Welcome to PatsFans.com

I don't get this "Opt Out" thing

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by BelichickFan, Oct 26, 2009.

  1. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Everyone knows I'm against obamacare but aside from the actual program - with all this talk about an "opt out" option for states, I don't get it. It reads like states can opt out of the public option but they wouldn't be opting out of adding to the national deficit so why would any states opt out of something that will be subsidized by the feds. It's like turning away "stimulus" money - you may be against the stimulus but you'd be a fool as a state to turn away the money if the feds want to give it to you.

    Maybe there's something I'm missing about "opt out" but it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
     
  2. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    First of all, its a public OPTION, you are not forced to buy what you keep calling "obamacare".

    Secondly, if you and most of your state wants to keep private insurers...you can vote to OPT OUT of having the option of medicare (Obamacare in your words).

    Seems to me that all you people b!tchin about "socialized Obamacare' should be pumped up about this. Instead you are now talking like Opting out is stupid?

    I'm really not getting your point here....
     
  3. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,488
    Likes Received:
    385
    Ratings:
    +919 / 6 / -9

    You're aware that the bill was scored by the CBO and will cut the deficit, right?

    I'm not an expert and I haven't read the bill obviously, but I assume opt-out is meant to make the bill more politically palatable to conservative Democrats.

    Here's Josh Marshall's explanation, for what it's worth:

     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2009
  4. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,332
    Likes Received:
    201
    Ratings:
    +575 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    That's because you support Obamacare. Most of those against it are against the COST to Americans. Many people who are middle-class don't want to have tax increases levied upon them. Especially those who are in the upper end of the middle-class.

    Take an average couple earning about $150,000 annually with very good company paid insurance. "Some" might think of them as "rich" but they're really just middle class folks. I guarantee you the VAST majority of families like them do NOT want to pay more taxes...nor should they!
     
  5. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    I'll refer you to the CBO, and its report that the public option as currently represented is deficit neutral, or might even save money.


    New CBO report says public option saves money Minnesota Budget Bites


    a new cost estimate of the House health care reform bill (H.R. 3200, the “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act”) by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has determined that the version of the House bill with a public option based upon Medicare payment rates would reduce the federal budget deficit over ten years by $110 billion. That’s $20 billion more in savings than earlier estimates for that kind of public option. And it would save $85 billion more than a public option in which payment rates would be negotiated with providers.


    where are you getting your 'facts'?
     
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +597 / 24 / -19

    I think the public option will be deficit neutral in the sense that it will operate on a break even basis. This still means the government has to find a way to help people pay for the plan (or any other plan if private insurance companies can match it). A state will opt out if they don't want to force their residents to use a private plan. This will make sense only if private plans offer competitive pricing, and I don't think anyone knows exactly how this will play out. Allowing the states to opt out is a clever political gimmick only if private insurance companies can't find a way to compete with the public option. If they cannot do that, then a state would be foolish not to give their citizens the choice. What's not clear is how much ramp-up money the public option will get.
     
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,332
    Likes Received:
    201
    Ratings:
    +575 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    I was explaining how many people feel about gov't health care and the fears they have about it. I've seen supposed facts that support it would add billions to our deficit as well as facts that support it would be neutral.
     
  8. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    Love how you are backing up your fear with things you have seen...yet don't post them.


    I'll go with the Congressional Budget Office, and the published report they gave to congress.

    CongressDaily - CBO Estimates Show Public Plan With Higher Savings Rate


    you can stick with your source of sight....and whatever blog you get your BS from.
     
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    That doesn't mean it will reduce costs, that just means the TAX INCREASES surpass the additional costs.
     
  10. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Dude, it won't save money. It will cost money. The fact that we're adding more taxes than the more than $1 Trillion cost is a statement on how much extra tax is being added.
     
  11. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    BF....


    Here is what you should do:


    step 1. Don't get the public option

    step 2. keep your private insurance (hope the price comes down)

    step 3. dont get sick
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2009
  12. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Anyway, I still don't get it. All of us will be taxed more which will pay for this massive new cost that will subsidize the public option. If we then opt out of the public option (not that my state of CA would) then we're subsidizing the other states but not getting the benefit for those who choose it.
     
  13. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,456
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +916 / 7 / -3

    It's BS is all. The fed is going to run massive deficits with whatever gubmitcare program it passes, so while your state might opt out, it's citizens are still footing the bill. It's a bunch of BS.

    Change you can believe in.
     
  14. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    What I'm upset about is MY COSTS will go up when I keep my insurance because they're taxing insurance and other medical companies to pay the $1T or so.
     
  15. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey



    do you think you are somehow NOT paying for those who are uninsured yet need medical care now?


    I'm still trying to understand you.


    YOu are upset that you will be taxed, yet under the current plan, you are already being 'taxed' by a middle man who is making a profit off raising your rates, dropping coverage, and denying care....



    who excatly are you upset with, if not your insurer?


    the future?
     
  16. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Evidently whatever "we" are paying now is less than we will be as they're adding $1T over 10 years.
     
  17. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    I posted the CBO estimate, and your figures are off.

    Its either deficit neutral, or actually saves money. Even the skewed critique of teh Baucus bill by the insurers shows that getting more people in the system of being healthier, saves money.

    My HC costs just went up 1k/year, they announced it at work last week. We have 1 plan. So, I should be expecting to get a thousand dollars BETTER coverage this year than I got last year, under my private care in Cali.

    You say that you live here too. I suspect your rates went up at the same level? So, me and my company pay 7k/year for everything (Medical, dental, vision) How did my cost rise 15%?? Should I expect 15% better care?

    OR

    Will my private insurer be showing its stockholders a 15% bigger profit?


    If I'm dissatisfied with my coverage, rates and plan...why can't I go with a plan that pays no middle man. Why can't I get the same coverage at a better rate? Why can't EVERYONE?
     
  18. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Wow, how many times can I say it. IT'S NOT SAVING MONEY, THEY'RE JUST RAISING TAXES MORE THAN THEY'RE RAISING COSTS.

    Regarding your other comments, health insurance makes a very low 3% or so profit, that's not the place to wage the war.
     
  19. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    Here we go again....


    I'll stop. we will never agree....


    If the public option is less money, I'm getting it. plain and simple. As it stands today, I have no choice. My cost just went up this year for absolutly no reason.

    Its bull$#!t.

    You can keep your beloved private insurance. Nobody will take that away from you.

    If you are making over 250k/yr, I could care less if you get taxed more.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2009
  20. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    290
    Ratings:
    +786 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    I don't make over $250K. But my taxes are going up and so are yours because they're taxing all kind of medical items, including health insurance, to pay for it.

    We will all pay for it, the obamans are taxing everyone but hiding it as taxing the companies who will then pass it on. And, yes, many people will choose the public option, whose cost will then skyrocket as the CBO score was for just the currently uninsured, not those who choose to "go public".
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>