View Full Version : So now that the government can prosecute you for not buying health insurace what is next?
A Chevy Volt in every garage.
Solar panels from myriad bankrupt, government financed, campaign money laundering companies on every roof and in every vacant lot.
Forcing us to house the homeless under our own roofs, feed the hungry at our own tables, and clothe the naked from our own closets.
No more soda for you...or chips, dips, and candy.
How about a tax for not listening to Air Amerika talk radio? Fairness act anyone?
Zundfolge
07-05-2012, 13:17
Its even worse than that ... they're going to make us buy GLOCKS (and in 9mm)!
6W4_mgATjHQ
What makes you say they can "prosecute" you for not buying health insurance? I know they can fine (they're saying it's a tax) each person/per year for not having a qualified insurance plan... and I guess the IRS can garnish your accounts if you don't pay your taxes, but what do you know about them "prosecuting" folks?
TEAMRICO
07-05-2012, 13:21
Well, I could use one. I have lots of 9 on hand.
Hopes it is a Glock 17!
"...but baby, I have to get it, it's the law!"
Its even worse than that ... they're going to make us buy GLOCKS (and in 9mm)!
6W4_mgATjHQ
haha good video. Thanks for sharing! [ROFL2]
Zundfolge
07-05-2012, 13:23
What makes you say they can "prosecute" you for not buying health insurance?
If they can fine...er...tax you for the inactivity, they can arrest you and prosecute you for not paying the fine...er...tax.
You can pick nits all day long about how you'll be prosecuted for not paying the fine...er...tax thing, but it still means you can be prosecuted for not buying health insurance.
Furthermore, now that the precedent has been set there will be plenty of laws coming down the pike that force you to do something or be fined...er...taxed.
actually all the IRS can do about this one specific "tax" is to deduct it from any refund you would have gotten. They cannot actively go after you for it, garnish wages, etc.
If you make sure you have to write them a check each year you could get away with not paying the tax for not having insurance.
If they can fine...er...tax you for the inactivity, they can arrest you and prosecute you for not paying the fine...er...tax.
You can pick nits all day long about how you'll be prosecuted for not paying the fine...er...tax thing, but it still means you can be prosecuted for not buying health insurance.
Furthermore, now that the precedent has been set there will be plenty of laws coming down the pike that force you to do something or be fined...er...taxed.
I agree with your concern, and I'm abjectly opposed to this BS health-care law... I've just not heard you can be arrested and prosecuted for that (until now). I guess if I were to think more realistically, I would realize that someone can be arrested for anything the government wants them to be arrested for, so of course they can...
actually all the IRS can do about this one specific "tax" is to deduct it from any refund you would have gotten. They cannot actively go after you for it, garnish wages, etc.
If you make sure you have to write them a check each year you could get away with not paying the tax for not having insurance.
That was my understanding as well, but we all know if you make yourself a target for the government (IRS included) they can make an example out of you for whatever reasons they want...so I respect Zundfolge's point.
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 13:41
I agree with your concern, and I'm abjectly opposed to this BS health-care law... I've just not heard you can be arrested and prosecuted for that (until now). I guess if I were to think more realistically, I would realize that someone can be arrested for anything the government wants them to be arrested for, so of course they can...
It will be treated like any other tax, brother. Not paying your taxes is a crime.
Good video. West is a smart guy.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 13:42
If they can fine...er...tax you for the inactivity, they can arrest you and prosecute you for not paying the fine...er...tax.
You can pick nits all day long about how you'll be prosecuted for not paying the fine...er...tax thing, but it still means you can be prosecuted for not buying health insurance.
Furthermore, now that the precedent has been set there will be plenty of laws coming down the pike that force you to do something or be fined...er...taxed.
No, you cannot ever be arrested or prosecuted in any way, shape or form. The worst they can do is take it out of any future refunds until it's paid off. They can't even garnish wages for it.
It's amazing how little people know about something yet still feel the need to ignorantly bitch about it.
I am not happy about the law, but at least I took the time to learn about it before I passed judgement.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 13:44
It will be treated like any other tax, brother. Not paying your taxes is a crime.
Good video. West is a smart guy.
No, it's not like any other tax. Please do some research. The worst they can ever do for not paying it is take it out of your tax refund. If you don't get a refund there is literally nothing they can do about it until you do get a refund.
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 13:46
No, you cannot ever be arrested or prosecuted in any way, shape or form. The worst they can do is take it out of any future refunds until it's paid off. They can't even garnish wages for it.
It's amazing how little people know about something yet still feel the need to ignorantly bitch about it.
I am not happy about the law, but at least I took the time to learn about it before I passed judgement.
