Wisconsin: Abortion planes incoming
The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform announced today it will fly 50′ x 100′ aerial billboards displaying photographs of first trimester, ten-week-old aborted babies over Green Bay, Appleton, Oshkosh, Racine and Waukesha, Wisconsin, from November 2 through Election Day, November 6:
The flights are part of CBR’s Key States Initiative. From the press release:
Our goal is to make certain that abortion does not become the forgotten issue in an election campaign dominated by economic concerns. We intend to force a debate and ensure that that debate is well informed.
Parents of young children may complain about these images but the news media routinely publishes and broadcasts disturbing news imagery from which few children can be totally shielded. CBR is publically displaying abortion imagery precisely because news organizations suppress such photos and video. We reject this double standard.
For example (click to enlarge)…
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I really hate both of these pictures. How heart breaking for both both babies :(
We live in a sick, sick, sick world.
But as a parent, I can choose not to let them watch the news and not to subscribe to the newspaper or those magazines. I can choose to preserve their innocence and introduce them to these realities in a way that does not scandalize them (Mark 9:42) and is age appropriate. I cannot keep them from seeing an airplane banner flying over our backyard or a picture held by a protestor on our way to Church.
Becca, I think that the only thing to hate is abortion itself.
Although this is a difficult topic, I came to agree with Fr. Pavone of Priest for Life when he says, paraphrasing: America will not reject abortion until it sees abortion!
One can continue to say s/he is pro-abortion without knowing what abortion really is, but when faced with the real blood and dismembered bodies of children maybe they’ll change opinion and say “I didn’t know this was abortion”.
How can anyone, even without faith, but with honest reasoning, deny these are human victims of a unjust gory war.
I recently showed similar images to my 10 and 12 year old daughters and discussed what abortion really is to some detail and they were horrified and could not understand why people do it.
I think that was a positive outcome, because it motivated them to reject the irrational, cruel, unjust reality of abortion and motivated them to do something to end it: pray or write letters to the President to ask him to stop supporting abortion.
American will NOT reject abortion until it SEES abortion!
Think about it…
Folks please keep my son and his family in your prayers. His girlfriend is pregnant with their second child. Even though she is 14 weeks her grandmother is pressuring her to abort. She says it would be “best for the baby.” Debbi has no intention of terminating but I can’t believe her grandmother would say this, especially since she loves her little great grandson so much. Pray that God softens her heart so that she will grow to love her great grandchild yet to be born.
philymiss,
I will pray intensely for your son, his girlfriend and their child.
Keep us posted.
Praying, phillymiss.
phillymiss, I will pray tonight that God softens the heart of your daughter’s mother-in-law.
Becca and Kristin, if your daughter sees the sign just tell her that these people are flying around trying to get people to help stop other bad people from hurting these children. When I was at a truth tour with my three year old daughter that is what I told her and my three year old she asked if she could hold a sign.
Pro-lifers hate these pictures more than most. In order to end this holocaust we must present them to the public, many of whom to this day still do not understand the brutality of abortion. Many in our society need to be educated as the reality of abortion.
When the world finally learned of the death camps in Poland and Germany they were aghast and horrified. And yet the brutality and scope of the abortion holocaust far exceeds that of the attrocities perpetrated in those death camps.
The German media was under the contol of the regime and could not report on this even if they wanted to. At least they had an excuse for their failure as they did not want to lose their lives. There is no excuse for our media…it is just that they are largely pro-abortion and they will not do their job to inform the public. Who is left then to inform the public?
I want my kids to see the horror that abortion is. I want them to fear it, hate it, and fight it with every ounce of their being. I do not want them to be shielded from evil, I want them to learn to face evil, defeat it and then flee from it. I want my children to be warroirs for Christ. Why might you ask? Because Satan comes as an angel of light and he has been allowed to poison our children’s minds that abortion is acceptable. He’s even got Christians believeing this detestable lie. It’s time to show the horror and the truth of what abortion is. Then and only then will it stop.
I wish something like this would’ve happened when I was a kid so that a dialogue about abortion could’ve been opened with my parents back then, instead of me finding out abortion even existed the way that I did.
“Parents of young children may complain about these images but the news media routinely publishes and broadcasts disturbing news imagery from which few children can be totally shielded. CBR is publically displaying abortion imagery precisely because news organizations suppress such photos and video. We reject this double standard.”
Lovely. Glad they aren’t in my part of the state.
Edited by mod.
X –
The reality is, in every city and town in America, every day, parents are watching horrible things on TV and on their computers, Ipods, etc., with their babies, toddlers and pre-teens in the house. Magazines in the checkout lane at the grocery routinely display pornographic and violent images which tiny children see from the vantage point of the cart. In fact, this past weekend, while in DC at a 711 on Capitol Hill, I noticed the porn, far from being stashed on a high rack in brown paper, was proudly displayed at the checkout counter at MY KNEE LEVEL, or at a child’s-eye view. My shopping companion did not even see it; but her 6-year-old would have.
So, do you keep your children in a cloistered room, with no internet, TV, newspapers, magazines or other purveyors of evil 24/7/365; and are you sensitive to your surroundings at all times, taking every opportunity to explain to your littles the awful things going on around them to soften the shock to their subconscious of all the profane and violent images they are subjected to and absorbing on a daily basis?
If not, then you are being disingenuous and hypocritical. I would far rather intentionally explain what abortion is to a child, even if that is prompted by a tragic image, than pretend that my kids are not exposed to predatory filth and violence on a regular basis when shopping at a convenience store, looking a billboard, or passing through a room with the TV on to a pg-13 show, that I AM INVITING IN. Pretending that they are somehow not exposed to tremendous amounts of visual evidence of sin, violence and all other manner of detritus of humanity’s fall is a huge failure of parenting.
I am offended at your dropping the (thinly veiled) F-bomb on prolifers that way. Why, even if a 8 or 9-yo read your comment, they would know what you were saying! We prolifers – as has been pointed out already – are offended the most by these images, but they are not made up like the movies you watch in your private sanctuary; they are reality and our children are likely the people who will carry the fight against this sanctioned killing to its necessary end. Would you rather just let Planned Parenthood educate them on the glories of abortion? God forbid.
Ex-RINO,
You’re always welcome to go back to MN. As a matter of fact, please do.
Amen and Amen Hisman!!
Right there with ya!!
And I would also agree that prolifers seems to have a very difficult time with these. Why? It is what we are fighting against! We speak for those that were torn from their mother’s wombs and died horrifying deaths.
Children instinctively know something very evil happened to the baby. They know!! They will trust you with how you will respond to it and take their cues from you.
Thank you Lord that Lila Rose saw graphic photos at the age of 9.
Praying phillymiss.
Lord, soften hearts to this precious child.
Amy1,
BRAVO!!!
Ex Gop,
I suggest you clean up your language please. Thank you.
I wish they were in my part of WI.
I understand the point you are making about exposing my children to reality. And yes, my kids watch TV (though we choose On Demand or DVR’d with me fast forwarding through commercials as often as possible) – but my 2 youngest are 3 and 5. They know about abortion – and we pray regularly for protection for the babies who aren’t born yet, and for the mommies who are scared to be mommies. They know that the reason we pray these prayers is because when mommies get scared of being a mommy, sometimes the Devil tricks them into thinking that it’s okay to kill the baby so that they don’t have to be a mommy any more.
