Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
At any rate - you are mistaken. The law only prohibits CRIMINAL penalties for failure to pay the penalty. The IRS may still garnish your wages and seize your bank assets. These are not criminal penalties. You will not go to prison nor have a criminal record - but your property will be seized in order to pay for it.
How is seizing your property or threatening to any less like treating someone as a criminal???
OPPD, given that the religious conditions on opt-out exemptions require someone to be a member of a religious group since 1999 where the members pay for each other's health care costs --
Can you please explain how this is NOT govt regulation or discrimination based on religion?
That if certain people qualify for exemption based on a narrow condition of religious nature, while other people who aren't of this faith category must either pay a fine or be subject to having property seized, etc.
the result being a two-tier system.....a good one and a bad one....
i'd like to know why the Amish are exempt from Obamacare.....but not other religions like the Catholics who protest paying for abortion....?
Bad care, as opposed to no care because people won't go see a doctor knowing the cost.
I think it's crap that anyone was exempted at all. If they're going to shove this down my throat then I want it shoved down every last throat in america. Unions, Amish, catholics, politicians, everyone.
another group that was exempted........Muslims.....
Chimpy McShrub stole the Medicare D bill, lock, stock and barrel, from the democratics....It was 100% the bill socialist stooges like you championed for years.The Precription Drug Bill was championed by the Bush 43 Admin and Big Pharma, and not socialist stooges, like me.
Edit: as to the rest, I doubt you'd know a fact if it was giving you head.
Speaking of not knowing a fact if one was hit over the head with it.
You're the one who introduced the vulgarity, comrade...I merely turned it around on you.Oh, and democratics don't deep throat BgPharma dick?GOP caucuses in both chambers who deep-throated Big Pharma dick and made certain Medicare Part D reforms would not be included in the Senate-passed healthcare bill, which due to the Scott Brown experiment in MA, turned into so-called "Obamacare," since the President and Pelosi pulled a fast one on the Tea Party retards by bringing the half-baked Senate bill to the floor in Congress, and at least getting some things done.
Bet you're gonna save the blue dress too, aren't ya?
Yes; many did, especially Lieberman and many of the Blue Dogs, one of which controlled a key committee.
As for the rest of your rightie rhetoric, how should I respond? Hmmm? Righties are big poopie-heads? Is that the level you like to "debate" on, Sparky?
Astonishing. Fall down much, pal?
But neither you, nor luddly, nor any of the other PPACA apologists droning on about so-called 'facts', have pointed out any specific fact I'm wrong about.
Link please, or you're talking through your hat.Oh, suuuuuure...The fact that a gubmint program costs more than 10 times more than it was claimed to (counting inflation, BTW), it's all the fault of the marketplace!Attaboy, Oddball. Let's relive the 60s, shall we?
Now then, whoduh ever thunk that healthcare costs, driven largely by insurance costs, would outpace inflation by a factor of two, and approach nearly 20 cents of every dollar in our economy? Not me. And seemingly, not folks in LBJ's Admin. Go figure.
Meanwhile, in other of them commie-lefty regimes, like France, Switzerland, etc., who have single-payer and lack all the terrific cost saving / service improving benefits of a for-profit market, they pay about half and live longer while also having about half as many still-born little miracle, on average, as we do.
Go figure.
Goddamn, are you Marxist stooges a hoot!
Actually, healthcare is in many ways, monopolized, and not governed by market forces. An example is the little (oops, huge) gift to Big Pharma we've come to know and love as Medicare Part D, or the Prescription Drug Bill ... oft sighted as the worst piece of legislation ever passed, fiscally speaking. No bidding on prescription drugs, as all other countries can, so we pay their asking price, whatever it is. And that's not a marketplace. It's a legislated monopoly, in effect.
It's bringing down costs, just not nearly enough.
And if it makes you feel better to call Pelosi or Obama or anyone else a liar to prove some sort of point that makes you feel better than that's fine.
Let me know when you're ready to talk about the issues and not focus on trying to make the other team look stupid.
