The plan from Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana would make health insurance mandatory, just like auto coverage. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/08/baucus-plan-allows-fines-failing-health-insurance/
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Baucus Plan Allows for Fines Up to $3,800 for Failing to Get Health Insurance
- Thread starter Jedi Knight
- Start date
I expect Max will soon be out of work.
The American people will never put up with it.
This is part of the healthcare reform package that I deeply disagree with. It is ridiculous.
Okay, so I'm going to have a "government mandated" lowest level of health insurance to go with my auto-insurance, home owners insurance, etc.? This is part of the plan I deeply disagree with...and I agree with alot of the plan.
Actually I think its in there so it can be cut. When I was working on the Hill we often included legislation that moved the conversation forward but we knew would be cut. This has all the markings.
Okay, so I'm going to have a "government mandated" lowest level of health insurance to go with my auto-insurance, home owners insurance, etc.? This is part of the plan I deeply disagree with...and I agree with alot of the plan.
Actually I think its in there so it can be cut. When I was working on the Hill we often included legislation that moved the conversation forward but we knew would be cut. This has all the markings.
And this precise fact is why the standards have steadily moved left!!
The Ds were crafty enough to stick a whole bunch of garbage that they could cut and say "we're compromising" while the Rs had to cut from legitimate points. (Don't think they have figured out this tactic yet- unless- both are pushing for the same goal & just use different tactics depending on the discernment of the public at any given time!)
JFK would be considered too conservative to be a D today!
Incidentally I'm a firm believer of the bolded portion above!
Do you mean government provided health care?
If so, yes, the President affirmed a Public Option yesterday. It's the proverbial "Camel's Nose in the Tent".
Once there, no matter how small or seemingly ineffective, it will be nurtured into a multi-headed beast no matter which party is in office.
My opinion of course.
HankD
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
The democrats have been moving toward communism since FDR!
It is a real tragedy. Reagan defeated the Soviet Union without firing a shot. Some thought communism was dead. It wasn't. There was communist China, but though a dictatorship, China is moving toward free market enterprise.
Meanwhile the Republicans took over the House after 40 years of democrat control. After a few years they began to spend like drunken democrats, the conservatives sat home and the democrats took over. Now we have the biggest power grab by the democrat government in history. If the government takes over medical care they will soon establish a Marxist state.
BINGO!!!
Then, when conditions are really, really bad, gov't steps in and takes over the whole shootin match.
This whole scenario is the same as when Joseph & the Pharaoh began to confiscate the commoners money, cattle, land, & ultimately the people thenselves, just so the folks could eat. Seems the only difference is "HEALTHCARE" is the big concern today, rather than "STARVING".
It's coming folks! If the populace continues to rely on gov't to be the Nanny, it WILL be the Nanny - so don't be surprised if one day you have to get permission to flush your toilet more than once a day.
But will they be able to afford it?
It's funny to me that the same people who claim that they can't afford to buy health insurance somehow don't think about the fact that they will have to pay for the "public option".
They are in for a rude awakening.
Small business has a sidestep already in place...and being practiced in many sectors.
Its called hiring nearly every worker as an independent contractor. I have sveral people in our church whose vocations have gone almost completely into this area. They have no benefits, low stability, and no guarantee of income from term to term. Yet they have to compete with so many others on this ground.
Regardless of the fines and taxes imposed on small business (or large business) there will always be ways around it.
Its called hiring nearly every worker as an independent contractor. I have sveral people in our church whose vocations have gone almost completely into this area. They have no benefits, low stability, and no guarantee of income from term to term. Yet they have to compete with so many others on this ground.
Regardless of the fines and taxes imposed on small business (or large business) there will always be ways around it.
That's not particularly easy to do. Rules are very specific as to what constitutes an independent contractor, and most workers do not qualify. As an employer, you can't simply hire contractors over employees. The job function is different between the two.
You are right but many are trying
You are right...however; because of gerrymandered districts, a stupid electorate, and an overwhelming majority...this bill will pass. And most of the socialists who pass it will keep their jobs.
That's a good question targus. In the president's Health Care speech he indicated that those who took the public option would be scaled into the option in proportion to their ability to pay and for some it would be provided at no cost.
What kind of care and their prioritization for that care was not discussed.
HankD