THIS IS WHY AMERICA IS GOING DOWNHILL

4/12/2011 11:04:22 PM

i'm so sorry you have to provide a proof of need for all the tax free medicine you buy

now shut the fuck up...people with preexisting conditions like...oh i don't know...cancer...can now not be denied health care insurance. your inconvenience<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<theirs

[Edited on April 12, 2011 at 11:46 PM. Reason : .]

4/12/2011 11:44:21 PM

hahahahaha

Quote :

"wtf is your deductible, $15k?"

nah my company pays for our healthcare

but I chose to buy up to the biggest plan since I know I'm going to need to have my tonsils out in the next year...my deductible is $350.

4/12/2011 11:47:06 PM

Quote :

"I've got my own retirement and a supposed $128k tax deficit I'm trying to pay off"

What the hell did you do to dig a $128k hole? You add a couple zeros by mistake or something and you got wacked by the IRS?

4/13/2011 12:03:36 AM

Quote :

"i'm so sorry you have to provide a proof of need for all the tax free medicine you buy now shut the fuck up...people with preexisting conditions like...oh i don't know...cancer...can now not be denied health care insurance."

yeah I'm going to jump behind this statement

rich people not being able to save a few bucks by gaming the system are way less my concern than being broke and worrying about my coverage lapsing for 63 days resulting in me being denied future coverage

4/13/2011 12:05:37 AM

Quote :

" I have to make an appt with my doctor, miss work, and spend a $15 co-pay for it to be eligible. And this will help drive down the cost of healthcare. "

No you don't. For OTC medications you just have to call their office and request it. The doctor handles everything from there, you just go to the drugstore and buy the medication.

There's lots of things in Obamacare to complain about, this isn't one of them.

And yes, actually, Obamacare DOES lower the cost per individual of basic healthcare over the a person's lifespan. You tards don't realize that one day you're going to be 70 years old too.

The privatized system didn't work. It's been tried twice, and, contrary to republican babble about competition lowering prices, this NEVER HAPPENS. What does happen is that HMO's immediately decide that insuring older Americans isn't profitable, so they deny coverage, or price hike it to the point that no one can afford the policies. There is no competition, because there's no profit to be made. Old people require multiple times more payout than they pay in to a policy during their latter years, and no privatized insurance policy is going to amortize that over an actual lifetime. All they care about is single year risk.

Thank god my father is a veteran and at least gets basic care through the VA. Their private insurance (catastrophic only, they have a 15k deductible) is still fucking 1700 dollars PER MONTH. For a 15k deductible, and 70/30% coverage. That is fucking bullshit no matter how you look at it.

4/13/2011 12:06:44 AM

Quote :

"healthcare is a privelege, not a right. If you want it, pay for it. Don't force me to join your system or make me help pay for some of your expenses because most of you can't afford it. I'm not here to save the fucking manatees. I've got my own life to worry about. Human compassion has taken a turn towards stupid these past few decades. "

It's a right. To say otherwise is ignorant and incredibly short sighted. I personally do not want to return to the 'good ol' days' when poor people died in the streets and acted as carriers for epidemics, spreading disease through the masses. When old folks who outlived their kids (or didn't have any) run out of money and die horrific and inhumane deaths due to starvation, infection, and malnutrition.

Yes, we ALL have our own shit to deal with. You aren't fucking special. And guess what? When we are all OLD, we will have even MORE shit to deal with, and I am personally quite glad that my country will make sure I have at least some minimum bar of good health and economic opportunity.

4/13/2011 12:14:04 AM

If you think healthcare is a right, I'd like to know what you think a "right" is.

4/13/2011 12:16:04 AM

I have a chopper to take me where I need to go. Why do I have to pay for your fucking highways and bridges? Fast transportation is a privilege, not a right. Go out and fucking earn it like i did, you lazy bastards. Toll roads, all day.

4/13/2011 12:17:07 AM

Quote :

"What the hell did you do to dig a $128k hole? You add a couple zeros by mistake or something and you got wacked by the IRS?"

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Notice the number under debt per taxpayer. Obama has made several mentions of it on tv on how each taxpaying American is over a hundred thousand dollars in debt. Because you know, Obama wants the national debt shared equally between each taxpaying American. That's the patriotic thing to do and it's our responsibility. It's our fault our politicians can't budget worth a damn.