I agree that the public should be more aware – that Satan’s greatest and most successful tactic is in keeping it hidden. I also understand that these groups believe that the greater good of public information is worth the smaller risk of scandalizing young children.
However, that does not mean I am okay with those protestors infringing on my right and duty as a Catholic parent to introduce these sensitive topics to my children in a way that is full of Truth and yet avoids scandal. And these groups regularly and blatantly ignore the very real concerns as a good Catholic parents with comments like, “Parents of young children may complain about these images but the news media routinely publishes and broadcasts disturbing news imagery from which few children can be totally shielded.”
Oh good – the news media regularly publishes graphic and scandalous images…by all means, let’s take a move right out of their righteous and holy playbook. {sarcasm}
I just want them to be honest with me instead of implicitly attacking me – acknowledge that for them, the ends (public information) justify the means (graphic and scandalous imagery) and that they believe the common good, in this case, outweighs the concerns of a few parents.
FWIW: My 7 year old is a different story. I will be showing him those pictures myself when get to his formation for the Sacrament of Reconciliation that deals with mortal sin in a few weeks.
Meh, not gonna have this argument again. Each to their own, I’m glad I don’t live in Wisconsin so my kids won’t see this.
These photos need to be seen in every major city in our country, not just Wisconsin! They expose abortion for the horror that it is and should be seen everywhere in our land!
ex says:
Lovely. Glad they aren’t in my part of the state.
Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil.
A recently released book: How to Kill 11,000,000 People, should be made required reading for every classroom in the United States, if not the entire world. This same principles apply now to the abortion struggle as were present in WWII Germany. Now of course the numbers world wide are in the hundreds of millions killed from abortion.
I wonder, ex, would you have been happy if a banner of starving and gassed Jews been prohibited from flying over ”your part of Germany” ?
Amy1 -
I don’t buy the argument that “well, other people are doing it, so we should be able to as well”.
On your last paragraph – I don’t need anybody educating my children until it is age appropriate. Those who think that these images should be anywhere in public better not complain about Bloomberg’s nanny state or big teacher unions dictating what should be taught – because the message folks are sending – forget about you parents – we know what is better for your kids than you know.
I do dig that I get edited by the mods – if I had a nickel for every time I’ve seen a less veiled swear word (and sometimes flat out swear words)…
Jerry -
Sure – ban it from my part of Germany. If you can’t win an argument without being respectful of others, then it isn’t an argument worth winning. Parents have the rights to parent, and I don’t need adults deciding for me what is and isn’t appropriate for my kids. This isn’t time for more Bloomberg’s out there. I don’t need PETA people pushing images of slaughtered animals to my seven year old – I don’t need peace advocates showing my kids pictures of bleeding Iraqi citizens – and I don’t need pro-lifers showing mutilated babies to my own babies.
Win the battle with logic and showing the images to the right people. Don’t win it by being disrespectful. Pro-lifers already have a bad enough rap.
Right Ex Gop. You are singled out for moderation when you swear. Nobody else.
If I had a nickel for every time I have read that here.
You at least get the opportunity to speak your mind on a prolife blog Minus the swearing.
That goes for everyone. :)
Ex-GOP, your comment on the nanny state is, in my opinion, misdirected and hypocritical. These images are not directed to your children. They are directed to you, the adult. They are directed to all the people who say “what’s the big deal with abortion? It’s just a clump of cells! Like a cyst”
Yes! A “clump” of cells with hands, feet, a heart beat, eye lids…just like you and me are “clump” of cells.
These people who use this excuse to justify abortion cannot hide behind ingnorance any longer. We know what abotion looks like now! Then if your children happen to see these images, you will be called out to explain why in the world adults want to slain innocent babies! And you better be prepared!
Guess a lot of stuff just slips by moderation!
https://www.jillstanek.com/2012/09/stanek-sunday-funnies-9-30-12/
Richard -
How, in the public space, can you simply direct them to certain people. EVERYBODY sees it. Your argument is like putting porn ads on billboards, and when parents complain, saying “well, it isn’t for your kids – just for you”.
Come on man. Don’t label me a hypocrite and then come with a weak argument that has nothing to do with being hypocritical.
Admit it – some people think that they can parent children better than parents. Usually folks on this board knock that line of reasoning, until it comes to graphic images. Then you guys become like people who think sex ed should be taught to first graders. Let parents parent. Even if images are true, they don’t need to be broadcast around in public spaces. Let kids by kids.
xalisae -
Maybe I’ll move down to Iowa for a couple of weeks. Minnesota is a runaway Dem state right now – and Wisconsin is starting to look pretty good all of the sudden. Iowa is pretty close though.
Jerry -
I actually see the evil quite clearly on this site, and on others that as an adult, I can go to.
It’s my kids that I am concerned about.
Ex-GOP your arguments are again misdirected and misleading. This is not the same as broadcasting porn. If you are one of those who think that abortion is just a little procedure, like removing a cyst, why are you so afraid of showing images of this little procedure? On another tone, I guess you are concerned only of certain children, not the 3000 that are slain everyday. That is hypocritical!
Maybe I’ll move down to Iowa for a couple of weeks. Minnesota is a runaway Dem state right now – and Wisconsin is starting to look pretty good all of the sudden. Iowa is pretty close though.
Go ahead and stay there. My fiance knows a bunch of people from Iowa (he went to high school there), and you’d fit right in with those moonbats.
Let kids be kids.
Let kids be killed.
EX,
You are welcome to leave anytime.
Mods aren’t here to babysit 24/7.
Carla – I don’t believe at all that we should let kids be killed – I just don’t think that in the battle to save babies, we need to feel free to break any rule that we want. That’s all.
Richard -
I believe there are a lot of evils and truths in this world, and I don’t believe that simply because something is true means that kids need to be exposed to it right away in life. I don’t know if you have kids, but I do – and my kids are emotionally ready for some things in life – and other things they aren’t. And I can’t say that all kids are ready at any certain time – it differs by kid. But I leave that up to parents and their judgment.
And you simply don’t like my logic – it isn’t hypocritical at all. I’d be hypocritical if I said that these images shouldn’t be shown but other graphic images should.
I do take offense to your statement that I’m simply okay with babies being aborted. I think that is the silliest argument i’ve heard, and quite dangerous. Just because somebody doesn’t agree with your method of approaching abortion doesn’t mean that they are okay with it. I’m sure that you and I disagree on the approach of a lot of things in life, but just because a person disagrees with the approach doesn’t mean they are okay with it.
“Guess a lot of stuff just slips by moderation!
https://www.jillstanek.com/2012/09/stanek-sunday-funnies-9-30-12/“
Anything in particular of interest there? I noticed you linked to the post instead of a comment and I don’t want to read the whole thread just to get your point.
Truthseeker used the first letter of a naughty word in one comment JDC, lol.
“Truthseeker used the first letter of a naughty word in one comment JDC, lol.”
Thanks for the tip, I have found the letter you were referring to. ;)
Ummm – no – the September 30th by Truthseeker:
“It sounds like your dad was in a really sh****y hospital.”
I was simply surprised because while I blocked out part of it, truthseeker spelled it out – which I thought was automatically blocked (which is why this sticks in my head – I’ve seen partial words 100 times).
