SPIN METER:

It's a behavior tax. Plain and simple. If you don't act like we demand then you will pay. We can either put you in time out, or we'll take away a bit of your allowance.
 
Damocles said:
It's a behavior tax. Plain and simple. If you don't act like we demand then you will pay. We can either put you in time out, or we'll take away a bit of your allowance.
Click to expand...

In other words a fine or a penalty. Just the same as if you don't have insurance on your car.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
who says that there won't be one coming soon? it's apparently constitutional now to require anyone to buy a service or product.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's not required, you simply get taxed (punished) if you don't do what The Masters tell you to. If you are willing to take the punishment you don't have to do what they say...

;)
 
Damocles said:
Nah, it's not required, you simply get taxed (punished) if you don't do what The Masters tell you to. If you are willing to take the punishment you don't have to do what they say...

;)
Click to expand...

it SHOULD be pretty upsetting that we're basically being threatened with death for not doing whatever the government tells us to do, or not do.
 
Bottom line: you purchase a car but not a basic auto insurance, then you get some serious bills in the event of an accident.

Unlike a car, human beings eventually need some type of medical treatment that is not available OTC. If more money is in the general coffer, then the financial burden is LESS on the society when grandpa keels over or grandma wraps the family car around that tree. Or if you have a slew of folk taken to an emergeny room after a natural disaster, and have of them have no insurance to speak of.

The ONLY people who would pay this "tax" are those who can but refuse to get health insurance. If you can't afford it, then the gov't will assist you.

Flunkies for the insurance lobby are wailing like stuck pigs, yet they are NOT the ones to be affected. It's being thrown around that from 1 to 3% of the population will actually be affected by this tax...which is adjusted to the individual tax return (affordable).

If the insurance companies raise their rates, it's NOT because of AHA. Gee, what about all that "free market will take care of everything" rap? Nothing is impeding "competitve" rates, and what the hell is the reason to raise your rates ahead of the COLA?

Sorry to inform you neocons and teabaggers ( and some libertarian lunkheads), but it's the gov't by,for and of the people....NOT the private corporation alone.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Bottom line: you purchase a car but not a basic auto insurance, then you get some serious bills in the event of an accident.

Unlike a car, human beings eventually need some type of medical treatment that is not available OTC. If more money is in the general coffer, then the financial burden is LESS on the society when grandpa keels over or grandma wraps the family car around that tree. Or if you have a slew of folk taken to an emergeny room after a natural disaster, and have of them have no insurance to speak of.

The ONLY people who would pay this "tax" are those who can but refuse to get health insurance. If you can't afford it, then the gov't will assist you.

Flunkies for the insurance lobby are wailing like stuck pigs, yet they are NOT the ones to be affected. It's being thrown around that from 1 to 3% of the population will actually be affected by this tax...which is adjusted to the individual tax return (affordable).

If the insurance companies raise their rates, it's NOT because of AHA. Gee, what about all that "free market will take care of everything" rap? Nothing is impeding "competitve" rates, and what the hell is the reason to raise your rates ahead of the COLA?

Sorry to inform you neocons and teabaggers ( and some libertarian lunkheads), but it's the gov't by,for and of the people....NOT the private corporation alone.
Click to expand...

Did you eve hear of 'tough love'...? Do you know what it means ?

Did you ever hear of the phrase, 'If you can't do the time, don't do the crime'?.....
 
Damocles said:
Wow, your example that we're all the same is this crappy law? I'm stunned. So, before Obamatax was upheld you believed in American Exceptionalism?
Click to expand...

No, just the opposite. I believe that much of American policy, and the consequent justification thereof, is fed from the wellspring of American Exceptionalism. Obamacare is an attempt to say that the US has something to learn from others, it may not be perfect but it can be modified with experience. The Luddites and backwoodsmen in the GOP are incapable of coming up with anything better.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
No, just the opposite. I believe that much of American policy, and the consequent justification thereof, is fed from the wellspring of American Exceptionalism. Obamacare is an attempt to say that the US has something to learn from others, it may not be perfect but it can be modified with experience. The Luddites and backwoodsmen in the GOP are incapable of coming up with anything better.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that before this law was passed you believed that "others" believed in American exceptionalism and take this as a sign that suddenly they do not?...

I think you are misapplying the word.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Bottom line: you purchase a car but not a basic auto insurance, then you get some serious bills in the event of an accident.

Unlike a car, human beings eventually need some type of medical treatment that is not available OTC. If more money is in the general coffer, then the financial burden is LESS on the society when grandpa keels over or grandma wraps the family car around that tree. Or if you have a slew of folk taken to an emergeny room after a natural disaster, and have of them have no insurance to speak of.

The ONLY people who would pay this "tax" are those who can but refuse to get health insurance. If you can't afford it, then the gov't will assist you.

Flunkies for the insurance lobby are wailing like stuck pigs, yet they are NOT the ones to be affected. It's being thrown around that from 1 to 3% of the population will actually be affected by this tax...which is adjusted to the individual tax return (affordable).

If the insurance companies raise their rates, it's NOT because of AHA. Gee, what about all that "free market will take care of everything" rap? Nothing is impeding "competitve" rates, and what the hell is the reason to raise your rates ahead of the COLA?

Sorry to inform you neocons and teabaggers ( and some libertarian lunkheads), but it's the gov't by,for and of the people....NOT the private corporation alone.
Click to expand...

it's amusingly ironic that the Libtardians and their Occupy movement that hate corporations and big company profits with such enmity that they actually tried to shut down NYC are 110% for forcing any and all Americans, who can barely afford food and medication at the same time, to fork over extra monies over to those very same big corporations they say they can't stand.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
who says that there won't be one coming soon? it's apparently constitutional now to require anyone to buy a service or product.
Click to expand...
not thru the Commerce Clause, SCOTUS finally limited that. I imagine we'll see "user fees", and whole bunch of new taxes
( Congress essentially has unlimited taxing powers) -to pay for the huge unfunded mandates coming up. Just my theory.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
No, just the opposite. I believe that much of American policy, and the consequent justification thereof, is fed from the wellspring of American Exceptionalism. Obamacare is an attempt to say that the US has something to learn from others, it may not be perfect but it can be modified with experience. The Luddites and backwoodsmen in the GOP are incapable of coming up with anything better.
Click to expand...
I wonder sometimes about the methodology and logic it takes to swing from the GOP being highly educated and scheming corporatists buying our government on one side, to being the redneck backwoods hicks who are so stupid that they vote against their own interests in the other.
 
annata said:
not thru the Commerce Clause, SCOTUS finally limited that. I imagine we'll see "user fees", and whole bunch of new taxes
( Congress essentially has unlimited taxing powers) -to pay for the huge unfunded mandates coming up. Just my theory.
Click to expand...

and that is such a HUGE difference. it's much easier now to mandate people purchase a 30,000 dollar automobile and if you don't, we'll get a 35,000 dollar tax applied at the end of the year. Those that can't afford to purchase that 30k car will receive a subsidized vehicle at taxpayer expense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top