So in this sense. No. I don't have $128k to pay off my supposed "portion" of this tax debt.

Quote :

"It's a right. To say otherwise is ignorant and incredibly short sighted. I personally do not want to return to the 'good ol' days' when poor people died in the streets and acted as carriers for epidemics, spreading disease through the masses. When old folks who outlived their kids (or didn't have any) run out of money and die horrific and inhumane deaths due to starvation, infection, and malnutrition. "

Right? So what about all those animals out there? I suppose it's their right to be given equal opportunity to live too huh? What about all those foxes that were starving (and probably still are)? What about the overpopulation and gassing/euthenizing of animals in shelters? If you consider healthcare a right, then it is a right because the laws of nature says it so. But it's not. There will be the weak. You have to have a hiearchy in any society, whether it be chickens or humans. Life isn't fair. It's tough. You've got to be tough to survive it. Poor people expect handouts because they can't get out of their situation. Bullshit. Everyone has choices. People throughout history have shown that if one applies themself properly, they can reach any goal they set. Yes, in the end, there will still be bums and poor people. But that's the reality of life and nature. You can't save everyone. Doing so only wastes resources that could possibly better enhance the world or a civilization which, in retrospect, could provide MORE opportunities and chances to poor people. Sometimes, to help someone in need is to force them to help themselves so other opportunties can come to them. What happened to being responsible for yourself? Does everyone need someone to hold their hand now? Are we that pathetic of a species that we need to protect ourselves from ourselves? It's all about decisions and responsibility. If you spend all your money when you're young and you end up old and broke, don't blame the system. You had every chance to save your money when you were young so you could retire comfortably.

Accountability and Responsibility. These are words long forgotten and lost in today's society. Everyone expects something for nothing, and as liberals keep giving handouts and setting up programs to help automate people's lives, the public will cry like spoiled ass children for more and more. Soon, we won't know what to do with ourselves because someone hasn't already designed a system to take care of us already.

Quote :

"Yes, we ALL have our own shit to deal with. You aren't fucking special. And guess what? When we are all OLD, we will have even MORE shit to deal with, and I am personally quite glad that my country will make sure I have at least some minimum bar of good health and economic opportunity. "

I hope that's not personal because you don't know anything about me or my situation.

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:33 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:21:57 AM

i just dont understand why its called Obamacare when everyone shit all over his original plan.

should be called UnderminedByRetardsCare

4/13/2011 12:26:31 AM

I agree that we all have a share in the national debt

but I think this share should be a function of the amount of resources and services we've consumed

corporations, for example, consume enormous amounts of federal services and resources
but somehow the biggest and most consumptive ones pay no taxes (I'm looking at you, GE)

a guy like me consumes very little of the fed's resources - I got a pittance in grants for school and received subsidized student loans (and unsub'ed loans at outrageous interest rates), I attended public schools and I drive on public roads, I enjoy the protection of the US military, police, etc.

The people and organizations most able to pay got that way by taking most advantage of the opportunities afforded by government

4/13/2011 12:30:54 AM

btw, I don't know if this "OTC prescription" rule is really caused by Obamacare or just the typical IRS bullshit.

4/13/2011 12:37:01 AM

**** I revised/edited my post above ****

Quote :

"but I think this share should be a function of the amount of resources and services we've consumed corporations, for example, consume enormous amounts of federal services and resources but somehow the biggest and most consumptive ones pay no taxes (I'm looking at you, GE) a guy like me consumes very little of the fed's resources - I got a pittance in grants for school and received subsidized student loans (and unsub'ed loans at outrageous interest rates), I attended public schools and I drive on public roads, I enjoy the protection of the US military, police, etc. The people and organizations most able to pay got that way by taking most advantage of the opportunities afforded by government "

I concur. At the same time. I never voted for some of these things. Yet I'm still responsible? I should not be responsible for debt that unorganized politicians created. The government is supposed to insure order and protect us and form relationships with foreign nations. That's it. The government has created this debt. It has duty to reverse the damages. They can start by cutting funding to unnecessary programs, especially those that don't work.