What in the world would lead you to believe something like that? Are there other taxes to which you are beholden that you can simply opt out of, or do you think because this is a new tax we'll all be on the honor system for paying it?
Seriously, enlighten us as to how this is an optional tax. Failing that, please describe any piece of legislation that has ever been handed down that the government has no ability to enforce.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 13:53
What in the world would lead you to believe something like that? Are there other taxes to which you are beholden that you can simply opt out of, or do you think because this is a new tax we'll all be on the honor system for paying it?
Seriously, enlighten us as to how this is an optional tax. Failing that, please describe any piece of legislation that has ever been handed down that the government has no ability to enforce.
I believe that because I actually did research into the law instead of just amusing it would be like any other tax.
It's not an optional tax, I never said that so I have no idea why you are saying that. I simply said that the punishment for not paying it is not like other taxes. Go read the law instead of listening to Fox News.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/07/03/some-tax-few-will-face-obamacare-uninsured-penalty-and-irs-hamstrung-to-collect/
read that article, it clearly spells out how little authority the government will have to enforce the law. Or I have the appropriate excerpt below
"Finally, there is the issue of whether the IRS can collect the tax if someone refuses to either buy insurance or pay the fine. The ACA says the IRS should enforce the law by imposing a tax penalty—but then effectively blocks the agency from using most of the tools it normally uses to go after tax scofflaws.
The ACA bars the IRS from bringing a criminal enforcement case against someone who refuses to pay the non-insurance penalty. And it makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for it to enforce a tax lien. Law professors Jordan Barry and Bryan Camp have a nice piece in Tax Notes explaining it all.
That leaves only one tool—the IRS can subtract the penalty from any refund it owes a taxpayer. But that applies only if the IRS happens to owe somebody a refund. These days, two-thirds of taxpayers get one, but it is usually their choice."
We need a middle finger smiley!
Just sickening...
Go read the law instead of listening to Fox News.
I've heard this before... but can't put my finger on it. Oh! That's right! Libtards constantly spew sh*t like this all the time. While no, any news outlet is not a great place to get full, factual information from, Fox is not the worst place (it's better than CNN). Tax treated normally or not, it's still a taxation for not having something and it is wrong. Now, aren't you supposed to be at Red Rocks right now for your hippy fest? [Coffee]
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 14:06
Just because you found some internet news article paraphrasing the bill for you, doesn't make your analysis true, nor does it justify your holier-than-thou attitude. For all the "research" you did that you're so proud of, I can probably find internet news articles from less left-leaning sources saying the exact opposite.
While I have read quite a bit of the actual bill, I admit I have not read all the pages of the ACA, so I don't know that you (or Forbes) are wrong, but I find it highly unlikely. I will be profoundly surprised the day the U.S. Government levies a tax that they can't enforce.
i dont know why we couldnt do what the whole rest of the world does and offer free healthcare instead of this crazy shit
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 14:15
i dont know why we couldnt do what the whole rest of the world does and offer free healthcare instead of this crazy shit
That's sarcasm, right?
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 14:19
Just because you found some internet news article paraphrasing the bill for you, doesn't make your analysis true, nor does it justify your holier-than-thou attitude. For all the "research" you did that you're so proud of, I can probably find internet news articles from less left-leaning sources saying the exact opposite.
While I have read quite a bit of the actual bill, I admit I have not read all the pages of the ACA, so I don't know that you (or Forbes) are wrong, but I find it highly unlikely. I will be profoundly surprised the day the U.S. Government levies a tax that they can't enforce.
I did far more research than that. I just found the quickest and easiest source I could find that had all of the important info, I had never even seen that article before I read it to see if it had the info I wanted. You can go find any number of other sources that say the same thing, it's the truth. If you can find a reliable source that contradicts it I will happily read and consider it.
And I don't know what world you live in, but telling people to actually do research and know what they are talking about is not "holier-than-thou", it's common sense. It no different than the "guns are bad" crowd that I am sure almost everyone here has to deal with. I just in general get sick of seeing people ranting about this and that when they clearly don't have the knowledge base to be talking about an issue.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 14:20
i dont know why we couldnt do what the whole rest of the world does and offer free healthcare instead of this crazy shit
Nothing is ever free, they pay for it one way or another. In general it's higher overall tax rates so everyone is paying for it whether the want and use it or not.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 14:27
I've heard this before... but can't put my finger on it. Oh! That's right! Libtards constantly spew sh*t like this all the time. While no, any news outlet is not a great place to get full, factual information from, Fox is not the worst place (it's better than CNN). Tax treated normally or not, it's still a taxation for not having something and it is wrong. Now, aren't you supposed to be at Red Rocks right now for your hippy fest? [Coffee]
Yes it is wrong, but you can not ever, in any way be prosecuted for disobeying. That is all I was saying.