“Ummm – no – the September 30th by Truthseeker:
“It sounds like your dad was in a really sh****y hospital.””
Uh, we were actually being a little tongue in cheek about the first letter business. Or at least I was after searching the page for Truthseeker and discovering the comment you were referring to.
Oh I must have missed it, it was a long tedious thread.I got deleted for that word today, haha. And for an acronym. The mods must not have gotten to see it.
I’m gonna tell Tyler he unfairly deleted me. Lol.
Jack – you get a checkmark!
I’m not knocking the mods at all with this comment – they do a fantastic job.
I do find it a little ironic that we’re talking about grown adults not seeing all the letters in swear words on a thread where we’ve argued about how little kids should be exposed to mutilated pictures of babies because it is “reality”.
Ummmm, so yeah, I’m in my 30’s – I’m not okay seeing the uc in between the f and the k, but my kids are okay seeing severed body parts?
What the stink?
I don’t know why anyone cares about bad language, but to be fair I have a filthy mouth. It’s Jill’s blog though, her rules and she doesn’t like it.
I find the emphasis on bad language interesting given that some pretty vile sentiments can be expressed without it and such things may not be deleted. for example, there was a comment that called a three year old a rapist and as far as I know that’s still there.
Oh yeah the infamous Doonesbury thread. That was pretty horrid. I’m actually glad they let those ones stand. If people are going to say things like that, or like the stuff Jake said to me, or some of the other vile stuff people have going on, sometimes I think it should stand so people can’t deny who they are and what they stand for.
Good point, Jack. Still, it was certainly more offensive than the mere use of certain forbidden words.
I’m not sure if it’s still there, but one chick accused me of having been raped by my father, and she used vulgarity and all. Wish I could remember what thread that was…
”one chick accused me of having been raped by my father, and she used vulgarity and all.”
Wow, the mods must of been taking a collective nap that day.
Ex-GOP, I have 4 kids, age 6 to 12 and they reacted marvously when they saw images like these. I explained what they were and they became indignant with the idea of abortion. They could not understand it. That’s right, because to a clear-minded person, like a child, abortion is irrational. That prompted them to write letters to Obama asking to stop supporting abortion or to companies asking them to stop supporting Planned Parenthood. Children react much better than us adults when they see and are properly explained what abortion really is.
On another tone, I never accused you of anything. I don’t know you! If you re-read my comment I used the “if” statement. You know what your values are and if you stand up to defend the unborn or not. So, the concept is simple:if you are concerned with abortion, you might have to explain your concern to your kids when and if they see these pictures, if instead you support abortion and think like many pro that abortion is just a small, insignificant procedure, then why are you so afraid to show these images to your children? Are you afraid that they tell you “no dad. This is not like taking the tonsils out. This is killing”?
Richard -
I’m willing to post some PETA animal abuse videos later – will you watch those with your youngest, and then answer a few questions for me? Let me know – I can get them on the site tonight.
Ex-GOP I have shown those as well to my kids. One decided to become vegetarian. Feel free to post whatever you wish.
Oh OK, I wasn’t going to re-post it, but I can’t resist after all the chatter about moderation. I assume the following was removed on account of the F followed by three asterisks followed by the common second person personal pronoun, used in a rhetorical way to refute a point. Here, I’ll try again:
EG: “If you can’t win an argument without being respectful of others, then it isn’t an argument worth winning.”
[offensive epithet here], EG, 2+2=4.
Ergo, on your premise, “2+2=4? is not an argument worth winning.
But it’s patently true.
How does the nastiness of an advocate determine the value of a proposition they advocate?
[offensive epithet here], EG, your children are not vile.
Ergo, it’s not worth establishing that your children are non-vile.
I think there’s a problem with your assertion. ;-)
Richard, I don’t think anyone who is not fond of the use of graphic imagery is gonna tell you how and when you should expose your kids to those things, how about you give us other parents the same respect? My oldest kid is four and I am sure not going to show him pics of torn apart babies or beaten animals, or other things like that for a long time. That’s my parenting choice, and that’s my right. It’s cool that you have different ideas for your family but someone else’s parenting choice isn’t wrong just because you don’t agree with it for yourself.
There is no swearing allowed here.
The cute little swears with asterisks where the letters would be is left up to the individual mod and their discretion.
If there is ever anything that you find truly offensive please email a mod directly.
We do our best. :)
And Jack……watch yer mouth boy! lol
Out here in farm country, kids are exposed to road kill at an early age. . . .
It’s not the photos of aborted babies that shock them. It’s the fact that the babies were not killed by accident but rather by the very people that should love them the most.
That fact should shock everyone.
Amen Praxedes!!
Jack, I am not saying you must show these photo to your kids! That is something and and your wife decide.
However, you cannot and should not hide the reality of abortion from people and ban these pict saying they are offensive, for example, or they could traumatize my kids.
That kind of mis-representation and hiding of the truth is what gives the pro-abortion folks ammunition (and the VP Biden for that matter) to say abortion is not a big deal.
In end, Praxedes said it best. It’s not the photo that shock the Kids. It’s the fact that the own parents have allowed abortion to occur! Thank you Praxedes, nice comment!
Not ten week old fetus hand. Be expecting false advertising suit.
prove it. These pics have been in circulation a looooong time. Haven’t heard of a suit yet.
How old is that little child’s hand, Dandy Andi? In the scheme of things, does it really matter if the child was four weeks or twelve weeks? Maybe you didn’t notice, but the child is no longer attached to it.
I stand by my comment from that thread where I said the best word to describe Ex-RINO’s posts in “inane”. Sorry for any other vulgarities on that thread but Ex-RINO got my blood boiling when I told him straight out how Obamacare was raising my taxes (taking away my FSA benefit) beginning next year and he refused to even acknowledge it and continued saying Obamacare doesn’t raise anybody’s taxes. I usually don’t let such gibberish get me roiled. I would normally just point out that the Supreme Court has already determined the largest revenue source of Obamacare (the mandate) is a tax so Ex-RINO can take it up with them…lol. I just get SOOO annoyed when we have to keep on spending our time calling Ex-RINO and his ilk on the crap they spew instead of actually dialoguing with the honest and rational people who frequent this board.
And Ex-RINO, don’t take it personally. I am mad at Obamacare and at the pro-abort mentality and not at you as a person. I see you as a victim of/collateral damage of the same ideology that I am fighting against.
There you go truth with that entitlement mentality! You want the rest of us taxpayers to foot your bill.
Maybe if there wasn’t such a push for reform to be revenue neutral, they could have left the rules in place (fortunately, very few Americans go over the $2500 limit). Back in the medicare overhaul in the mid 2000’s, Orrin Hatch said “It was standard practice not to pay for things”. Well, now we’ve got to be more careful.
It cost’s over $2500 for any kind of orthodontia. That leaves zero dollars for any other medical. So let me get this straight though.
You are against government letting citizens keep their own money to pay for their own medical costs but you are for government taking away citizens money to pay for Obamacare.
Simply put you are a statist. You are for government taking from the people (money and freedoms) cause you think government is wiser and needs to help us make the right decisions about how to spend our money and/or how to take care of ourselves. That type of statism is antithetical to what it means to be an American. For the first time in American history now thanks to you and the liberal minions the citizens of the United States are taxed just for breathing. No commerce involved. It even goes beyond that and restricts us from buying non-compliant health care policies.