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:38 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:37:46 AM

Quote :

"The people and organizations most able to pay got that way by taking most advantage of the opportunities afforded by government"

And many by amorally externalizing every cost along the way they could get away with, legal or illegal

4/13/2011 1:00:33 AM

Quote :

""

4/13/2011 2:40:51 AM

Quote :

"I think it is bullshit that FSA money does not carry-over. Afterall it is YOUR money. Why can't you "save" your untaxed healthcare dollars in case of emergency."

i don't know what kind of crappy FSA's yall all have but my money from 2010 is good until May of 2011. and then this year's money will be good until May of 2012. i get 18 months - which i understand is not complete roll-over but it's better than losing it all January of the new year.

4/13/2011 7:57:35 AM

Quote :

"No you don't. For OTC medications you just have to call their office and request it. The doctor handles everything from there, you just go to the drugstore and buy the medication."

That doesn't do me much good if I happen to need medicine outside of my doctor's business hours or on a weekend.

Quote :

"There's lots of things in Obamacare to complain about, this isn't one of them."

It absolutely is. What problem does this solve?

This issue is not a political issue but one of government forced inefficiency. FSA was designed to encourage people to take responsibility for their own out of pocket expenses. Seemed to be one of the few good government programs out there. Let's not discount the fact that the changes in FSA would raise the cost for doctors and insurance companies to prescribe OTC medicine(s). Man hours would need to be
allocated for paperwork processing. This only adds more unneeded cost to healthcare.


It's funny how this devolved into a democrat/republican argument. my OP is just an apolitical rant against retarded government red tape. Seems that people are so hypersensitive to the possibility that it's an indictment against their team (team donkey or team elephant) that you people just have to make it about that.

4/13/2011 9:51:44 AM

Lol, at the "private sector" not being able to handle healthcare. The federal and state governments have been fucking with healthcare for countless decades. But I doubt that had anything to do with the current mess we're in now.


Oh well, I pay $90/mo, have a $20 copay on most things and have a yearly $0 deductible. So I'm good.

4/13/2011 10:10:34 AM

you know why the healthcare bill is messed up? They let the greedy insurance companies get involved in the making of it.

4/13/2011 10:29:18 AM

^amen. Working in the healthcare industry, I hate insurance companies with a passion.

4/13/2011 10:45:49 AM

see, this is why i just don't get sick.

i don't have to deal with all this bullshit.

4/13/2011 11:07:43 AM

Quote :

"It's funny how this devolved into a democrat/republican argument. my OP is just an apolitical rant against retarded government red tape. Seems that people are so hypersensitive to the possibility that it's an indictment against their team (team donkey or team elephant) that you people just have to make it about that."

lol, yep.

Quote :

"Lol, at the "private sector" not being able to handle healthcare. The federal and state governments have been fucking with healthcare for countless decades. But I doubt that had anything to do with the current mess we're in now."

The federal government has directly been involved with healthcare/insurance subsidies since at least the 1940s. The claim that we've had anything remotely resembling a "free market" in healthcare is beyond outlandish.

4/13/2011 11:20:36 AM

Quote :

"That doesn't do me much good if I happen to need medicine outside of my doctor's business hours or on a weekend. "

you might have to pay a few bucks pennies to buy a pack of otc allergy medicine because you were too stupid to plan ahead

BLOW UP HEALTHCARE

you really need to shut the fuck up

4/13/2011 11:33:22 AM

or you'll do what, exactly?


still no one has been able to answer the question of what problem this solves.

it's like the people who have no problem with virtual strip-searches and "enhanced" pat-downs in the name of security theater.

It accomplishes nothing yet gives people warm fuzzies.


[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 11:37 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 11:35:27 AM

lol - so tuff

telling someone to shut the fuck up doesn't carry an implicit "or I'll"

but since you want one: shut the fuck up or i'll keep telling you to shut the fuck up

better?

4/13/2011 11:39:49 AM

well at least you have a well reasoned argument there, chief!

4/13/2011 11:40:58 AM

Nothing more than another payout to health insurance providers. PRAISE THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR!

