Obamacare screws the young & healthy

Rana said:
Illegals need a path to citizenship, until that happens, not much can be done.
Click to expand...
Arg.

That would be great as long as I wasn't paying for their welfare.

Why not just open the borders, and our bank accounts to help them.
 
Village Negroe said:
Short answer, YES. Petula
Click to expand...

Short answer, Petulant, is that you are incorrect.

ObamaCare is a law that requires compulsory or mandatory insurance – not healthcare. We are all required to buy insurance that is subsidized by our employers and/or possibly the government.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2013/10/02/obamacare-affordable-care-act-is-not-an-insurance-or-healthcare-problem/
 
Taft2016 said:
So which model do you like best?

The UK model that puts 106 year-old women on 56 month waiting lists for hearing aids, or the Canadian model that drives the wealthy and politicians to leave the country for treatment?
Click to expand...


I'd have to say my choice is the Canadian system.

Any system that forces the wealthy to wait in the same line as the poor gets my vote.

If the wealthy don't like waiting in line then they can leave Canada and everyone behind them in line moves up one spot.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
I'd have to say my choice is the Canadian system.

Any system that forces the wealthy to wait in the same line as the poor gets my vote.
Click to expand...

And that's typical of liberalism.

Initially they sell a program by promising to bring everyone up, but in reality they just drag those at the top down.

The best they can ever do is to spread misery around equally and kill incentive to excel.
 
christiefan915 said:
Q: Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents to enforce the health care law?

A: 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.

FULL ANSWER
This wildly inaccurate claim started as an inflated, partisan assertion that 16,500 new IRS employees might be required to administer the new law. That devolved quickly into a claim, made by some Republican lawmakers, that 16,500 IRS "agents" wouldbe required. Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas even claimed in a televised interview that all 16,500 would be carrying guns. None of those claims is true.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/
Click to expand...

http://watchdog.org/92975/irs-leviathan-expands-to-enforce-obamacare/

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Still mired in scandal for its mishandling of nonprofit political groups, the Internal Revenue Service is prepping for a new role: chief enforcement arm of the Affordable Care Act.

That task will require new agents — 6,700, the IRS figures — and more money — about $1 billion more than the current budget.

Confronted with the tax agency’s 9-percent increase in its 2014 budget, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., blasted Deputy IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel at a meeting of the House Committee on Ways and Means Thursday morning.

After reading off a long list of instances of waste, fraud, excess and abuse at the agency over the past several years, Ryan demanded to know how the IRS felt it had the “moral authority” to ask for more money. He actually sounded almost hurt by the request.

Werfel meekly responded that the additional funding was essential to the agency’s expanded enforcement mandate.

The agency’s latest funding boost follows an increase of nearly $1.5 billion and 1,200 agents already dedicated to the implementation of ACA.

More commonly known as Obamacare, the ACA contains 18 separate tax provisions and 47 monitoring functions. It will fall on the IRS to collect taxes and to enforce one of the key provisions of the law — ensuring that every individual in the country has health insurance, and levying a tax on those that do not. It will also be responsible for collecting taxes from employers that do not offer insurance, manufacturers of medical devices and drug companies.
Click to expand...

And that's just for starters....
 
Taft2016 said:
http://watchdog.org/92975/irs-leviathan-expands-to-enforce-obamacare/



And that's just for starters....
Click to expand...

Still wrong.

The Treasury Department on Feb. 14 released the IRS budget request for fiscal year 2012 that shows the agency is seeking 1,269 full-time equivalent employees (FTEs) at a cost of $473 million to help implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. That includes 291 IRS agents, most of them (193) to "ensure accurate delivery of tax credits." For more information, read our Ask FactCheck, "IRS and the Health Care Law, Part II."

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/irs-and-the-health-care-law-part-ii/
 
Taft2016 said:
And, as long as we're on the subject, your employer matches all of those contributions throughout your working life... so twice as much of your money becomes the government's.
Click to expand...
Could you link me to a site that makes the case for the govt. keeping the SS money? Thanks.
 
Taft2016 said:
Or even just rework it.

You know those 16,000 new IRS agents hired to police the individual mandate? Instead, send them out to collect emergency room bills from deadbeats. To garnish their paychecks. Repossess their cars. Withhold their earned income tax credit. Turn off their cable TV, turn off their iPhones, etc.
Click to expand...
No need. Why not just demand a credit card, or cash before services are rendered if you don't have insurance?
 
Taft2016 said:
Suppose there was a system in place that offered you the option of taking a catastrophic type policy, which covered hospitalizations, emergencies, surgeries, etc. But when you went to the doctor's office for a checkup, etc., you paid out of pocket?

And that by taking this $1000 option offered by your employer, instead of the more expensive $8K more comprehensive policy .... you were allowed to put the $7K difference into a tax free medical savings IRA-type account? So by the time you arrived at Medicare age your dependency on the government largesse would be dramatically reduced?

Sound good?

Of course, I just explained why it will never happen; it will reduce dependency on government largesse.
Click to expand...
Why do you think there aren't those type of catastrophic policies for young healthy people now? We aren't seeing claims that they don't exist.

We're seeing claims that muddy the waters by citing out of pocket expenses for our youth.

There's no out of pocket, if there's no usage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top