Truth – I can 100% guarantee you that you can go to the Ortodonist in future years, take out your checkbook, and write a check without government interference. Your claim that the government won’t let you pay your medical costs is completely absurd.
Truth – on your second comment – your broad sweeping generalizations aren’t helpful. I mean, according to your rhetoric, Reagan would have been a massive progressive and Nixon would be darn near been a socialist!
Let me rephrase this for you so you can better comprehend….even though I am fairly sure you knew and are just being indignant.
New Obamacare regulations are taking a large portion the money I could save to pay for my own orthodontia and that of my children next year (which is in excess of $2500) and using it to pay for Obamacare and leaving me with no tax deferred savings for any other medical expenses. Does that sound as absurd?
I mean, according to your rhetoric, Reagan would have been a massive progressive and Nixon would be darn near been a socialist!
You must have misread what I wrote cause my statement included “For the first time”. As in never been done before. As in a HUGE government power grab. As in never been done before. Not by Reagan or Nixon or anyone else. I’ll restate it for you. Maybe it will help if you were to read it a second time:
“For the first time in American history now thanks to you and the liberal minions the citizens of the United States are taxed just for breathing. No commerce involved. It even goes beyond that and restricts us from buying non-compliant health care policies.”
Truth – on your 10:52 comment…I can’t assume you understand the issue fully. Previously, you indicated that it would cost your family thousands of dollars – which is false, unless you were flexing 20K or so and were at a high tax bracket (which you’ve indicated you are not). So don’t get upset if I answer your question/concern – which was, that the government wouldn’t let you pay for things.
On your question of “does that sound absurd” – no, it does not. A small minority of Americans go over $2500 on a fsa. Part of the reason of having them in the past was when people had crap insurance policies, more money came from out of pocket. With better insurance, hopefully the need will go down. Yes, some people will get hit with a small tax increase (if they flexed $4k, they’ll have $1500 less at whatever bracket, so if they are in the 10% bracket, it’s $150 in tax impact) – but again, in a plan that needs to be revenue neutral, some people will see some increases.
On your 11:58 statement, I didn’t respond because it was false. If you ask the question with truthful info, I’ll give you my thoughts.
Again though, you and I both believe the government should tax people – which just disagree on the amounts and what the government should pay for it.
“Truth – on your 10:52 comment…I can’t assume you understand the issue fully. Previously, you indicated that it would cost your family thousands of dollars – which is false,”
No, it was not false. The thousands I was referring to included not ONLY the FSA cutbacks but also my increase in out-of-pocket deductibles. Each person in my family now carries a $5k individual out-of-pocket before 100% coverage kicks in. This used to be a $2.5k out-of-pocket per person. It is the truth that Obamacare is costing me thousands of dollars in increased health insurance costs and I can only assume that it is you who does not understand the issue fully. Not even close to fully.
I said
“For the first time in American history now thanks to you and the liberal minions the citizens of the United States are taxed just for breathing. No commerce involved. It even goes beyond that and restricts us from buying non-compliant health care policies.”
Ex-RINO said “On your 11:58 statement, I didn’t respond because it was false. If you ask the question with truthful info, I’ll give you my thoughts.”
I say, there is nothing untruthful about it. Other then Obamacare, when in the history of the US have people been taxed under the commerce clause for NOT buying something?
truth – how do your out of pocket deductibles have anything to do with health care reform?
truth
So first it was breathing, and now it is not buying something.
You said you got taxed by just breathing. My 9 year old breathes. What is her tax for reform? She has no income. A number will suffice.
Or how about a family of three under the poverty level? What is their tax? Again, a number will suffice.
“You said you got taxed by just breathing. My 9 year old breathes. What is her tax for reform? She has no income. A number will suffice.
Or how about a family of three under the poverty level? What is their tax? Again, a number will suffice.”
What’s the annual income limit for being exempt from the mandate? I’m not sure and I was curious. I really don’t have a dog in the Obamacare fight, seeing as I’ve been below the poverty level forever, I was just wondering.
“truth – how do your out of pocket deductibles have anything to do with health care reform?”
Health insurance companies have to charge more to ALL their customers in order to compensate for the Obamacare mandates. Employers compensate for those additional costs by raising out of pocket deductibles. Get it?
Now a nine year old girl is an unemancipated minor so the taxes on her to cover the Obamacare mandate are actually passed on to her parent or legal guardian. In my case; just for the direct out of pocket additional costs as I have already explained, are $2500 a year per individual directly related to her care alone. Keep in mind that is not counting FSA’s or the co-pays for doctors visits which also went up from $20 per visit to $35 per doctors visit all just to accomodate Obamacare mandates. Again the number is actually higher but I want to keep this simple for you.
Jack, we have to wait until they implement it since that number will be up to bureaucrats to decide upon and they can manipulate it at any time. But for people below the poverty line it will likely be something less than $1000 year. That is, you can go five years without insurance and then when you need it you can either pay the $5000 yoiu owe the government in back-taxes or buy insurance. Insurance companies won’t be able to refuse you coverage but the costs of an Obamacare compliant policy in the free market will be so high (CBO estimates have it at $12.5k right now) that you could never afford it. So a lot of people will end up going without insurance till they need it and they will have to pay uncle sam all their back-taxes owed on Obamacare in order to get help otherwise the whole thing is toothless and useless.
“But for people below the poverty line it will likely be something less than $1000 year.”
What do you mean by something less than $1000 a year? Is that what you think I would be required to put toward insurance? Meh, I don’t have a thousand a year, they can fine me and take my non-existent money if they please.
Yeah but if/when you ever do get a job and try to make a little extra for yourself they will garnish your wages and take it away. Right now they have capped the tax at a maximum of $2085/year for ‘families’ making under $110k but it is on a sliding scale and unelected bureaucrats and the IRS will have control over setting that tax penalty.
I have a job! I just don’t have a spare $1000 a year. I don’t have a spare $50 a year. They will literally be taking food out of my kids mouths if they tried to garnish my wages. I really don’t think they will, it will cause them more issues. I will have to look into it though. I can’t see any politician would be stupid enough to try and enforce garnishments on someone in my tax bracket.
Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you only owe them $500 that you don’t pay they can add huge penalties on that over the years. So you will basically be their indentured servant if you ever do try and make it on your own.
“I can’t see any politician would be stupid enough to try and enforce garnishments on someone in my tax bracket.”
Really? They passed it without even knowing what was in it. That should tell you something about how stupid they can be.
I am on my own, and I have never taken government assistance for anything except I had to get my kids on state insurance because there was literally no other choice. All I am saying is, they would be screwing themselves over to take any money from someone with as little income as me. I’d end up on food stamps and housing.
In the past you would have been able to go to the hospital and get the care for your family and might end up declaring bankruptcy to get back on your feet. But the bad news is that taxes are not forgivable through bankruptcy so your medical debt (in the form of accrues Obamacare taxes) will now have you by the nuts for the rest of your life
“All I am saying is, they would be screwing themselves over to take any money from someone with as little income as me. I’d end up on food stamps and housing”
That is precisely what the statists want. The statists stay in power by growing a dependent class. By mandating that everybody’s private insurance must cover no lifetime caps etc they are pricing millions of people out of the insurance market and making them dependent/indebted on the government.