4/13/2011 11:44:01 AM

your inconvenience for having to pay taxes on the money you use to buy OTC cough syrup over the weekend is by far - and I mean they're not even in the same universe - outweighed by the benefit that people who previously could have been denied health insurance gain

so shut the fuck up and deal with the quarter extra you have to spend for some nyquil

but if you want to bitch about other provisions that are actually worth bitching about, have at it. i'm not saying it's a perfect plan. i'm saying the crux of your personal argument and impact on this particular topic is so trivial, it's pathetic

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 11:46 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 11:44:23 AM

Quote :

"i do have a well reasoned argument your inconvenience for having to pay taxes on the money you use to buy OTC cough syrup over the weekend is by far - and I mean they're not even in the same universe - outweighed by the benefit that people who previously could have been denied health insurance gain so shut the fuck up and deal with the quarter extra you have to spend for some nyquil "

Fuck this attitude. Yeah, it's great that more people have access to health insurance now. That doesn't mean you have to support every part of the bill. You should be pissed off at things like this. It's a bullshit payout to the insurance industry.

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 11:46:42 AM

clearly no one in the history of the world has ever had to make a small sacrifice under a provision in order to provide a greater good.

every goddamn bill that's passed should be perfect for every individual in the country, including some douchebag who wants to cry about his fucking allergy medicine

4/13/2011 11:50:19 AM

Quote :

"clearly no one in the history of the world has ever had to make a small sacrifice under a provision in order to provide a greater good. every goddamn bill that's passed should be perfect for every individual in the country, including some douchebag who wants to cry about his fucking allergy medicine "

Why should we accept it? It has no use other than to line the pockets of insurance providers. It's complete bullshit. You'd be pissed too if you were in his situation.

I'm not asking for a perfect piece of legislation. I'm asking for a piece of legislation that isn't obviously catered to the needs of the insurance and drug industry.

4/13/2011 11:57:08 AM

Bobby, just tell your wife to write you a prescription for it. I don't see how it's a big hassle for you, since your wife is a doctor.

4/13/2011 11:57:34 AM

^ pwnt?

4/13/2011 12:04:43 PM

illegal.

Quote :

"clearly no one in the history of the world has ever had to make a small sacrifice under a provision in order to provide a greater good."

false dilemma. try again.

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:05:14 PM

i'm torn on all of this.

i mean are all of the extra revenues gonna actually go to people who need it?

or is it gonna be used to cover latisse and viagra?

4/13/2011 12:09:05 PM

there are no extra revenues here. only extra cost.

4/13/2011 12:10:28 PM

here's another answer. the government no longer wants to subsidize your cough syrup and advil. so either buy that shit out of pocket or jump through the hoops.

how can you be outraged at this shit but be ok with the fact that in the past you've been able to avoid paying taxes on money used to get some affrin?

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:13:16 PM

ehhhhhhh. i see.



we actually had a convo today about cancer treatments and how a significant portion of people refuse treatment b/c its so invasive.


no idea why i told ya'll that. just rambling.

^but isnt that stuff considered healthcare, which is what we're trying to reduce the cost of?

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM. Reason : i'm torn on all of this]

4/13/2011 12:13:59 PM

apparently the cutoff is some OTC medications

4/13/2011 12:15:46 PM

Quote :

"clearly no one in the history of the world has ever had to make a small sacrifice under a provision in order to provide a greater good. every goddamn bill that's passed should be perfect for every individual in the country, including some douchebag who wants to cry about his fucking allergy medicine"

I would suggest reading all of Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, as it would probably take you all of an hour if that, but from the very beginning:

Quote :

"Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousand fold by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics or medicine-the special pleading of selfish interests. While every group has certain economic interests identical with those of all groups, every group has also, as we shall see, interests antagonistic to those of all other groups. While certain public policies would in the long run benefit everybody, other policies would benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The group that would benefit by such policies, having such a direct interest in them, will argue for them plausibly and persistently. It will hire the best buyable minds to devote their whole time to presenting its case. And it will finally either convince the general public that its case is sound, or so befuddle it that clear thinking on the subject becomes next to impossible. In addition to these endless pleadings of self-interest, there is a second main factor that spawns new economic fallacies every day. This is the persistent tendency of men to see only the immediate effects of a given policy, or its effects only on a special group, and to neglect to inquire what the long-run effects of that policy will be not only on that special group but on all groups. It is the fallacy of overlooking secondary consequences."

http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L2

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM. Reason : ]

4/13/2011 12:16:32 PM

libertarian economics - cute. doesn't everyone who studies economics read this.

and that second bolded part is just as applicable to the OP's side of this

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:25 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:22:28 PM

^not everyone studies economics.

