Mass. Lawmakers OK Mandatory Health Bill

[WanderAimlessly]

I wonder how many businesses this will drive out of business in MA:

**Mass. Lawmakers OK Mandatory Health Bill
**By STEVE LeBLANC,

BOSTON - Lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a bill Tuesday that would make Massachusetts the first state to require that all its citizens have some form of health insurance.

The plan — approved just 24 hours after the final details were released — would use a combination of financial incentives and penalties to dramatically expand access to health care over the next three years and extend coverage to the state’s estimated 500,000 uninsured.

Full Story

Or. How many will drop health insurance and just pay the extra tax.

PF

 

[tom.wineman]

Aren’t Massachusetts taxes high enough now.

Only the Kennedy’s will be able to afford to live there.

 

[b_justb]

http://www.coolsmilies.net/jobs/police.gif License, registration and proof of health insurance, please.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Aren’t Massachusetts taxes high enough now.

Only the Kennedy’s will be able to afford to live there.

I think that’s their plan. The model they are trying to follow is France.

 

[TarAshly]

actually I think its a great idea. My husband is a diabetic, we have no medical insurance. We got his insulin pump but can not afford for him to use it because it will cost us 800 a month for his supplies alone. so we stick with the needle and bottles and test strips and high blood sugars and low blood sugars and trips to the emergency room, and 300 dollars for his bi monthly visits. Its a nightmare! Come on Texas get on board here!

 

[Isidore_AK]

Mass. Lawmakers OK Mandatory Health Bill:

If all goes as planned, poor people will be offered free or heavily subsidized coverage; those who can afford insurance but refuse to get it will face increasing tax penalties until they obtain coverage; and those already insured will see a modest drop in their premiums.
…
Individuals deemed able but unwilling to purchase health care could face fines of more than $1,000 a year by the state if they don’t get insurance.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

If I lived there, I would be forced to purchase insurance, whether I want it or not?!? As of now I decline my companies insurance…I take the gamble because the odds are on my side. I’d have to rack up at least $4000 of medical bills a year (counting the deductable) just to break even if I take the insurance. Otherwise I get to keep $1500 of that money…plus my employer pays me an additional $1200 a year because they don’t have to count the cost of my insurance premiums against my compensation package.

As long as I keep my med bills under $4000/year, I’m better off without any insurance at all…

Anyway, my point is, this bill may hurt just as many people as it helps…possibly more if businesses decide to leave town rather than pay the extra costs…

 

[koda]

Isidore_AK:

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

If I lived there, I would be forced to purchase insurance, whether I want it or not?!? As of now I decline my companies insurance…I take the gamble because the odds are on my side. I’d have to rack up at least $4000 of medical bills a year (counting the deductable) just to break even if I take the insurance. Otherwise I get to keep $1500 of that money…plus my employer pays me an additional $1200 a year because they don’t have to count the cost of my insurance premiums against my compensation package.

As long as I keep my med bills under $4000/year, I’m better off without any insurance at all…

Anyway, my point is, this bill may hurt just as many people as it helps…possibly more if businesses decide to leave town rather than pay the extra costs…

The problem is that sooner or later you will need insurance - the odds are not in your favor to never need serious medical care. Should that happen, $4,000 won’t last 5 minutes. And who will be responsible for the bills you can’t pay? Do you see where this is going? A lot of people try your strategy and lose. Thus the law that you have to have insurance.

 

[Isidore_AK]

koda:

The problem is that sooner or later you will need insurance - the odds are not in your favor to never need serious medical care. Should that happen, $4,000 won’t last 5 minutes. And who will be responsible for the bills you can’t pay? Do you see where this is going? A lot of people try your strategy and lose. Thus the law that you have to have insurance.

I totally disagree with you on that. I can pay whatever medical bills I incur. The only likely cause of injury is a vehicular accident…which is paid for by my car insurance anyway. The odds are in my favor that I won’t need major medical care. Most people don’t. Unless I get cancer or some other degenerative disease, I should be quite fine.

Now, I don’t have kids, and that might change the equation, but many people don’t.

And in the end, the state has absolutely no business telling me what to do in any case. I would refuse to comply with such a law if it were enforced on a national level…I will not bow to some commie liberals idea of society.

 

[Geldain]

The pro-socialist agenda has won again, sadly;(

 

[koda]

Isidore_AK:

I totally disagree with you on that. I can pay whatever medical bills I incur. The only likely cause of injury is a vehicular accident…which is paid for by my car insurance anyway. The odds are in my favor that I won’t need major medical care. Most people don’t. Unless I get cancer or some other degenerative disease, I should be quite fine.

Now, I don’t have kids, and that might change the equation, but many people don’t.

And in the end, the state has absolutely no business telling me what to do in any case. I would refuse to comply with such a law if it were enforced on a national level…I will not bow to some commie liberals idea of society.

First, the little smiley guy doesn’t even come close to making your name calling okay.

As to your health, see below.

*According to the May 2000 Norton Bankrupcy Adviser, 326,441 families that filed for bankrupcy protection in 1999 identified an illness or injury in their family as the major reason for the bankrupcy. That means 1 in 4 debtors in 1999 were attributed to a disability.