Truthseeker, I am already in like $15,000 of medical debt. And I cannot afford insurance, so I am kinda riding it out before I declare bankruptcy in case something happens and I end up paying ridiculously overpriced medical bills if I get pneumonia or something and end up in the hospital (you know because doctors won’t treat you without insurance or cash up front, so the ER has always been my only option). So, medical debt already has me by my nuts. I don’t really think Obamacare makes it better or worse for someone in my bracket.
I just explained why it makes it worse Jack. Under Obamacare bankruptcy will no longer be a way out because your “medical” that you owe will be in the form of taxes owed and tax debts cannot be declared as part of a bankruptcy.
But you haven’t given me any proof that this will even hit me or how much I will have to pay annually or monthly. Do you have a link to some hard numbers? How do you know I am not exempt? I am pretty sure I am in the lowest tax bracket.
I’ll see if I can find some but I think the minimum starts at like $325 a year in 2014 and then phases up to like $1000 in 2016. Those were the hard numbers I gave you. You are supposed to be happy to pay it cause you are getting Obamacare so cheap. I’ll see if I can find any other numbers for you.
Jack – I apologize that I went to watch football a bit – Truth is lying through his teeth, and I’m disappointed by that.
First off – if you make less than 133% of the federal poverty level, you’ll be eligible for medicaid coverage ($29,300 for a family of four is the 133% mark).
Secondly – if you make above that, but less than 400% of poverty level ($88K for a family of four), your health insurance will be subsidized to make it more affordable.
If, for some reason, you simply don’t want health care insurance, the fine is $285 or 1% of income in 2014. There are limits though for income – so if you are below the poverty level, the fines won’t affect you anyways.
Truth mentioned garnishments, which is against, a downright lie. The law actually PROHIBITS the government from putting liens or levies. There’s no criminal penalty. The governments recourse is it offset or take from future tax refunds.
Seriously – I’m very sorry that you’re being flat out lied to – it’s disappointing to see from somebody who claims to be of God. Here’s some info on how it will affect you:
http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/29/pf/taxes/health_insurance_mandate/index.htm
Thanks Ex. There are three people in my family and I am under 133% of the poverty level for that, looks like I could just get on Medicaid and be fine.
Flat out lied to? Where are your hard numbers Ex-RINO? Sounds like you are saying that Jack would be on Medicaid or he would start owing $285 a year in 2014 is that correct? If so then that is onlyt $40 a year different then what I had said. And What would that same person owe in 2016? Come on Ex-RINO. Give us the hard numbers…
And what if Jack’s family makes more than $28k per year, how does this sliding scale work?
Jack, don;t expect any honest hard numbers from Ex-RINO. He is better at calling other people liars then speaking the truth with any hard facts. Just read the first few lines of the article he pointed you to: “Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the health insurance mandate, most Americans must be insured starting in 2014 or pay a penalty.
The penalty will be assessed on your tax return and administered by the IRS. But exactly how is a big question. The IRS has not issued its guidance yet.”
Odds are that a lot of Americans who though they were lower class are gonna find out how “rich” they are when the Obamacare guidelines are actually written in hard numbers.
The only honest answer anybody can give you today is that the government hasn’t even written the breakdown yet but it looks like the only people not effected will be those families making less than $28k/year because they will remain on Medicaid. But watch out!!!
No problem Jack – some states that are solidly red are turning away funds to expand medicaid to more people, so you might have to check your state (not sure where you are at). Hopefully, you are in a place where you can get decent coverage to give you a bit more peace of mind (that you’re covered and can get care if you need it – or your kids).
Let me know if you have more questions – a lot of misinformation out there right now being spread by people.
Truth
Flat out lied to – yes
$285 or medicaid – no – there are income limits to being subject to a fine. If Jack’s family is under poverty level, hopefully they get on medicaid. Otherwise, the fine isn’t applicable to low income families. Read a bit on the law before scaring people.
I put the link – in 2016, the fine is higher. It still isn’t subject to ALL people – there are financial limits.
I think you owe Jack an apology quite frankly – finances and family are important – and providing for a family is an important thing. Spouting off a lot of lies towards somebody to scare them on a political position – I think that is downright evil.
I live in Florida, which tends to be awful about expanding any type of social programs. My kids have been covered on state insurance ever since my work jacked up insurance premiums out of my reach, and I haven’t had insurance ever since.
Truthseeker at least he gave me a link! If you give me a link I’ll read it and take that into account too.
I make less than 28K truthseeker.
Ex-RINO, speaking of misinformation, how do you even know Medicaid will be available for every family who makes $28k or less since Medicaid is run by states and not by Obamacare guidelines. In fact the honest answer would be that you simply don’t know the answer. The honest answer would be that a plurality of the states already suing the federal government for trying to mandate that without funding it? The honest answer is that Obamacare is a cluster you know what that leaves Jack and everybody else at the mercy of bureaucrats. The honest answer is that the state health coverage Jack enjoys now is put in danger by Obamacare.
Oh, and according to that link, I’d be exempt from the fines if the insurance premiums I would have to pay exceed 8% of my income. Since both the insurance that my work provides and literally every single private insurer I have looked at exceeds 8% of my income anyway, I would be exempt even if I couldn’t get on Medicaid.
He literally JUST said it would depend on my state truthseeker.
Jack, do you have the hard numbers now? Are you comfortable that the state coverage you have now will still be available after Obamacare mandates kick in? I am not trying to scare anybody. I just hate to see people ‘find out what is in the law’ after it bites them in the rear. Obamacare is gonna bust the state medicaid budgets. It is a fact Jack.
Jack – the biggest threat to coverage for you right now are the GOP lawmakers in Florida. Florida is one of the states right now that is holding back on implementation – so they are witholding medicaid from those who qualify, and they are balking on setting up insurance exchanges (which oddly enough, promotes competition, something that the GOP supported back when I considered myself a Republican).
Just keep an eye on it – if Obama wins next week, my hope is that the states that are problems start serving their people and not playing political games (since the threat of repeal will have passed).
Oh, and according to that link, I’d be exempt from the fines if the insurance premiums I would have to pay exceed 8% of my income. Since both the insurance that my work provides and literally every single private insurer I have looked at exceeds 8% of my income anyway, I would be exempt even if I couldn’t get on Medicaid.
Jack, I hope you are exempt. Just something else to keep in mind though in case you or your family ever break the poverty level in income. The 8% number is based on the cost an ‘individual’ policy even when calculating exemption status for a family. I know that sounds unfair but bureaucracy usually doesn’t make sense.
I never know what Florida will do, truthseeker, and it has little to do with Obama. We did waste millions on drug testing for welfare, after all.
From that article, it seems as though if you are uninsured for a period of longer than three consecutive months you will be assessed a prorated fine according to a percentage of your income. This fine does not apply to people with very low income, or those who’s insurance premiums would exceed 8% of their income. I would be exempt under these conditions, whether my state allows me on Medicaid or not.