4/13/2011 12:25:14 PM

that was my nice way of telling him that I have

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:26 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:26:25 PM

why didn't you just say that?

4/13/2011 12:27:51 PM

why do you care how I word my responses?

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:31 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:30:51 PM

Quote :

"libertarian economics - cute. doesn't everyone who studies economics read this."

People read a lot of things while in school, but they rarely learn to apply those principles to real world situations. Should we, as you seem to suggest, ignore secondary consequences or the glaringly obvious fact that certain parties (which sometimes have a little or a lot of influence over the political process) are rigging the game in their favor? That's exactly what has happened, as many people have already pointed out: the insurance companies lobbied for this legislation, because it benefits them directly. If that doesn't present a problem in your mind, I can't help you.

4/13/2011 12:36:17 PM

Quote :

"your inconvenience for having to pay taxes on the money you use to buy OTC cough syrup over the weekend is by far - and I mean they're not even in the same universe - outweighed by the benefit that people who previously could have been denied health insurance gain"

Let me explain this a different way, you're obviously missing the point and clearly do not understand how the FSA works.

FSA is a federal program created to encourage people to take responsibility for their own out of pocket healthcare costs (co-pays, prescription medicines, remaining costs not covered by insurance, and OTC meds). Of these, the most commonly used eligible items covered by the FSA are OTC meds.

A person participating in an FSA determines how much they want for the next year, say $1000. That $1000 is deducted incrementally from each paycheck pre-tax and kept in an account, and then reimbursed back to the individual for eligible items.

The new healthcare bill mandated that all OTC meds now require a prescription from a doctor to qualify. This creates additional non-revenue generating work for doctors, plan administrators, and yet another item to audit by the federal government. This costs money to do.

Now back to the $1000 that's taken out of a person's pay pre-tax. That money will get spent one way or another. Sure, there's always some percentage of people who don't spend it, and that money is forfeited. That forfeited money does not go to subsidizing healthcare for poor people.

What Happens to Money Not Used During the Plan Year? Since FSA's were first allowed, the IRS has required that any money remaining in the employee's account at the end of the plan year be forfeited to the employer. Anything can be done with this money, except giving it back only to the persons who have forfeited it.Source

So as you can see, your entire argument is built around a false dillemma fallacy. If it was a matter of ending the tax breaks to help fund public healthcare, fine-- all that takes is eliminating FSA altogether, ending eligibility for OTC meds, or dictating that unused funds must be forfeited to the government to be used to fund public healthcare. However, none of that is the case. There is literally nothing that is improved by this change.

And btw, I agree that this, in the grand scheme of things, is minor. But if they can't get the small things right, how can we believe that they'll execute well on the bigger things?

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:38 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:38:03 PM

because i have a question.

and that response seemed either was malicious towards people who haven't read it (like myself) or towards someone who has a differing opinion from you.


and if you 're not here to discuss, youre here to prove your right.


and i need to know who to listen to.




[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM. Reason : ^and you more or less answered it. thanks ]

4/13/2011 12:39:45 PM

i understand how fsa works. i happen to think it's bullshit that it can be used for otc meds. i don't agree that people should be able to buy advil with non-taxed income. and by requiring the prescription, it does, in a round about way, eliminate people getting some OTC meds that are more of a one-off nature (i.e. some sudafed for the sniffles you got last night) without completely eliminating OTC from the program. would you have been any less pissed if they just put in the bill "no more otc period?"

i also believe that there is a fair amount of "fraud" (quotes because it's not fraud like straight-up tax evasion) in the FSA program - just google terms like "help me spend my fsa" to get an idea of how the program isn't just used by responsible adults who can plan out a year's medical expenses ahead of time.

i also think that libertarian economics are bullshit. i have studied that pub as well as many other economic theories. i formed my opinions that don't agree with them. i thought cute was a nicer way of putting it.

this is fucking chit chat. you want a serious discussion on "obamacare" 1) don't start it here and 2) don't be a whiny bitch in the OP

[Edited on April 13, 2011 at 1:05 PM. Reason : .]

4/13/2011 12:59:43 PM