Still not concerned? According to the US Housing and Home Finance Agency only 3% of home mortgage foreclosures are due to a death of the breadwinner. 48% of all foreclosures are do to a disability*

So unless you have a bundle to pay for medical costs, you could end up depending on government charity to pay your bills. There are a lot of people who think like you and who end up having to get indigent care - which results in higher health care costs for all of us.

 

[Geldain]

Isidore_AK:

And in the end, the state has absolutely no business telling me what to do in any case. I would refuse to comply with such a law if it were enforced on a national level…I will not bow to some commie liberals idea of society.

AMEN!!!

 

[koda]

Geldain:

AMEN!!!

Are you, too, getting in on the name calling?

 

[Geldain]

koda:

Are you, too, getting in on the name calling?

Yes, I am. When any state government places into law a statute telling people they have to spend money they earned for health insurance or be penalized I am reminded of the USSR. Also, since I believe the ultimate goal of liberalism is the totalitarian state I’m going to call it what it is when I see it

 

[koda]

Geldain:

Yes, I am. When any state government places into law a statute telling people they have to spend money they earned for health insurance or be penalized I am reminded of the USSR. Also, since I believe the ultimate goal of liberalism is the totalitarian state I’m going to call it what it is when I see it

I’m talking about calling me names - a “commie liberal” to be exact. I don’t appreciate it and it is rude and uncalled for. I don’t agree with you but I’m not getting nasty about it!

 

[Geldain]

koda:

I’m talking about calling me names - a “commie liberal” to be exact. I don’t appreciate it and it is rude and uncalled for. I don’t agree with you but I’m not getting nasty about it!

From where I sit, this law is just another step along the way to totalitarianism. From where I sit, if you support it, then I’m going to assume you either are A) ignorant of the ultimate goal of liberalism, which is total state control or B) you support totalitarianism.

 

[koda]

Geldain:

From where I sit, this law is just another step along the way to totalitarianism. From where I sit, if you support it, then I’m going to assume you either are A) ignorant of the ultimate goal of liberalism, which is total state control or B) you support totalitarianism.

You are name calling, presuming to know what I think as well as what is in my heart. You are being unjust, uncharitable and rude. You are sterotyping and generalizing. You are putting the worst possible face on my view. As it is, I think people should have health care because I believe their dignity as humans demands such. Now, if I wanted to sink to your low of name calling and generalizing, I could say that it is clear that you don’t care about anyone but yourself - but I won’t because that wouldn’t be fair.

 

[Isidore_AK]

koda:

I’m talking about calling me names - a “commie liberal” to be exact. I don’t appreciate it and it is rude and uncalled for. I don’t agree with you but I’m not getting nasty about it!

Look, it wasn’t a jab aimed at you. The government of Mass. has a decided socialist bent, hence qualifying them as Communist Liberals. I gotta call it as I see it…

Now, if you (politically) are cut from the same cloth, then it does happen to makes you a commie liberal…

As to the health care issue:

Koda:

As to your health, see below.*

According to the May 2000 Norton Bankrupcy Adviser, 326,441 families that filed for bankrupcy protection in 1999 identified an illness or injury in their family as the major reason for the bankrupcy. That means 1 in 4 debtors in 1999 were attributed to a disability.

Still not concerned? According to the US Housing and Home Finance Agency only 3% of home mortgage foreclosures are due to a death of the breadwinner. 48% of all foreclosures are do to a disability*

So unless you have a bundle to pay for medical costs, you could end up depending on government charity to pay your bills. There are a lot of people who think like you and who end up having to get indigent care - which results in higher health care costs for all of us.

This is a country based on Freedom & Liberty. That includes the freedom to make my own choices…even if You or the Government happen to think that they are foolish. I will never take government hand outs. NEVER. I refuse to take part in any socialist institution. I have more pride than that.

 

[Geldain]

koda:

You are name calling, presuming to know what I think as well as what is in my heart.

Actually, I’m doing none of those things. I wouldn’t presume to know what’s in your heart.

You are being unjust, uncharitable and rude. You are sterotyping and generalizing. You are putting the worst possible face on my view.

I’m being honest and very charitible. I wasn’t speaking of your view, but rather, my view of the law.

As it is, I think people should have health care because I believe their dignity as humans demands such.

I believe this law takes away a portion of our human dignity and personal freedom when we are forced to purchase something by the state.

Now, if I wanted to sink to your low of name calling and generalizing, I could say that it is clear that you don’t care about anyone but yourself - but I won’t because that wouldn’t be fair.

You are free to sink or to rise as you chose.

With great confidence, I stand by my earlier statements. From where I sit, this law is but another step along the path of liberalism towards it’s ultimate goal of totalitarianism: the state knows whats best for you–better than you know yourself.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Isidore_AK:

…I will not bow to some commie liberals idea of society.

I think this phrase violates this rule from the forum guidelines?

Avoid categorizing people by a term which could be considered derogatory (e.g., Nazi or neocon) unless they have embraced that title. In which case, you may qualify them with the term as long as you preface it with the word “avowed.” Posters are asked to use their best judgement when posting articles using such terms. Do not abbreviate terms.

 

[Isidore_AK]

LCMS_No_More:

I think this phrase violates this rule from the forum guidelines?

As I said before, I was not calling the poster a Commie Liberal, I was referring to the Gov’t of Massachusetts.

Although it looks like I did violate the portion referring to abbreviating terms. I should have said “Communist Liberal”. Would you prefer I use Socialist liberal instead…?