FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Obama Care!





dclark1104
So, here's to the new Obama Care. Though it was a complete disaster in the beginning, as far as I know now, steps are being taken to ensure a smooth registration experience. Also, not only do some people think that this is ridiculous, but most don't even know about the alternative ways of signing up for the health care plan. What do you guys think???
coolclay
I think some of the stipulations in the law make sense. Most important in my opinion is coverage of preexisting conditions, and other stipulations. While the idea of universal healthcare is is good, and would work in an ideal world, for the same reasons socialism doesn't work, neither will universal healthcare.

Attempting to force people into a purchasing a product should not be the role of the government. I also believe in accountability for example if someone chooses not to purchase healthcare, and they do get hurt, well they should be held to that debt and required to pay for it (bankruptcy withstanding).

I don't believe the fining of people without healthcare should be legal, nor should exemptions for government employees, nor should people with good insurance be taxed more because of it. We shouldn't be taxing manufacturers of medical supplies because that only makes it more expensive for the customer.

I hold both parties accountable to the serious flaws of this law, the democrats for the law itself, and the republicans for being unwilling to even take part in the discussions.

All and all, I believe the Affordable Care act will only be another nail in the coffin of our once great nation.
standready
Don't you mean the 'Obama don't care' act. It has very few good points such as coverage of preexisting conditions. A lot of bad/stupid points like mandated maternity coverage for all including old and males.
His plans hopes that young people will sign up to offset old people yet he mandated before his 'don't care' act that young must be covered on their parents policy until they are 26 years old. That means no young people to sign up so this crap is designed to fail.
Only real thing to come out of this is the 'kickbacks' from insurance companies to Obama pockets.
SpaceInvader75
Quote:
I don't believe the fining of people without healthcare should be legal, nor should exemptions for government employees, nor should people with good insurance be taxed more because of it. We shouldn't be taxing manufacturers of medical supplies because that only makes it more expensive for the customer.


OK I agree with the first part. And, as I am unemployed, I noticed my healthcare would be more expensive? What kind of sense does that make? Now should people with good insurance be taxed more? Probably not, but everyone pays if people have no insurance. Somebody has to pay for it, and this argument can be used to say there should be no minimum wage, which I think is ridiculous.
coolclay
Your insurance is really going to be more expensive? I thought that there were tax deductions that were supposed to make it more affordable.

Another one of my pet peeves about the ACA is that many people who's employers, or colleges were was paying to cover there employees and students are now no longer able to afford it.

Case in point when I was a teaching assistant/graduate student in Louisiana my first year I was there we were covered by a healthcare plan paid entirely by the school. However once the ACA got passed my last year we had to pay for our own healthcare, which was ridiculous, here I was making $1200 a month, and barely breaking even, and then wham! one more freakin bill to pay. Now was our insurance great, probably not but not great insurance is better than none at all, and/or going into debt.

Of course most of the democratic leaning politicians may think going into debt is no big deal (they certainly don't mind raising the debt limit every 3 months), but I certainly do everything I can to stay in the black, but it is very hard these days thanks to our elected officials who tax, and regulate everything they can. It certainly makes it much harder for young hard working people like myself to break into the middle class.

I recently moved to Massachusetts (aka Taxachusetts), where they have a flat non-tiered income tax. They also have no reciprocity of income tax for those that work and live in different states. So even though I am only making approx. $20K a year I still have to pay an income tax on every bit of it. I have always been morally against public welfare and even though I've qualified for food stamps most of my life I've never signed up for it. However I think this may be my only option for recouping the unfair taxes that Taxachussetts is levying on me. Anyway sorry for getting off topic.
watersoul
coolclay wrote:
Your insurance is really going to be more expensive? I thought that there were tax deductions that were supposed to make it more affordable.

Another one of my pet peeves about the ACA is that many people who's employers, or colleges were was paying to cover there employees and students are now no longer able to afford it.

