts of the law are valid, but the universal mandate is the major issue.

BTW SCOTUS even challenged the admin, including Dems: Is it a tax or penalty. That is a key point of the reach of congress in the commerce clause.

I do fear that 2nd and 3rd order effects of this law for many, their employers will drop coverage in favor of the fine, its cheaper to the employers.
SATX John is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 12:35 am
  #10  
BE Forum Addict
 
Brit3964's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: South Florida
Posts: 2,068
Brit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

You don't have to drive a car so I'm unconvinced this is an equivalent.
Concur. I do not need airplane insurance, yet I fly or vacation insurance when I take a vacation.
True. You could choose not to have a car and walk or use public transport. You could choose not to have health insurance because you think you won't need it. When you do fall ill or have an unexpected medical problem, you'll either pay direct out-of-pocket and/or go bankrupt or go to the ER and let everybody else pay for you.

It all seems so simple
Brit3964 is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 12:38 am
  #11  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,592
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Brit3964 View Post
True. You could choose not to have a car and walk or use public transport. You could choose not to have health insurance because you think you won't need it. When you do fall ill or have an unexpected medical problem, you'll either pay direct out-of-pocket and/or go bankrupt or go to the ER and let everybody else pay for you.

It all seems so simple
The "get out of jail card" of going to the emergency room is a critical part of the debate, imo. But I suspect Scalia et al will respond that if Congress is bothered about this, they should pass a law that excludes people without the ability to pay from ER treatment.
Giantaxe is online now  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 12:56 am
  #12  
Bob
BE Site Lead
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 91,773
Bob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Giantaxe View Post
You don't have to drive a car so I'm unconvinced this is an equivalent. Additionally, some states allow you to post a bond in lieu of insurance.
Okay, some states, such as New Hampshire don't require you to have any car insurance, but as the state is the size of the pimple on my arse and you can't drive without insurance in the neighbouring states that's a bit moot for a freedom, when you consider only kids are about the only people who don't drive here and that having a car is a requirement, meaning car insurance is a requirement.

Only difference is, you get a ticket for not having insurance for your car, rather than a fine at tax time without having medical insurance.
Bob is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 12:59 am
  #13  
BE Forum Addict
 
Brit3964's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: South Florida
Posts: 2,068
Brit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond reputeBrit3964 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Giantaxe View Post
The "get out of jail card" of going to the emergency room is a critical part of the debate, imo. But I suspect Scalia et al will respond that if Congress is bothered about this, they should pass a law that excludes people without the ability to pay from ER treatment.
Yes because that is not part of the SCOTUS appeal. It then gets thrown back to our elected Congressmen (us) asking what kind of society we want. One that says no healthcare for those that can't afford it. Is that what we want? If so then next...stop people going bankrupt over medical bills? Make them pay even if it means paying it off for the rest of their life and/or possibly never paying it off? What's next...make the family of the deceased patient pay for it? I fear if this appeal is successful, SCOTUS rules it unconstitutional it might just open a big can of worms unintentionally.

It all seemed so simple
Brit3964 is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 1:15 am
  #14  
BE Enthusiast
 
SATX John's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 899
SATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really niceSATX John is just really nice
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by Bob View Post
Okay, some states, such as New Hampshire don't require you to have any car insurance, but as the state is the size of the pimple on my arse and you can't drive without insurance in the neighbouring states that's a bit moot for a freedom, when you consider only kids are about the only people who don't drive here and that having a car is a requirement, meaning car insurance is a requirement.

Only difference is, you get a ticket for not having insurance for your car, rather than a fine at tax time without having medical insurance.
Just to further my point and some others posting. Tax vs. fine/penalty. All folks that work pay into medicare.medicaide. Many of us never use it. Where does that money go? to those that need it.

If I am an employer , I can cancel health insurance benefits for my employees because it is cheaper for me to pay the fine., than pay for their insurance.

The gov't then provides health care banks to buy insurance from since it is the law they have to have it. It is cheaper for the employee to pay the fine, and not have the insurance. Is "their" insurance better, noone knows, "we have to pass the bill to know whats in it." (Nancy P.)

We still have the same problem, but larger. Unintended consequences of politicians dealing with the market.

2 fragments for Eb.
SATX John is offline  
Old Mar 27th 2012, 1:51 am
  #15  
Septicity
 
fatbrit's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 23,762
fatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond reputefatbrit has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case

Originally Posted by SATX John View Post
I do fear that 2nd and 3rd order effects of this law for many, their employers will drop coverage in favor of the fine, its cheaper to the employers.
Good! It is a mistake tying health insurance to an employer.
fatbrit is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.