Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Tax Rates
Wait. What? Have you actually experienced this? Or is this conjecture and anectodes from a cousin's sister's baby sitter's vet?
The key difference is that Romneycare was done at the state level, which makes more sense because it is the states who regulate insurance.
Why is this a key difference? Why does it matter if it's the state government infringing on your freedom to be uninsured or the federal government?
burn! (Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind)
good point, Geraldo.
what kind of tax credit? how much? would it really off-set the price they would spend every month in health insurance?
Agreed. Obamacare sucks. What we need is a nationalized health insurance system and to get rid of the insurance companies entirely.
Did you seriously not know that there are vouchers and credits for people who can't afford it? I am in no way being snarky when I ask if you actually know what the ACA entails?
The reason for the mandate is because there are people who have enough money to afford health insurance, but don't do it. This encourages personal responsibility so that the rest of the country doesn't have to pay for their health care. For people who cannot afford it, there will be credits, vouchers, Medicare, etc.
why is this a bad thing?
Maybe I never saw a good article online clearly explaining it to me. So you are saying that people that are above poverty level will be given credit at 100% cost of what they would be spending a month in insurance premiums? we buy our own insurance and I'm a little nervous that the monthly price will sky rocket.
Anything that gives a huge gift to insurance companies is a bad thing, IMO.
also, so if we buy our own and we can't technically afford it, then do we get credits too. i'm getting more confused than before.
I thought if you already buy your own then you just report on your taxes that you're insured, and then nothing else happens. Your life won't have changed. Am I wrong?
Oh, hey!
Look!
More fresh hell.
Romneycare and Obamacare are very different. Romney worked to promote flexibility; Obama and the Democrats imposed uniformity.
While Romney worked to limit mandates in Massachusetts health care, Obama and a Democratic Congress president threw into the Affordable Care Act a host of goodies - such as an end to co-payments for "preventive care." Employers now will have to pay for services for which workers used to chip in.
http://mittromneycentral.com/2012/07/08/key-differences-between-romneycare-and-obamacare/
lol at the idea of anyone taking Mitt Romney Central as a good source for info.
I am not an ACA expert. Why don't you do some research before lambasting something? Doesn't sound like anything will get worse for you, but you just assumed it would. Nice.
What do "flexibility" and "uniformity" mean, exactly, here? That's pretty vague.
Does Mass. have a mandate or not? I don't care what Romney "worked for" - that's beside the point. The point is, what is the enormous difference, exactly, behind Romneycare and Obamacare, given that they both have mandates?
I think you are confusing Socialist with Communist.
Vlagirl and others with that line of thinking, I think you need to consider the following.
In 2012, a Canadian making $100,000 a year who lived in Ontario would have a take-home pay of $72,600.00. (http://lsminsurance.ca/calculators/canada/income-tax) In the USA in the same year a person making the same amount would have a take-home pay of $75,619.50. (http://us.thetaxcalculator.net/) You are arguing about a 3% income difference in this case. If the income is $50,000 Ontarians have a take home pay of $40,922.00 while Americans have a take home pay of $41,802.50 and you are arguing about $880.50.
With these taxes, you would be paying less in health care. The US spends a much higher percentage of its GDP on health care because if poor people can't pay for basic treatment, you have to pay after the fact while in Canada it is covered under your provincial taxes on an income based scale. It also means I have never paid to see a doctor and that my sister's open heart surgery didn't cost my parents a fortune. Never mind that with the insurance offered by many good employers, especially unionized ones *shock/horror*, your total payment for most prescriptions sits at exactly $0.35. That's how much immunizations, 3 months of BC, antibiotics, etc were under my father's plan.
Somebody finishing up a 4 year honours BA now will pay something like $25,000 for books, tuition, and student fees at many respected universities (my experience, at least). If I was going to NYU, I'd be spending more than $20,000 on tuition alone this year. This can easily mean your average Joe in Canada can have $50,000 less in student loans than your average Joe in the USA. Accounting for interest, you can save well over the average year's salary in this alone.
I won't even get into the elementary education system in depth, but teacher's make a good living here & Canada was rated on par with South Korea, where people spend hours after school being tutored, in education.
So, if I'm making $50k at some point I will gladly give up an extra $880.50 a year for that. It will be a hell of a lot cheaper than your health care system or paying off tens of thousands of dollars in student loans over my lifetime.
I was confident about what I stated but then others started stating things that were different. I didn't say anything would get worse for me, I was talking about others that work where they get a paycheck every 2 weeks and how their employer will drop the insurance. again, thanks for paying attention
thanks
Did you notice that 6 of the countries listed above have the highest-quality of life? Cite: http://www.businessinsider.com/10-top-countries-oecd-better-life-index-2012-5?op=1
Must be so TERRIBLE to live there.
Not to mention, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands ranked in the top 10 richest countries. Australia was 11th. I really feel bad for their citizens. Cite: http://www.forbes.com/sites/bethgreenfield/2012/02/22/the-worlds-richest-countries/
It's a GIRL!