Case in point when I was a teaching assistant/graduate student in Louisiana my first year I was there we were covered by a healthcare plan paid entirely by the school. However once the ACA got passed my last year we had to pay for our own healthcare, which was ridiculous, here I was making $1200 a month, and barely breaking even, and then wham! one more freakin bill to pay. Now was our insurance great, probably not but not great insurance is better than none at all, and/or going into debt.

Of course most of the democratic leaning politicians may think going into debt is no big deal (they certainly don't mind raising the debt limit every 3 months), but I certainly do everything I can to stay in the black, but it is very hard these days thanks to our elected officials who tax, and regulate everything they can. It certainly makes it much harder for young hard working people like myself to break into the middle class.

I recently moved to Massachusetts (aka Taxachusetts), where they have a flat non-tiered income tax. They also have no reciprocity of income tax for those that work and live in different states. So even though I am only making approx. $20K a year I still have to pay an income tax on every bit of it.


How does that break down with figures Coolclay?
Here in the heavily taxed UK this is how £20,000 a year would work out:

Yearly salary Gross Pay ------------- £20,000.00
Tax free Allowance ------------------- £9,440.00 (Earnings below which no-one has to pay tax on)
Total taxable -------------------------- £10,560.00
Tax charged --------------------------- £2,112.00
National Insurance -------------------- £1,470.24 (This is for NHS & Welfare benefits/state pension)
Total Deductions ---------------------- £3,582.24

Net 'in your pocket' pay = £16,417.76

Total taxes, plus healthcare/welfare 'National Insurance' = 18% of income

I know we're comparing apples with oranges a bit, but if you could give me an idea of the taxes one pays on $20,000 plus the annual charge for the ACA policy I'd be interested to see the comparison.
I am able to take a private healthcare insurance policy if I wanted to in the UK. There is an excellent private hospital a few streets away from me in fact, but I've never seen the need as I've been mended a few times by the NHS so they are good enough for me.
Another thing though, if an employee takes out a private plan they still have to pay the National Insurance deduction above which is worked out at the rate of 12% on weekly earnings between £149 and £797, plus 2% on any weekly earnings over £797.

I'm self employed so the rules are slightly different, and earnings/profit are calculated annually by me, with business expenses and all the rest of it to deduct first. It's more time consuming of course but allows far greater flexibility and options than the UK employee who just reads what has been deducted on behalf of the government (by the employer) on their payslip each month.

Employers also have to pay a similar calculated contribution for National Insurance related to the pay of each employee as well. In the £20,000 year example this would be £1,697.95 paid on top by the company/employer, to the government for the employees national insurance.
It is why whenever anyone does any work for me (a day labouring/assisting say) it is under a self-employed contract requiring them to give me an invoice/bill for work carried out. I am not then required to pay towards someone else's National Insurance, and their invoice is deducted from my personal tax liability.
coolclay
Do you have different levels of taxes? For example we must pay federal taxes, and state taxes.

If we are just looking at federal taxes it roughly breaks down like this

Gross Pay: $20,000
Single person Income tax deduction: $6,100
Total taxable: $13,900
Income tax 10% first $8925, and 15% $8,925 to $36,250: $1,638
Social Security tax: $834
Medicare tax: $208
Average yearly "Silver" ACA premium: $3936 (will differ by state and tax deductions may reduce it)

Actual take home pay: $13,304

That doesn't take into account state taxes either.
Massachusetts state income taxes would come to roughly $700, but they are one of the most heavily taxed states in the country.

It's tough to get an accurate comparison because our 2 countries are very different in the way they operate. But your 18% looks really good based upon the numbers I came up with! Of course the difference in petrol prices would probably make up for it!
watersoul
coolclay wrote:
Do you have different levels of taxes? For example we must pay federal taxes, and state taxes.
We have a sliding scale of 0% on earnings up to £9440, 20% on every £ between £9441 to £32,010, 40% on every £ between £32,011 to £150,000, then 50% for every £ over £150,000.
It's a national UK-wide income tax rate, same for England, Wales, Scotland & N.Ireland.
The only local taxes are paid by householders, per property. I pay £1300 per year to the local authority for rubbish collection, local roads, fire/police, beach cleaning etc etc. This charge is in bands depending on the valuation of the property. I'm in band C, and the maximum charge is band H, currently £3000 per year. Band H is million£+ properties though and there are quite a few here.

