Why We Have To Pass The Health Care Bill:

[SwampThing]

[quote]To help fund the $940 billion health care overhaul, a 10% tax on individuals receiving indoor tanning services was tacked on, and the initiative is expected to generate $2.7 billion over ten years. The 10% tanning tax has replaced the 5% tax on cosmetic surgery that was originally included in the bill.[/quote] Interesting. I bet we start to see a lot of these type of taxes on goods/services that are harmful to our health, a way to offset the healthcare cost of people who will need to see the doctor more because of lifestyle choices.

<font size="1></font>

[marie3]

Yeah for health care reform!
Yeah to all the people who lost their jobs over the past 8 or 9 years who can now get health insurance!
Yeah to all the people with pre- existing conditions that can get health insurance!
Yeah to no more life time maximum coverage. What a BULLSHIT crappy thing that is.
My sister in law had cancer and died in 1990. She exhaused her health insurance and had to divorce her husband in the midst of all the crap she went through so she could go on Medicaid. It still bankrupted her family. So F*CKED up.

I'd rather pay for health care then IRAQ or the shitting 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug Plan. Oh yeah, we don't pay for those either.

I forgot to add, if we can get a public option in there sometime soon that would be even better!

[SallyLightfoot]

[b]DJCraig[/b] wrote: "I never referred to the Health Care Bill's taxes."

Right, and I asked what you were referring to. I appreciate that you posted something specific for me to address.

The Health Care law (now being referred to as the ACA "Affordable Care Act") covers its expenses via a combination of savings and revenues (taxes). One of the new taxes, but not the largest, is a tax on individuals making more than $200k (or joint-filers making greater than $250k).

From what I can tell, all of the examples you cite in your post (from "Certainly not all of these those made to the final draft...") refer to this same thing-- the taxes imposed on the wealthiest 2%.

<img src="http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Fiscal%20Facts/20100326-L-healthcare_finan.jpg" height="552" width="750">

With regard to the rest of your post, you seem to be in denial about who is chiefly responsible for the current deficit. I know I've cited links (from both liberal and conservative sources) asserting that the majority of the deficit came from the Bush administration. If you have any counterfactuals you'd like to present, I'd appreciate it.

Lastly, you mumbled something early on about me prejudging you as a racist. I don't know which topic or conversation you're referring to, but I don't recall any intent on my part to make it personal. If you make racist/bigoted comments, I may call you on it; if you disagree with that, you're perfectly semi-capable of defending yourself. [:D]

[SallyLightfoot]

[quote][i]Originally posted by marie3[/i]
<br>My sister in law had cancer and died in 1990. She exhaused her health insurance and had to divorce her husband in the midst of all the crap she went through so she could go on Medicaid. It still bankrupted her family. So F*CKED up.

I forgot to add, if we can get a public option in there sometime soon that would be even better!
[/quote]Wow, that is a sad story, marie3. Rep Alan Grayson (FL) has a bill to enable Medicare for all-- but all comers under 65 must pay into it at cost. I think that would be a great alternative to a public option for now. If you're interested, check it out and contact your representative to ask him/her to support it.

[marie3]

[quote][i]Originally posted by SallyLightfoot[/i]
<br>[quote][i]Originally posted by marie3[/i]
<br>My sister in law had cancer and died in 1990. She exhaused her health insurance and had to divorce her husband in the midst of all the crap she went through so she could go on Medicaid. It still bankrupted her family. So F*CKED up.

I forgot to add, if we can get a public option in there sometime soon that would be even better!
[/quote]Wow, that is a sad story, marie3. Rep Alan Grayson (FL) has a bill to enable Medicare for all-- but all comers under 65 must pay into it at cost. I think that would be a great alternative to a public option for now. If you're interested, check it out and contact your representative to ask him/her to support it.
[/quote]

Funny, I remember when my mother in law was alive she had a framed response letter from President Reagan on her wall. She had written him a letter stating the situation my sister in law was going through at the time and how it was unfair. She felt since she and my father in law were WWII vets, (She in the Waves, and my father in law a U.S. Marine with a purple heart) that they fought for their country and her family shouldn't be treated this way by health insurance companies because her daughter was fighting cancer for 10 years. Amazing that the situation hadn't changed in all these years.

Anyway, yes, I have heard about Alan Greysons bill. Looks as though he is trying to give the Republicans a heart attack.

[SallyLightfoot]

Worth noting:

Ezra Klein: <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/04/will_the_irs_need_16000_new_ag.html" target="_new">Will the IRS need 16,000 new agents to enforce health-care reform?</a>

From <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/" target="_new2">Factcheck.org</a>:

[b]Q[/b]: Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents to enforce the health care law?

[b]A[/b]: No. The law requires the IRS mostly to hand out tax credits, not collect penalties. The claim of 16,500 new agents stems from a partisan analysis based on guesswork and false assumptions, and compounded by outright misrepresentation.