I just have to say, I know you don’t like Ex and think he’s a baby killer and all but you should still read his posts if you’re gonna respond. I am willing to listen to both of you, he is the one who provided me with a link explaining this so I am giving him a bit more credence. If you can provide me with a link I’ll consider it as well. :)
” The 8% number is based on the cost an ‘individual’ policy even when calculating exemption status for a family.”
The individual insurance premiums available to me are somewhere between 35% (through my employment) and 60% (which is just ridiculous). Even if I break poverty level they won’t be close enough to 8%.
Jack, wether Obama wins or not Obamacare is gonna decimate your states medicaid budget because the federal government is only subsidizing such a small percentage of the cost for all the people they will be adding to your states medicaid rolls. Expect longer lines and less care from medicaid if Obamacare gets implemented period. Regardless of who is president. If you don;t want the level of care you have now to get much worse then your only chance is to elect Romney and repeal the pig of a law.
Truth – factual links of your assertions seem like they’d be appreciated at this point.
Quick question – do you feel bad at all about this thread? Seriously? I know you ignored my call for an apology, and from the little i know of Jack, he’s not the type of guy who’s going to ask for you – but I must ask – do you feel a bit bad at all for the misinformation you gave?
” Florida is one of the states right now that is holding back on implementation – so they are witholding medicaid from those who qualify, and they are balking on setting up insurance exchanges (which oddly enough, promotes competition, something that the GOP supported back when I considered myself a Republican).”
It honestly doesn’t surprise me. Floridian lawmakers always do things like this. And it’s hilarious, some of these dudes who are against insurance exchanges were totally for them right before Obamacare passed. I remember them talking about it.
Florida is a lovely state – I’ve read some articles concerning how much they are essentially paying per positive drug test in the welfare law – what a joke. I’d laugh, but it’s really sad seeing how it is taking away money that could actually help people.
And the voter ID bill? Again – a massive joke.
Move up to Wisconsin some day – we’ll take you! Our politics are crazy as well…but things are settling down now that we have some balance in our government.
“Jack, wether Obama wins or not Obamacare is gonna decimate your states medicaid budget because the federal government is only subsidizing such a small percentage of the cost for all the people they will be adding to your states medicaid rolls. Expect longer lines and less care from medicaid if Obamacare gets implemented period. Regardless of who is president. If you don;t want the level of care you have now to get much worse then your only chance is to elect Romney and repeal the pig of a law.”
Truthseeker:
1) Right now, I get no healthcare. None. I am in a ton of debt from hospital visits from when I was 18, 6 years ago still. My kids only get very basic healthcare from very basic state insurance. Telling me how much worse it is going to get doesn’t mean much to me because I literally am getting no healthcare right now.
2) You can’t expect me to just be like “you’re right”. If you can link me to a reliable source (pleeaaassseee no FOX or FreeRepublic) that supports your viewpoint I will definitely look at it. I can’t just take your word for it you know?
Oh you don’t even know Ex, it’s insane. We wasted tons of money on that drug testing bs. To catch the 4% of welfare recipients that were smoking pot. I think all in all we spent a few million to not pay out a few thousand bucks to some potheads. It’s just stupid. Not even to mention that I am pretty sure that the children of drug users still need to eat and live somewhere. :/
And the voter ID thing is just a joke.
I don’t know if I could handle the snow in WI. :)
“The individual insurance premiums available to me are somewhere between 35% (through my employment) and 60% (which is just ridiculous). Even if I break poverty level they won’t be close enough to 8%.
I just wanted to point out that families will qualify for exemptions based upon the premium costs for an individual policy. Where I work, which would be considered a cadillac plan, our premiums for an individual are about $100 per paycheck which is would be $2600 oer year. So anybody who makes more than $31,200 would have to pay Obamacare tax. That is even though my family premiums are more than double that. So if they wanted to be fair and use the cost of a family premium $240 per paycheck then the Obamatax wouldn’t kick in until somebody starts making $75k per year. See what I mean by how it is unfair? A family’s eligibilty for exempt status is being pro-rated off an individuals premium rate. What a scam.
I hate driving in the snow.
There are two things I like about winter. First, I don’t have to do yard work. Second, the first warm day of spring feels so much better after the cold of winter.
That’s what I tell myself to make myself feel better when I see states like Florida having 70 degree days in the winter!
Lol, I have never actually seen snow or been in weather colder than like 45 degrees. I am a huge baby about cold, I start wearing a sweater and jeans when it hits sixty! And I live in Miami so it never really goes that low, but we still complain when it gets close.
Truth, please, if you want me to evaluate your claims you’re gonna have to give me something. Where are you getting this information?
By definition, a cadillac insurance plan is a plan where the premiums are above $27,500 a year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_insurance_plan
So truth -your insurance premium is a cadillac plan? Really?
Truth gets most of his information somewhere between his right cheek and his left cheek.
I apologize a little that for.
Will others apologize for anything, ever?
It’s cool I don’t need an apology. I do need a reliable link to your information please truthseeker.
Do you understand I am not just gonna agree with everything you are telling me if you can’t give me some unbiased info truthseeker? I’m not trying to be unfair to you, or take Ex’s side or anything, it’s just that you haven’t given me anything but your opinion unsubstantiated.
Truth I did find one thing in the article that Ex posted that touches on something you said:
“What’s not clear is whether failure to pay the penalty for not having insurance would subject you to late payment penalties to the IRS, much the same way a failure to pay your taxes on time would.”
So we don’t know whether late fees will apply to the mandate fines. Is there anything you can post that can substantiate your other concerns? I really do want to know.
You can’t expect me to just be like “you’re right”. If you can link me to a reliable source (pleeaaassseee no FOX or FreeRepublic) that supports your viewpoint I will definitely look at it. I can’t just take your word for it you know?
Jack, What little eligibilty you have from your state now will only get worse under Obamacare because it is the federal government making unfunded mandates upon the state to provide medicaid coverage to people. The participant pool size will rise and the funds to pay for care will rise proportionally only a fraction of what the the pool size to. Here is a link to the lawsuit that the Florida and 25 other states have filed against Obamacare because of how it would cripple medicaid in their states.
http://healthcarelawsuits.org/detail.php?c=2171284&t=Florida%2C-25-Other-States%2C-and-the-NFIB-
Yes, it is a Cadillac plan. The exempt status is based upon employee portion of the premiums only. My employer pays the rest and in total cost it does qualify as a cadillac plan.
Ok so this is the only part of that link that talks about that issue, the rest is all about constitutionality:
“Because the Plaintiffs in this case are states, they are especially concerned with the top-down unfunded mandates that impose increased conditions on states participating in federal programs from which withdrawal is not practical, rather than to engage in voluntary federal-state partnerships. States where Medicare is already stretching the annual budget, such as Florida, simply cannot afford the increased costs attributable to the new requirements imposed by PPACA .”
I’m not sure what this means. What’s the difference between a “federal program from which withdrawal is not practical” and a “voluntary federal-state partnership”? I would love both of you guys’ opinions on that. And where are the increased costs coming from? Is there a part of Obamacare that requires that low income people be let onto Medicaid if they are under a certain income level? I think I am confused.
Holy cats – the total cost of your insurance plan is over $27K a year???
I’ve never known anybody with one of those types of plans – my goodness.
Seriously?
Truth I did find one thing in the article that Ex posted that touches on something you said:
“What’s not clear is whether failure to pay the penalty for not having insurance would subject you to late payment penalties to the IRS, much the same way a failure to pay your taxes on time would.”