Quote:
If we are just looking at federal taxes it roughly breaks down like this

Gross Pay: $20,000
Single person Income tax deduction: $6,100
Total taxable: $13,900
Income tax 10% first $8925, and 15% $8,925 to $36,250: $1,638
Social Security tax: $834
Medicare tax: $208
Average yearly "Silver" ACA premium: $3936 (will differ by state and tax deductions may reduce it)

Actual take home pay: $13,304

That doesn't take into account state taxes either.
Massachusetts state income taxes would come to roughly $700, but they are one of the most heavily taxed states in the country.

It's tough to get an accurate comparison because our 2 countries are very different in the way they operate. But your 18% looks really good based upon the numbers I came up with! Of course the difference in petrol prices would probably make up for it!
Ouch, that is an absolute stinger from the take-home pay, but the first thing I notice is the flat rate for social security & medicare tax?
It's done as a percentage here through 'National Insurance' tax so higher earners contribute more.
That seems unfair to charge someone on £20,000 per year the same flat rate as someone on £300,000 to contribute towards a government service they may both never use.

You're so right about the comparison though, fuel tax is huge with one litre at £1.36 right now, the government takes £0.81.
In US figures at current exchange rates that would be one US gallon at $8.44 with the government taking $5.02 in tax Shocked
...then we have 20% "value added tax" included in receipts/bills on pretty much all purchases except essentials such as food, blah etc.

Sorry to go off topic, but thanks for helping me compare our systems with real examples.
I don't know a huge amount about the ACA but it certainly appears to be more affordable by some than others, and I think I prefer the % charge of income on everyone here in the UK.
I'm no rabid socialist by any stretch, but if a government is going to force me to pay taxes to bomb other countries I'm happy for this forced compliance to fund universal healthcare as well.
coolclay
It's a percentage rate for social security and medicare but isn't tiered.

The current tax rate for social security is 6.2% for the employer and 6.2% for the employee, or 12.4% total. The current rate for Medicare is 1.45% for the employer and 1.45% for the employee, or 2.9% total.

The idea behind this is that upon reaching the age when you can collect SS and medicare, you will get back what you put in. That only works in an ideal world, not one in which social security is more akin to a Ponzi scheme and is going bankrupt, and medicare which not only covers those past 65 but also those with disabilities, and is also having serious issues.

That's a crazy high value added tax, and fuel tax. However I have been a big proponent of similar consumption taxes here in the United States versus income tax. Environmentally it would be a huge help because people would consume less resources. It would help lower income people whom typically consume less anyway pay less taxes. It would also be an incentive for businesses to spend more money on labor (hence more jobs) and less on consumption of materials. Maybe even throw in a decreased rate based upon post consumer content %, to encourage the use of recycled materials. It also would create more of an incentive to work harder and earn more money, because most people have the viewpoint of why work harder because the government will just take more of my money and give it to people who don't work hard (wealth distribution).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-17/consumption-tax-would-make-it-easier-to-reduce-u-s-budget-deficit-view.html

Definitely agree with your bombing vs healthcare thought!
watersoul
Our benefits system is easily and often exploited though. A person can live quite a comfortable lazy life if they know how to work the rules...many people do, but thankfully the majority of people so far still aspire to more than that.
Healthcare is the one I would genuinely wish everyone in the world to have available free at the point of need, in every country where people are forced to pay taxes for the country to keep running.
It is as/more important as/than border security, which is funded by tax...they both are forced taxes, and they both protect the payer of the tax...just in different ways.
Related topics
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.