Gee, my health insurance premiums went up 20% this last renewal. Where are the cost savings? Obama promised reductions in premiums. No one has seen their premiums go down. No one.
Weird, I didn't realize the program was fully implemented. You must be on the fast track.
You're the one who introduced the vulgarity, comrade...I merely turned it around on you.Oh, and democratics don't deep throat BgPharma dick?
Bet you're gonna save the blue dress too, aren't ya?
Yes; many did, especially Lieberman and many of the Blue Dogs, one of which controlled a key committee.
As for the rest of your rightie rhetoric, how should I respond? Hmmm? Righties are big poopie-heads? Is that the level you like to "debate" on, Sparky?
Astonishing. Fall down much, pal?
Fact remains that Medicare D was a program stolen from the democratics, and the only reason you hated it was because it got signed by a socialist stooge with an (R) next to his name.
I assume you mean "you" as in "dem dirty liberals" and not me specifically?
Feeling shy about telling us what you think is wrong with Obamacare?
Not at all.
I don't think the mandate will persuade people to purchase insruance, because more than likely the tax will be much lower than the cost of insurance. There are serious flaws in the rebate/price regulation portion of the bill, which worries me. The massive list of people and companies eligible for waivers unsettles me, again cost is to go down because so many will opt in but I think the opt in will be far less than anticipated. I also think as a whole we should be willing to admend it when issues arise, like the issue of insurance companies not selling child only polices because of the ACA. If we can't move quickly( by government standards) to amend the bill to the many problems that will naturally occur when you restructure an industry as large as insurance then Americans will suffer huge burdens.
My biggest problem is that the GOP want it to fail, I can understand that. However I worry that dems won't want to admit it needs amended and republicans would rather let Americans suffer in the hope that, if it gets really bad, they will get to finally repeal the thing.
Feeling shy about telling us what you think is wrong with Obamacare?
Not at all.
I don't think the mandate will persuade people to purchase insruance, because more than likely the tax will be much lower than the cost of insurance. There are serious flaws in the rebate/price regulation portion of the bill, which worries me. The massive list of people and companies eligible for waivers unsettles me, again cost is to go down because so many will opt in but I think the opt in will be far less than anticipated. I also think as a whole we should be willing to admend it when issues arise, like the issue of insurance companies not selling child only polices because of the ACA. If we can't move quickly( by government standards) to amend the bill to the many problems that will naturally occur when you restructure an industry as large as insurance then Americans will suffer huge burdens.
My biggest problem is that the GOP want it to fail, I can understand that. However I worry that dems won't want to admit it needs amended and republicans would rather let Americans suffer in the hope that, if it gets really bad, they will get to finally repeal the thing.
You've basically covered the central points of what the bill does and correctly identified all the flaws. And then you say your problem is that the GOP wants it to fail. The GOP does not want it to fail. The bill fails on its own for all the reasons you've given, plus some. If you want to "correct" the problems you've identified then you would have to scrap the whole bill and start over.
And btw, welcome to the Republican Party.
But neither you, nor luddly, nor any of the other PPACA apologists droning on about so-called 'facts', have pointed out any specific fact I'm wrong about.
Actually I just did in the post you replied to. Did you read it? Before the EMTALA was passed patients WERE turned away from emergency rooms because of ability to pay. Your claim was that never happened.
The problem with the mandate is not only that the penalty is too small to motivate most of those who choose not to buy health insurance,
I already knew the right wing maintained that what is the best health care program in Mass. Isnt' the same as the rest of the country, but now you are claiming the laws of economics are different in Mass. as well? Because RomneyCare in Mass. has about the same divide between the penalty and the cost of health insurance - yet almost everyone has chosen the insurance over the penalty. Maybe its because health insurance has actual economic value to a person - but a tax penalty does not? Gee whiz, maybe so.
but as written, it is unenforcible. Under the current law the IRS can only attempt to assess the penalty by taking it out of your income tax refund, but by adjusting your withholding, you can avoid having any refund due at the end of the year and so pay no penalty.
You aren't allowed to adjust your withholding willy nilly. Its perjury to lie on your withholding form.
