Discussion in 'Parents Off Topic' started by virgo39, Jun 28, 2012.
It's all a vast conspiracy to get more vaccines into our innocent children.
"Common sense" = "I made it up in my mind".
Do you honestly think we need actual people to deduct taxes from a pay check? You do know that people don't go door-to-door anymore to collect the King's taxes?
To be honest I've been struggling with, what appears to be a conflicting position, opposition to the act based on the assumption that there will be a lower quality of care resulting in the decline of "unnecessary" medical expenses, one being vaccines, and reconciling that with historical positions.
I haven't searched very hard for logical consistency, to be honest, but I'd say that an overarching theme that the government is up to no good, and isn't to be trusted in any situation appears to be lurking there.
You obviously don't know me at all after reading my words for five years.
I am grateful for the help paying for what my primary insurance doesn't cover. I will shout that from the rooftops, and have mentioned here several times. The point I am trying to make is that government coverage is lacking when put up against what some people seem to be expecting. CGM, $2,000 a month prescriptions, pain relief that doesn't fit the typical mold, etc. is not something they are willing to pony up the money for.
As for your desire to receive Medicaid along with your other coverage---you are right. It's great to be so low income!
You do know that the IRS still employs real people to enforce tax law, right? And that they are expanding their workforce, right?
I don't think anyone expects Medicaid to be Cadillac coverage. But it is more than millions of people have.
As for my desire to receive Medicaid along with my other coverage, it's my desire that everyone has Medicaid to cover the basics, along with private insurance if they so choose.
Well, shut my mouth ... holy crap ... I need one of those tanning bed jobs at about $142,000 per year.
... and 1000 is almost thousands upon thousands ...
... and considering the size of the federal government 1000 is most certainly accurately described as a "battalion".
So, we're going to need a few more people to oversee the implementation of a healthcare system that will provide benefits to millions of people who didn't previously have healthcare.
THAT'S a valid argument against the system?
And for some reason, government jobs aren't "real" jobs, employing "real" Americans. Job creation is only good in the private sector.
Thank you for the confirmation. Fron the factcheck article:
That?s ridiculous. Yes, the IRS?budget request lists 1,054 FTEs under the category of "enforcement initiatives" ? which is the number cited by U.S. News. And, yes, the IRS?wants 58 agents to enforce the new tanning salon tax, which took effect in 2010. But the 1,054 figure also includes 504 new hires to "ensure accurate delivery of tax credits." The law, among other things, provides tax credits for small businesses to offer coverage to their employees, beginning in April 2010.
Here are the areas, as defined by the IRS, where the new 1,269 FTEs will be needed (see pages 21 through 66):
Improve Taxpayer Service, 150
Increase Coverage to Address Tax Law Changes and Other Compliance Issues, 363
Ensure Accurate Delivery of Tax Credits, 504
Administer New Statutory Reporting Requirements, 187
Implement Individual Coverage Requirement and Employer Responsibility Payments, 65
Now, the 159-page budget document shows that the IRS is seeking a total of 5,112 new workers ? including 1,653 that are needed to carry out the president?s fiscal year 2011 policies.
I was only addressing the point about the IRS using actual people. Not all are tax collectors, although 58 of them appear to be to collect one simple tax.
Seriously? Government jobs serve necessary functions, but without private sector taxpayers, government jobs don't exist.
Probably much the same way they do here in Mass.: You get a form from your insurance company with all the relevant information, enter it on your tax form, sign and send. Those who don't have insurance will follow the instructions for how to enter that information.
And your point is?
The fact that we're discussing a miniscule increase in the IRS budget in the context of the PPACA is just silly ... in my opinion.
Well put, comrade.
Really, it's an indicator of how desperate people are to find something to knock about the bill.
My experience with MA health care reforms makes me chuckle because most of what's being said now in the rest of the cuontry is what was said when we implemented it here. THE SKY IS FALLING. THE SKY IS FALLING! Didn't happen.
We don't wait longer to get an appointment, we don't sit in a waiting room for 6 hours to see our primary care doctor. Standards of care have not decreased. And on and on and on. What the law has provided is a whole lot of community based health care for people who previously were uninsured. And while we can talk about the cost of the program all day long (and THAT is the debate we should be having) the bottom line is that it's a program that is worth the cost in the long run. You can read a lot of details here: http://bluecrossmafoundation.org/Health-Reform/~/media/D0DDA3D667BE49D58539821F74C723C7.pdf
As for enforcing the tax, the way it happens here is that your insurance company sends out a tax form at the end of the year (much like you receive a 1099 from your bank or a w2 from your employer) which lists each member of your family and how long they had coverage in that tax year. You then indicate on your state tax that you've had coverage and if you don't then that's when you pay your tax/penalty. No 1000s of tax collectors hired to enforce this.
Also, we haven't been held down and vaccinated against our will either.
Like I said before, the debate we should be having is the cost. How to curtail costs and where that should happen. Why there is ANY issue at all with every American being covered is just beyond me. It needs to happen. There are LOTS of other places in the budget that money can be cut. The fact that we as a country haven't yet figured out that health care is important means we might as well still be walking around with George Washington's wooden teeth because THAT is the amount of respect we give to health care in this country.
We don't want your stinkin' Kennedy-lovin', gay-marryin', funny-accented, liberal elitist universal coverage in these parts!
(But what you said about cost and THAT being the conversation we should be having is dead on. It should be a given that everyone gets coverage, and the argument should be about how to best pay for it.)
Separate names with a comma.