Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lets say apples cost $10.
Theres 100 people who need apples, but only 50 people are paying for every person to have one.
So each person paying is paying double what they should have to.
The government passes a law saying everyone needs to contribute into the apple fund, thereby distributing the costs more evenly across the populace. The law also has regulations concerning what the apple corporation is allowed to charge per apple.
In response to the new costs the business is taking on, it attempts to protect profits by scaring everyone into thinking apple prices will skyrocket if the law is passed (and even years afterward).
I'm not sure whats so difficult to understand about this. With everyone paying into the system, its cheaper for everyone. The multi-trillion dollar healthcare industry knows this, but also knows its profits will take a dive when they are forced to insure people who might actually get sick.
Costs are going to rise initially, then fall, and stabilize. Its basic mathematics.
Here's the real deal: 85 people of 100 have an apple now. Instead of figuring out how to get an apple for the 15 people who do not have one, the government takes away the 85 apples from the 85 people who already had one. Then it hopes that the youngest people will be happy to pay double under the "Affordable Apple Act," and that everybody else will be happy to have a way better apple than they ever had, wanted or needed in their lives--and that by overcharging for that, there would be enough money left over (even after the apple-sellers book record profits) so that all 100 would end up with an apple.
Last edited by marcopolo; 11-13-2013 at 09:32 AM..
Lets say apples cost $10.
Theres 100 people who need apples, but only 50 people are paying for every person to have one.
So each person paying is paying double what they should have to.
The government passes a law saying everyone needs to contribute into the apple fund, thereby distributing the costs more evenly across the populace. The law also has regulations concerning what the apple corporation is allowed to charge per apple.
In response to the new costs the business is taking on, it attempts to protect profits by scaring everyone into thinking apple prices will skyrocket if the law is passed (and even years afterward).
I'm not sure whats so difficult to understand about this. With everyone paying into the system, its cheaper for everyone. The multi-trillion dollar healthcare industry knows this, but also knows its profits will take a dive when they are forced to insure people who might actually get sick.
Costs are going to rise initially, then fall, and stabilize. Its basic mathematics.
you left out some parts.
stuff like, government deciding that some of the apples are too small and too cheap for the public so those have been removed and replaced with larger more expensive apples.
you also have suggested that everyone is being asked to pay. That isnt true. a big bunch of apple eaters are getting their apples paid for by other people who have more apple money. Now for those gettng free apples and those at the high end, this isnt a terrible problem.
but those in the middle who now must pay for larger more expensive apples they neither need nor want, the impact is they can no longer afford any apples, and there is no one out there to buy them apples.
other than that your false silly apple story doesnt relate to anything that looks like reality. but thanks for letting us all know you are part of the uninformed majority!
Lets say apples cost $10.
Theres 100 people who need apples, but only 50 people are paying for every person to have one.
So each person paying is paying double what they should have to.
The government passes a law saying everyone needs to contribute into the apple fund, thereby distributing the costs more evenly across the populace. The law also has regulations concerning what the apple corporation is allowed to charge per apple.
In response to the new costs the business is taking on, it attempts to protect profits by scaring everyone into thinking apple prices will skyrocket if the law is passed (and even years afterward).
I'm not sure whats so difficult to understand about this. With everyone paying into the system, its cheaper for everyone. The multi-trillion dollar healthcare industry knows this, but also knows its profits will take a dive when they are forced to insure people who might actually get sick.
Costs are going to rise initially, then fall, and stabilize. Its basic mathematics.
First of all its not math that is the problem.
The cost of the apples come from many factors and if apples were offered in other forms, the price of apples would go down. But since the government is regulating the apples, where you can buy the apples and how the apples get delivered that is why they cost $10. Now making laws to tell someone they must BUY apples only brings about the limit of choices and solutions to meeting the needs to people. Some people don't need the apple and would be OK with just the juice. Some people who have a serious sickness and or need more apples are going to have to pay. But the question is should the government take other peoples money via force to pay for the apples or should free people choose to donate, or via the lottery system via non profit to help fund these costs and offset the price of those who can't afford apples.
This is not a math problem its a freedom problem of which government and insurance companies have been limiting for sometime now!
Last edited by LibertyandJusticeforAll; 11-13-2013 at 10:12 AM..
Lets say apples cost $10.
Theres 100 people who need apples, but only 50 people are paying for every person to have one.
So each person paying is paying double what they should have to.
The government passes a law saying everyone needs to contribute into the apple fund, thereby distributing the costs more evenly across the populace. The law also has regulations concerning what the apple corporation is allowed to charge per apple.
In response to the new costs the business is taking on, it attempts to protect profits by scaring everyone into thinking apple prices will skyrocket if the law is passed (and even years afterward).
I'm not sure whats so difficult to understand about this. With everyone paying into the system, its cheaper for everyone. The multi-trillion dollar healthcare industry knows this, but also knows its profits will take a dive when they are forced to insure people who might actually get sick.
Costs are going to rise initially, then fall, and stabilize. Its basic mathematics.
Now lets say the price of apples goes up to 30 dollars so no one buys the apples and they rot on the shelf making stinking rotten apples that no one wants but have to buy anyway ,
Socialism made easy
And the OP needs to explain who is going to pay for the apples that the free loaders are eating? And why the free loaders are first in line at the apple cart?
we've been paying for the freeloaders the whole time. So you complain.
Then the ACA forces people to participate. So you complain.
If we would've just elected the guy whose healthcare system this is modeled after, we wouldve never had to worry about it.
lol.
just ad hominem your way all the way to irrelevancy, you're about halfway there guys.
Lets say apples cost $10.
Theres 100 people who need apples, but only 50 people are paying for every person to have one.
So each person paying is paying double what they should have to.
The government passes a law saying everyone needs to contribute into the apple fund, thereby distributing the costs more evenly across the populace. The law also has regulations concerning what the apple corporation is allowed to charge per apple.
In response to the new costs the business is taking on, it attempts to protect profits by scaring everyone into thinking apple prices will skyrocket if the law is passed (and even years afterward).
I'm not sure whats so difficult to understand about this. With everyone paying into the system, its cheaper for everyone. The multi-trillion dollar healthcare industry knows this, but also knows its profits will take a dive when they are forced to insure people who might actually get sick.
Costs are going to rise initially, then fall, and stabilize. Its basic mathematics.
Not everyone is paying into the system....... See the report below...... The Congressional Budget Office projects that 7 million people will use the exchanges to obtain private health insurance for 2014, and that 6 million of them will qualify for tax credits.
Seventeen million people will qualify for tax credits to reduce the cost of health insurance under Obamacare, according to a report released Tuesday.
That amounts to about 60 percent of the 29 million people who could make up the market for the health insurance exchanges
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