At any rate - you are mistaken. The law only prohibits CRIMINAL penalties for failure to pay the penalty. The IRS may still garnish your wages and seize your bank assets. These are not criminal penalties. You will not go to prison nor have a criminal record - but your property will be seized in order to pay for it.
The penalty will be paid as a federal tax liability on income tax returns and is enforced by the
Treasury. Individuals that fail to pay the penalty will not be subject to criminal penalties, liens
or levies.
I wouldnt be opposed to scrapping the bill and starting over. I also recognize that that is impossible, so now we have to deal with what we have. I say the GOP is a problem, because like you they seem to be working from the "nothing can be done to fix this" standpoint. Perhaps that is so, but since it's already here, perhaps we could try instead of throwing our hands up and waiting until Americans are facing serious healthcare issues before addressing the issue.
Not at all.
I don't think the mandate will persuade people to purchase insruance, because more than likely the tax will be much lower than the cost of insurance. There are serious flaws in the rebate/price regulation portion of the bill, which worries me. The massive list of people and companies eligible for waivers unsettles me, again cost is to go down because so many will opt in but I think the opt in will be far less than anticipated. I also think as a whole we should be willing to admend it when issues arise, like the issue of insurance companies not selling child only polices because of the ACA. If we can't move quickly( by government standards) to amend the bill to the many problems that will naturally occur when you restructure an industry as large as insurance then Americans will suffer huge burdens.
My biggest problem is that the GOP want it to fail, I can understand that. However I worry that dems won't want to admit it needs amended and republicans would rather let Americans suffer in the hope that, if it gets really bad, they will get to finally repeal the thing.
You've basically covered the central points of what the bill does and correctly identified all the flaws. And then you say your problem is that the GOP wants it to fail. The GOP does not want it to fail. The bill fails on its own for all the reasons you've given, plus some. If you want to "correct" the problems you've identified then you would have to scrap the whole bill and start over.
And btw, welcome to the Republican Party.
I wouldnt be opposed to scrapping the bill and starting over. I also recognize that that is impossible, so now we have to deal with what we have. I say the GOP is a problem, because like you they seem to be working from the "nothing can be done to fix this" standpoint. Perhaps that is so, but since it's already here, perhaps we could try instead of throwing our hands up and waiting until Americans are facing serious healthcare issues before addressing the issue.
But neither you, nor luddly, nor any of the other PPACA apologists droning on about so-called 'facts', have pointed out any specific fact I'm wrong about.
Actually I just did in the post you replied to. Did you read it? Before the EMTALA was passed patients WERE turned away from emergency rooms because of ability to pay. Your claim was that never happened.
Heh... better be careful. Simple lies are usually better than complicated ones. Did YOU read that article? I sort of suspect you didn't, since it requires a $125 subscription. In any case, the abstract only mentioned the 'dumping' practice - where people with questionable ability to pay are transferred to charity or public hospitals. Does the rest of the article discuss the frequency of people dying in alleys (the usual image invoked by health care statists) for inability to pay?
No, I don't believe that. I've looked into this (though, of course I wouldn't want to do any of your research for you
But even if we leave it in place, it's not a significant driver of inflation because - as pretty much any doctor or hospital will tell you - it hasn't changed their practices.
The Law That Changed Everything—and It Isn't the One You Think"Indefensible" is an appropriate term. Ron Anderson, M.D., president and CEO of Parkland Memorial Health and Hospital System in Dallas, was the medical director of the emergency department at Parkland in the early 1980s, and he knew all about dumping. "I would see patients transferred with knives still in their backs, or women giving birth at the door of the hospital, simply because they were uninsured."
"She does not have any insurance, [and] the hospital does not want to take care of her, OK? This is a private, capitalistic, money-making hospital. They're on my back to have her transferred."
? ObamaCare IS RomneyCare!
and they are both fucked in the head wrong.
Much better to have taxpayers foot the bill when people can't pay their emergency room bills.
All the folks that oppose the individual mandate.
and they are both fucked in the head wrong.
Much better to have taxpayers foot the bill when people can't pay their emergency room bills.
much better....for whom?
