Which "Cadillac" health plans would Obama want to tax?

[Bluebear]

"Taxing Cadillac plans that don't make people healthier, but just take money out of their pockets because they're paying more for insurance than they need to -- that's actually a good idea and that helps bend the cost curve," Obama said in an interview with NPR, excerpts of which were on the NPR website.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BG46S20091223

====

I don't understand what health insurance plan "makes you healthier"?

[FreakinDJ]

1. Great 20 yrs of being "Taxed" with UnReimbursed Medical Expenses

the cost of Emergency Room care for the Uninsured. Now the Fucking Government is going to Tax me some more

[shadowknows69]

36. I hereby apologize for the unisured burdening you.

Believe it or not some of us uninsured that have had no option but the ER have also worked our asses off and been taxed for it.

[napi21]

2. So far this is the best I could find.

It's widely agreed that health reform's best remaining hope for "bending the cost curve" downward is the Senate's proposed 40 percent excise tax on "Cadillac" health plans valued at more than $8,500 (for an individual) and $23,000 (for a family).

http://www.slate.com/id/2239592/

[laughingliberal]

29. Damn it, our premium was $14,400 a year and it was pretty basic stuff

80 percent coverage with a $2000 per person $4000 per family out of pocked expenses. Deductible was $1000. What are we going to be getting? Some form of high deductible catastrophic crap?

[David Zephyr]

43. I'm in the same boat because of my age.

I will now be taxed on a marginal health care policy filled with deductibles, caps, co-pays and that doesn't include dental. That's a Cadillac plan? I'm already paying over $8,500 a year for this "Cadillac" so I guess my taxes will make it even more.

This is a shitty bill.

The Democrats are going to go down in flames in November.

They pissed away a year by not creating new jobs and by still letting the foreclosure time bomb continue. But they brought us mandated corporate health "care" with taxes on top of it all.

[yourout]

3. Incredibly stupid idea......lets hammer the unions and health care workers..

[laughingliberal]

30. Yes and unionized health care workers shall be hammered twice nt

[dana_b]

38. thanks - I can't wait.

:sarcasm: <-- as if I needed to post that

[dflprincess]

4. Apparently, the plans some of the unions have hung on to

by negotiating away wage increases.

Taxing working people - that's the way to pay for this. :sarcasm:

[Eric J in MN]

5. If a union successfully fought for the the employer to pay...

...over $8,500 per employee per year for an insurance policy, that means the policy doesn't "make people healthier" according to that twisted logic.

[AwakeAtLast]

6. And now my teacher's union will demand higher pay

We've given concessions in pay for better healthcare for years. That will end now.

[Bluebear]

8. You said it. Pay concessions for YEARS to keep health benefits, only to be taxed now?

This is a Democratic administration saying this would be a GOOD idea?

[Xicano]

7. Bulletin from my union:

Sorry for the little bit of redaction. Its not appropriate for me to post names of my co-workers or details on dollar figures of our benefits.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Since LGBT couples are not recognized as families, we would pay tax at $8,500

LGBTs have had to endure Obama's shenanigans with Rick Warren and Donnie McClurkin, and his paralysis on DADT and DOMA, and now we are going to get taxed because we are not considered "families." What a crock!

[Xicano]

24. I am so disappointed at our leaders right now.

What sell outs they are. The way they treat the poor and middle class people is criminal. :(

[Bluebear]

28. +1

[RobinA]

40. Well, I'm Single

and I guess I'll get taxed because I'm not a family. And not for the first time.

[David Zephyr]

44. A crock indeed.

The Democrats will be going down in November when as the American People learn more about this toxic corporate/government (fascist) bill.

[Romulox]

9. It's a thinly veiled attack on the UAW. nt

[FreakinDJ]

11. and every other union worker too

[Bluebear]

12. SOLIDARITY

[FreakinDJ]

20. Hate to say it - but if the Dems do this - their toast in 2010/2012

The union membership will never trust them again.

Already their has been significant pressure to break off AFL-CIO and support union sympathizing GOP politicians. That was the reason the several National Unions broke off from the AFL-CIO in 2006. This will gaurantee many of the Construction Trades to do the same

[Romulox]

14. Agreed. But Rattner, Geithner, Summers, and Obama all seem to have a special animosity for the UAW

After all, it is Obama who forced GM, Chrysler into bankruptcy, rejecting union contracts in the process and then shortly thereafter made a special appearance on television to make an impassioned argument for the "sanctity" of taxpayer funded Wall Street bonuses.

Like I said: I believe his administration has a special animosity for the UAW.

[Bluebear]

17. As you go, we go, brother.

UAW is the big target but it's just the big enchilada to bust all of our unions.