The SCOTUS has called it a tax. Late taxes are subject to penalty. Nobody in HHS or the IRS has said they wouldn’t charge late penalties. Why would anybody think that they wouldn’t?
I’m not sure what this means. What’s the difference between a “federal program from which withdrawal is not practical” and a “voluntary federal-state partnership”? I would love both of you guys’ opinions on that. And where are the increased costs coming from? Is there a part of Obamacare that requires that low income people be let onto Medicaid if they are under a certain income level?
Jack, that is exactly how I understand it to be. I will look for more links on it. Maybe Ex-RINO can show us something different.
Okay truthseeker. Ex what’s your opinion on that?
Holy cats – the total cost of your insurance plan is over $27K a year??? I’ve never known anybody with one of those types of plans – my goodness. Seriously?
Ex-RINO, they send out a packet of total compensation/benefits to us each year. I remember the total insurance cost being 20k plus but I don’t have the exact number. I have no need or intention to exaggerate I will give you an exact number if I can find it.
For comparisons sake truth – I have pretty decent insurance through my employer – $1000 deductible, and the total plan cost (I share the cost with my employer, who covers most of it) is about $14K a year – or about half the threshold of the plan.
What’s the fundamental claim being made on medicaid to research? Just want to make sure I know what you guys are asking.
“What’s the fundamental claim being made on medicaid to research? Just want to make sure I know what you guys are asking.”
Truth is claiming that under Obamacare, states are required to extend Medicaid eligibility to all low income people and that this is unfunded and will bankrupt states, specifically my state. I am not sure what threshold of income he thinks it will be. I have no idea myself, that’s why I was asking you what you thought.
Ex-RINO, You can read it word for word in my post at 6:37.
Jack, here is a link to a WSJ article on it:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574414831869954664.html
So instead of being eligible for ‘health insurance’ low income people would be forced onto an even more overburdened and unfunded state medicaid system that can’t even support you now.
Okay truth, first thank you for providing a link, even if it’s an opinion piece. I do appreciate it.
This article is from 2009, are you sure it’s referring to the law that was actually passed in 2010? The law went through a lot of changes before it actually passed. I am not sure but I’ll assume it is until I can find out.
So it looks like this guy claims that the law will basically force the states to extend Medicaid coverage to everyone 133% under the poverty line. He says that this will cost about 287 billion dollars by 2019, and that 37 billion of that will have to be from state budgets I guess. that doesn’t sound good to me.
I did take issue with this:
“While some people will be eligible for subsidized private health insurance, everyone in the lowest income bracket will be forced into Medicaid, the country’s worst insurance program by a long shot. States try to control spending by restricting access to prescription drugs and specialists. About 40% of U.S. physicians won’t accept Medicaid at all.”
What exactly do they think the lowest income people do right now? Most of us just don’t see the doctor until we have to go to the ER.
“Why? One reason is that Medicaid’s price controls are even tighter than Medicare’s, which in turn are substantially below private payers. In 2009 or 2010, 29 states will have either reduced or frozen their reimbursement rates to providers. Democrats love Medicaid because is it much cheaper than subsidizing private insurance, but that is true only because of this antimarket brute force. Of course, such coercion will be extended to the rest of the health market under ObamaCare.”
I have no idea what they are talking about here. What do they mean by price controls and reimbursement rates being frozen?
Price controls are used by government programs as a way to keep costs down. They control the costs of running the program by limiting the amount of money they will pay/reimburse doctors for any given procedure. Because of this many doctors in private practice will not take medicaid patients. For example doctors in Obamacare exchanges would not accept medicaid patients because the government would not reimburse them enough for the cost of doing business.
And you could go even a step farther. Patients in Obamacare exchanges may not get accepted by doctors in private practice because the Obamacare coverage/reimbursement rates may not be enough to make it worth their while.
Question truthseeker. Do you think that in countries with universal types of health care, do doctors not get compensated enough to make it worth their while? Why would anyone be a doctor then?
I am signing out for a while. I will be surprised if you get a response from Ex-RINO on that last question you had for him. Good chatting with you though Jack.
Talk to you later truth. I actually got to get going in a bit too, got a date. I am sure Ex will answer me time permitting, he usually does respond to health care inquiries lol, it’s kind of his thing.
They do have doctor shortages (longer waits) and the quality of doctor care goes down because the financial incentive goes away.
Jack -
Start with this article on the Medicaid expansion – links out to other ones – http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/104883/perry-scott-republican-governor-medicaid-expansion-spending-obamacare
The Republican fundamental argument is that states will have extra people who already are eligible for medicaid that will now jump on because of extra exposure. A bit of a weird argument.
Also, you are a smart guy – look at the states that are part of the lawsuit, and look at the party affiliation of the governors of those states. Could some of this be less about costs and more about politics?
Truth – why would you be surprised? I answer questions that come to me, and I answer them with facts.
You make up garbage. Don’t take pride in answering quickly, but lying through your teeth the whole time you are doing it. That’s not something to be proud of.
I’m still downright shocked at how bad you botched the entire individual mandate argument. For somebody that expresses passion about it, you really don’t have a grasp on it at all.
Did you know the individual mandate was a big pitch from the Heritage Foundation years ago?
Thanks Ex. If i don’t get a chance to read up on it before I leave tonight I’ll let you know what I think tomorrow. But I will say, I have never seen Rick Scott do anything that wasn’t because of politics, doesn’t seem to have us constituents in mind. Ever.
Lol did the Heritage Foundation really propose an individual mandate? I will die laughing if that’s true. Link me!
Here you go – the article has links to original content:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/the-individual-mandates-c_b_1386716.html
What’s interesting is – if you went back five to ten years and said that in the future, there would be legislation that would try to reign in health care spending by requiring individuals to have health care so that they can’t freeload off the system – and that the same legislation kept insurance companies as the primary vehicle for coverage, and promoted insurance exchanges to promote competition to drive down prices…you’d swear that the idea would have come from the GOP.
And, looking through the article I posted, you’ll see why.
The dirty little secret Jack is – I voted Bush, I voted Walker – I’ve voted a LOT of GOPers in my short lifetime (I’m mid 30’s). I dig conservative principles. I just can’t get behind this “screw the poor, we love the rich”, mentality of the GOP. I really feel like the money has gotten too powerful for them. The Dems aren’t much better…but seriously – the GOP left me more than I left them. I’m hoping they come back a bit more center. I really liked McCain (the first version) – and like a few GOP governors out there.
Well, I’m out, I’ll read your links tomorrow Ex, thanks for providing them.
I agree with your last paragraph quite a bit, it’s close to how I see the GOP. I wasn’t old enough to vote in a presidential election until Obama/McCain and I voted McCain… but the GOP has just simply gotten so nuts I can’t get over it. Of course, I am really not fond of a lot of the Dems policies (abortion is the biggest thing, I can’t really make myself vote for them with their weird fanaticism about it, what ever happened to “safe legal rare” like they used to claim?), but honestly there is so much crazy and plain old mean on the GOP side I really don’t know what to think.
