Menu

Home › Forums › Other › Way OT; You need to make 79k

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 51 total)
1 2 3 4
  • Author
    Posts
  • January 13, 2009 at 9:48 PM #14830
    SD Realtor
    Participant

    Okay sorry for posting a political thread. I am sure it will drop off the board fast…

    Can someone correct me on this because I honestly cannot believe it to be true…

    I heard that the new “childrens” health reform bill will provide the following:

    – Health care for “children” who are under 30.
    – Health care for “children” who make under 80k a year.
    – You do not have to be a citizen of the US.

    Someone please tell me that with all our problems somehow we are scrounging up a few extra dollars to provide health care for any citizen or non citizen who is under 30 years old.

    Is this true?

    Someone? Anyone?

    So if I earn 79k at a job that provides health care but I have to kick in for it, why the heck wouldn’t I cancel the benefit to get the extra money and just let the government pay for it.

    Hopefully someone can straighten me out and point out that I am misinformed of this health care reform plan. Because I sincerely hope I am.

    January 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM #328571
    CBad
    Participant

    Hmmm, I have heard about the under 80K and legal/not-legal rules. (I have also read that it would be paid for by a substantial increase on tobacco.) But I had no idea it was for 29 and under! I’m really hoping this is incorrect. Plenty of people have children of their own by the time they are 29 so we are covering entire families now, not just children under SCHIP? No wonder Bush vetoed this. I’m still not clear on whether it’s the “child” who has to make under 80K or the parent when we are talking about “children” who are really adults (over 18). I guess if you are under 30 and smoke you are partially paying for your health plan. It’s just one step closer to universal healthcare.

    January 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM #329088
    CBad
    Participant

    Hmmm, I have heard about the under 80K and legal/not-legal rules. (I have also read that it would be paid for by a substantial increase on tobacco.) But I had no idea it was for 29 and under! I’m really hoping this is incorrect. Plenty of people have children of their own by the time they are 29 so we are covering entire families now, not just children under SCHIP? No wonder Bush vetoed this. I’m still not clear on whether it’s the “child” who has to make under 80K or the parent when we are talking about “children” who are really adults (over 18). I guess if you are under 30 and smoke you are partially paying for your health plan. It’s just one step closer to universal healthcare.

    January 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM #329003
    CBad
    Participant

    Hmmm, I have heard about the under 80K and legal/not-legal rules. (I have also read that it would be paid for by a substantial increase on tobacco.) But I had no idea it was for 29 and under! I’m really hoping this is incorrect. Plenty of people have children of their own by the time they are 29 so we are covering entire families now, not just children under SCHIP? No wonder Bush vetoed this. I’m still not clear on whether it’s the “child” who has to make under 80K or the parent when we are talking about “children” who are really adults (over 18). I guess if you are under 30 and smoke you are partially paying for your health plan. It’s just one step closer to universal healthcare.

    January 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM #328979
    CBad
    Participant

    Hmmm, I have heard about the under 80K and legal/not-legal rules. (I have also read that it would be paid for by a substantial increase on tobacco.) But I had no idea it was for 29 and under! I’m really hoping this is incorrect. Plenty of people have children of their own by the time they are 29 so we are covering entire families now, not just children under SCHIP? No wonder Bush vetoed this. I’m still not clear on whether it’s the “child” who has to make under 80K or the parent when we are talking about “children” who are really adults (over 18). I guess if you are under 30 and smoke you are partially paying for your health plan. It’s just one step closer to universal healthcare.

    January 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM #328908
    CBad
    Participant

    Hmmm, I have heard about the under 80K and legal/not-legal rules. (I have also read that it would be paid for by a substantial increase on tobacco.) But I had no idea it was for 29 and under! I’m really hoping this is incorrect. Plenty of people have children of their own by the time they are 29 so we are covering entire families now, not just children under SCHIP? No wonder Bush vetoed this. I’m still not clear on whether it’s the “child” who has to make under 80K or the parent when we are talking about “children” who are really adults (over 18). I guess if you are under 30 and smoke you are partially paying for your health plan. It’s just one step closer to universal healthcare.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #328939
    patientlywaiting
    Participant

    Isn’t that another form of bail-out for private enterprises?

    I think that corporate executives figured they can off-load health care expenses onto the government. Great for the car makers.

    What does it matter if they are citizens or not? If they are residents in USA, we want them to be healthy.

    I support universal health car with rationing. Something like no more than $5,000 per person, per year, adjusted for inflation. You have to buy additional coverage if you need it.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #329011
    patientlywaiting
    Participant

    Isn’t that another form of bail-out for private enterprises?

    I think that corporate executives figured they can off-load health care expenses onto the government. Great for the car makers.

    What does it matter if they are citizens or not? If they are residents in USA, we want them to be healthy.

    I support universal health car with rationing. Something like no more than $5,000 per person, per year, adjusted for inflation. You have to buy additional coverage if you need it.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #329035
    patientlywaiting
    Participant

    Isn’t that another form of bail-out for private enterprises?

    I think that corporate executives figured they can off-load health care expenses onto the government. Great for the car makers.

    What does it matter if they are citizens or not? If they are residents in USA, we want them to be healthy.

    I support universal health car with rationing. Something like no more than $5,000 per person, per year, adjusted for inflation. You have to buy additional coverage if you need it.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #328601
    patientlywaiting
    Participant

    Isn’t that another form of bail-out for private enterprises?

    I think that corporate executives figured they can off-load health care expenses onto the government. Great for the car makers.

    What does it matter if they are citizens or not? If they are residents in USA, we want them to be healthy.

    I support universal health car with rationing. Something like no more than $5,000 per person, per year, adjusted for inflation. You have to buy additional coverage if you need it.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #329118
    patientlywaiting
    Participant

    Isn’t that another form of bail-out for private enterprises?

    I think that corporate executives figured they can off-load health care expenses onto the government. Great for the car makers.

    What does it matter if they are citizens or not? If they are residents in USA, we want them to be healthy.

    I support universal health car with rationing. Something like no more than $5,000 per person, per year, adjusted for inflation. You have to buy additional coverage if you need it.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #328944
    SD Realtor
    Participant

    Like I said, I just wanted clarification because I was not clear on the facts and still am not. The quites around child was facetious. All I ask is that if you are gonna stick it to me give me a reach around as well. Don’t call it a child health care reform. Call it a young adult (citizen or non citizen) health care bill.

    Anyways perhaps someone will post the true facts about the program. It should sail through now.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #328606
    SD Realtor
    Participant

    Like I said, I just wanted clarification because I was not clear on the facts and still am not. The quites around child was facetious. All I ask is that if you are gonna stick it to me give me a reach around as well. Don’t call it a child health care reform. Call it a young adult (citizen or non citizen) health care bill.

    Anyways perhaps someone will post the true facts about the program. It should sail through now.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #329016
    SD Realtor
    Participant

    Like I said, I just wanted clarification because I was not clear on the facts and still am not. The quites around child was facetious. All I ask is that if you are gonna stick it to me give me a reach around as well. Don’t call it a child health care reform. Call it a young adult (citizen or non citizen) health care bill.

    Anyways perhaps someone will post the true facts about the program. It should sail through now.

    January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM #329041
    SD Realtor
    Participant

    Like I said, I just wanted clarification because I was not clear on the facts and still am not. The quites around child was facetious. All I ask is that if you are gonna stick it to me give me a reach around as well. Don’t call it a child health care reform. Call it a young adult (citizen or non citizen) health care bill.

    Anyways perhaps someone will post the true facts about the program. It should sail through now.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 51 total)
1 2 3 4
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.