[Romulox]

26. I've never set a foot on a shop floor. I'm just a supportive civilian.

But I respect and return the sentiment.

[Bluebear]

27. Much appreciated.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Union rank-and-file won't stand for this shit, no matter what is posted in DU

about party loyalty.

No one has been more loyal than organized labour--this deal will fracture the long time relationship with the Democratic Party.

[FreakinDJ]

13. Membership + Spouse makes up a voting block the size AARP

Taxing the Union Health Benefits would be a Death Blow to the Democratic party

I thought this was a "Poison Pill" the Dems would never accept. Oh well, if they want to go through with it, its their funeral

[Bluebear]

16. Now it's a "good idea".

Up is down, DJ.

[IndianaGreen]

19. It is their funeral if the House fails to strip this provision from the bill

which will be difficult to do when you have a President thinking that it is swell to screw the workers of this country.

[Romulox]

18. "labor" rolled over for NAFTA, MFN China, Bankster bailouts, and soon...mandatory private ins.

:shrug:

[FreakinDJ]

21. Wrong - Labor did not - The AFL-CIO did

and as a result the Labor Unions have begun to break off the AFL-CIO. They may have the notoriety and lobbyist, but without OUR money they ain't shit

[Hannah Bell]

32. except "labor" now a passingly small portion of the private workforce, &

public unions (e.g. teachers) being phased out through the backdoor of privatizing public services.

yes, afl-cio = company union, sold out workers for decades.

[FreakinDJ]

35. There are enough of us to make sure Dems lose big time

Less you forget the payback the Dems received in 94 for NAFTA

[Eric J in MN]

23. Hurting Labor by passing NAFTA didn't work out well for the Democrats in 1994. NT

NT

[Romulox]

25. On the contrary--I think it was a precise plan that worked out EXACTLY as intended.

We live in an age in which politicians serve corporations and freely chose their own constituents. Democrats, by and large, have decided that working class people are passe, and have decided to court a much wealthier constituency.

Which can easily be observed by the disparity in the bailout offered to Detroit vs. the one offered Manhattan.

[Bluebear]

39. Absolutely

[Karmadillo]

22. Unions are a key to the rejuvenation of the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.

Let's hope this slap in the face will wake us up to what has happened to the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. There's a powerful coalition to be built if we're willing to do the work of building it.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

31. He channeled Hillary's mandates and now McCain's taxing. Rah rah sis boom bah!

[coti]

33. Yep. Pretty amazing. nt

[Thothmes]

34. Not sure. But I believe you can bet on the fact that

it will not be the health plans of the Representatives and Senators of the United States Congress.

[Bluebear]

37. Definitely a given!

[DemoTex]

41. Will I get a tax credit for my "Edsel" pension plan that the company terminated?

My airline terminated the pilots' pension plan on 3/31/2003 (and then the CEO walked with $10MIL+). Maybe my losses there can offset any health insurance plan taxes (although I'd describe my plan as a Ford Crown Vic shrinking toward the size of a Ford Escort).

http://image.automotive.com/f/junkyardcrawl/10742728+pheader/ccrp_0805_01_z+1958_ford_edsel+junkyard_ford_edsels.jpg
My pension plan


My health care plan

[David Zephyr]

42. From U.S. News & World Report: A Cadillac plan triggers taxing when the premium is over $8,500

Since my health premium (I'm no youngster) exceeds $700 a month, I guess I will now be paying taxes on my "cadillac" plan. I didn't know it was a Cadillac because there are deductibles, co-pays, caps and my Cadillac doesn't include dental care. Some Cadillac!

But I get to pay taxes on that now. Swell.

What a shitty piece of legislation this turned out to be. Shitty.

"New taxes. To help pay for increased coverage, a number of long-standing tax credits and deductions would decline, while taxes on some other benefits would increase. One of the most prominent changes would be a tax on "gold-plated" health insurance plans that provide lavish benefits but are expensive; the threshold at which the surtax would kick in would be $8,500 for an individual's annual premium and $23,000 for a family's. There's a lot of fine print, however, and some people with gold-plated plans would probably end up exempted from the tax. The House bill doesn't tax gold-plated plans, but raises funds through an additional 5.4 percent income tax on individuals earning $500,000 or more per year, and families earning $1,000,000 or more. All of these new taxes are controversial, creating more flash points for negotiators."

[TheWebHead]

45. the idea is that the cadillac plans

where the policyholder has little to no skin in the game is encouraged to gorge on an all you can consume buffet of healthcare with little worry about the cost. it's a system that has worked well with some of our fellow developed economies because we subsidize their at or below cost drugs and their defense budgets.