“Also, you are a smart guy – look at the states that are part of the lawsuit, and look at the party affiliation of the governors of those states. Could some of this be less about costs and more about politics?”
lol…. The CBO estimates that the Obamacare mandate will put 11 million more people on the state medicaid rolls (about a third of the uninsured people who get coverage through Obamacare) while phasing out any additional funding to care for these additional people and it is all just politics….Ex-RINO you are a loon! What will happen differently in the states with Democratic governors?
EG: “The dirty little secret Jack is – I voted Bush, I voted Walker – I’ve voted a LOT of GOPers in my short lifetime (I’m mid 30?s). I dig conservative principles. I just can’t get behind this ‘screw the poor, we love the rich’, mentality of the GOP. I really feel like the money has gotten too powerful for them. The Dems aren’t much better…but seriously – the GOP left me more than I left them. I’m hoping they come back a bit more center. I really liked McCain (the first version) – and like a few GOP governors out there.”
And you wonder why I consider you a false flag.
“I just can’t get behind this ‘screw the poor, we love the rich’, mentality of the GOP.”
Again — no one can be that stupid. I have more respect for you than that. You have to be a false flag, because the alternative (abject moronitude) is beneath any attribute I’d prefer to assign in your direction.
Jack,
Ex-RINO posted: “What’s the fundamental claim being made on medicaid to research? Just want to make sure I know what you guys are asking.”
Then you posted: “Truth is claiming that under Obamacare, states are required to extend Medicaid eligibility to all low income people and that this is unfunded and will bankrupt states, specifically my state. I am not sure what threshold of income he thinks it will be. I have no idea myself, that’s why I was asking you what you thought.”
Then look at Ex-RINO’s response. When you filter through all the gibberish did he answer you honestly? Did he admit to you that 11 million people are being added to the state medicaid rolls (a whole one-third of all the uninsured who get covered by medicaid) and that the federal government phases out any funding for these people’s care? That is what you asked him about isn’t it? Do you think his answer was forthright? Do you feel like he answered your question at all?
I just can’t get behind this “screw the poor, we love the rich”, mentality of the GOP.
Ex-RINO, do you mean like adding the poorest third of all uninsured people to medicaid and then phasing out the funding to pay for their medical care? Oh wait, that is what the Democrats did.
“For comparisons sake truth – I have pretty decent insurance through my employer – $1000 deductible, and the total plan cost (I share the cost with my employer, who covers most of it) is about $14K a year – or about half the threshold of the plan”
Ex-RINO, How much out-of-pocket after you pay your $1000 deductible? I used to have a $500 deductible and then another $2.5k out-of-pocket at an 80/20 split (20% me) and then everything was covered 100%. Now cause of Obamacare mandated changes I have a $1000 deductible and an additional $5k out of pocket per individual and then everything is covered 100%. This is per individual but if three individuals hit there out of pocket maximum then the whole family’s out of pocket is considered hit.
Ex-RINO,
are you poor? I am. Republicans aren’t “screwing” me. They’re trying to help me not be poor anymore. That requires me to have a job. That requires me to be hired by one of “the rich”. That requires a business to hire me. Republicans help businesses. Businesses hire me.
Jack, One other obvious way that Obamacare will negatively impact the state funded care available for you and your family is the price controls/reimbursement levels thing you were asking about. You may have heard that Obamacare raids $500 billion dollars from medicaid and uses it to fund Obamacare. They do this by reducing the imbursement levels medicaid is willing to pay doctors for various procedures. That will mean less doctors willing to see medicaid patients and less options on who/where you will be able to get care. This is going to effect you immediately when Obamacare is implemented.
Also, I was able to find the hard numbers and the federal government is funding the new medicaid enrollees 100% for the first three years of the expansion and from then on the states have to pick up 10% of the tab. In Florida that Obamacare mandated medicaid expansion end up meaning a 50% boost in enrollment for the state.
Here is a Yahoo news article that has a lot of the hard numbers in an easy to read format: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/map-where-obamacare-expand-medicaid-most-175400889.html
I decided to crunch some numbers and I am estimating that Obamacare would mean Florida adding another 1.5 million people to their the medicaid rolls. 10% of that cost would be unfunded. That means if it costs the state an average of $7000 per person to provide medicaid for those 1.5 million people then 10% of that total cost would be just over a billion dollars a year. I am not sure what it actually costs on average for the state to fund insurance for a person but I just wanted to crunch something and that is what I came up with.
” Then look at Ex-RINO’s response. When you filter through all the gibberish did he answer you honestly? Did he admit to you that 11 million people are being added to the state medicaid rolls (a whole one-third of all the uninsured who get covered by medicaid) and that the federal government phases out any funding for these people’s care? That is what you asked him about isn’t it? Do you think his answer was forthright? Do you feel like he answered your question at all?”
Yeah, the article he linked to showed the same thing that yours did. Except your article didn’t show that Obamacare will only raise state Medicaid funding by 2.8% overall, seeing as it’s already at some trillion dollars. And with your talk of phasing out, it looks like the new enrollees will be covered 100% for three years and then your “phase out” that you are talking about is scaling it back to covering 90% (which is higher than the federal government currently covers for Medicaid patients in most states).
I don’t know about the price freezing and all that. Do you have another article that goes into depth on that? It does sound like a concern, and I do know that a lot of doctors won’t take Medicaid right now.
And lol it’s true, the Heritage Foundation did have an idea for an individual mandate. You can’t make this stuff up.
Put a plan place to ‘fix’ the health system by place the poorest people in Florida on medical plans that are unfunded by a billion annually…meh
Jack/Truth -
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/how-much-would-the-medicaid-expansion-cost-your-state/
More info – I haven’t linked and read out to the larger Kaiser study on this – maybe tonight while watching election returns.
Truth – at the least, your math is too simple – so I’d read through this.
truth -
On your comment on the 11 million…
Actually, I’d admit that it could be as high as 17 million.
I’ll also admit that most of these people, if they have a medical emergency, get medical care, and that cost either gets passed onto the state or more likely, to those with insurance, who see fast growing rates.
You talk as if these people aren’t getting medical care at all – they ARE, it is horribly inefficient because they don’t have insurance, and you and I are paying for it. I’m not sure why you don’t take that into the equation. It isn’t as if 17 million people from Mars are going to come down to the US – these are folks here now, that have been getting care in the most expensive way possible. Change the dynamic…change the dynamic.
“You talk as if these people aren’t getting medical care at all – they ARE, it is horribly inefficient because they don’t have insurance, and you and I are paying for it. I’m not sure why you don’t take that into the equation. It isn’t as if 17 million people from Mars are going to come down to the US – these are folks here now, that have been getting care in the most expensive way possible.”
That was kinda my thought, I don’t know how people think someone like me declaring bankruptcy on a ton of medical debt that I can never pay off is somehow cheaper than having basic insurance. And there are literally millions of people like me, it’s not like I’m some outlier.
And come on, from that link it seems as though Florida will spend 1.223 billion over 2014-2019… which is 0.16% of our GDP from 2011. Uh huh.
Facts and logic can be so inconvenient!
Maybe if my state would stop wasting money on weird stuff we wouldn’t even have the slightest worry about Medicaid expansion. Naaaahhh that would make sense!
I really find abortion a very disgusting and immoral act done by people who have no heart. I just hope that people become more responsible with their actions and actually listen to their conscience! :(