As for which news station is the worst that is usually colored by your political beliefs. Libtards will say fox is the worst, conservatards say CNN in the worst. As a moderate I think they are all pretty equal is levels of bullshit and none of them are worth watching/trusting. It's all just about which agenda you buy into.
Rucker61
07-05-2012, 14:31
Yes it is wrong, but you can not ever, in any way be prosecuted for disobeying. That is all I was saying.
As for which news station is the worst that is usually colored by your political beliefs. Libtards will say fox is the worst, conservatards say CNN in the worst. As a moderate I think they are all pretty equal is levels of bullshit and none of them are worth watching/trusting. It's all just about which agenda you buy into.
That's why I don't watch TV news. As far as I'm concerned, the two most unbiased news sources are The Economist and the Christian Science Monitor.
Circuits
07-05-2012, 14:33
Yes it is wrong, but you can not ever, in any way be prosecuted for disobeying. That is all I was saying.
ever and any way are pretty blanket statements
If there's a high level of noncompliance, some future congress will simply change that inconvenient non-prosecute clause as easily as they inserted it in the first place.
And it all started with this!!
http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss170/waxthis/Obamacare-Celebration.jpg
[Rant1]
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 14:35
I did far more research than that. I just found the quickest and easiest source I could find that had all of the important info, I had never even seen that article before I read it to see if it had the info I wanted. You can go find any number of other sources that say the same thing, it's the truth. If you can find a reliable source that contradicts it I will happily read and consider it.
And I don't know what world you live in, but telling people to actually do research and know what they are talking about is not "holier-than-thou", it's common sense. It no different than the "guns are bad" crowd that I am sure almost everyone here has to deal with. I just in general get sick of seeing people ranting about this and that when they clearly don't have the knowledge base to be talking about an issue.
Let's see this in a hypothetical:
I am never due a refund. I write the taxman a check for thousands every year. That's my choice; I'd rather have bigger paychecks and settle up in April. Let's say I don't have health insurance. So in 2015 I write my annual check for the taxes I owe but say I withhold that additional 1% of my annual income that I now owe because I don't have an insurance policy. What you're saying is that the IRS gets that check and says, "Well, he didn't pay his ACA tax, but there's not anything we can do about it." So they just let it slide, because their hands are tied. Next year I do the same thing, with the same result and the government just has to write off me and everyone like me as effectively exempt from contributing to the national healthcare program. Is that really what you believe will happen?
If so, you have bigger problems than whether or not someone called you sanctimonious and used the definition instead of the word because he assumed you would just have to look it up.
DeusExMachina
07-05-2012, 14:35
Please, stop letting facts and information get in the way of hyperbole and fear mongering.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 14:39
ever and any way are pretty blanket statements
If there's a high level of noncompliance, some future congress will simply change that inconvenient non-prosecute clause as easily as they inserted it in the first place.
Yes, but then that would be a different law then. And I don't usually tend to speculate about what could happen at some vague point in the future. Some future congress may also decide that farting in public is illegal, and I will consider that when and if it happens. For now I will stay in reality and deal with the info and law as it exists.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 14:43
Let's see this in a hypothetical:
I am never due a refund. I write the taxman a check for thousands every year. That's my choice; I'd rather have bigger paychecks and settle up in April. Let's say I don't have health insurance. So in 2015 I write my annual check for the taxes I owe but say I withhold that additional 1% of my annual income that I now owe because I don't have an insurance policy. What you're saying is that the IRS gets that check and says, "Well, he didn't pay his ACA tax, but there's not anything we can do about it." So they just let it slide, because their hands are tied. Next year I do the same thing, with the same result and the government just has to write off me and everyone like me as effectively exempt from contributing to the national healthcare program. Is that really what you believe will happen?
If so, you have bigger problems than whether or not someone called you sanctimonious and used the definition instead of the word because he assumed you would just have to look it up.
Yep, that is pretty much what will happen. It's not what I believe, it's what I know. As I said, read the law and you may be able to see it for yourself.
And being sanctimonious has to do with trying to claim moral superiority. There is nothing about morals in play here so the word doesn't apply. Sorry.
I thought it was common knowledge that the IRS can't prosecute for this, but apparently not.
The important question is, does your unpaid health care tax roll over each year?
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 15:15
Yep, that is pretty much what will happen. It's not what I believe, it's what I know. As I said, read the law and you may be able to see it for yourself.
And being sanctimonious has to do with trying to claim moral superiority. There is nothing about morals in play here so the word doesn't apply. Sorry.
What a wonderful little fantasy world you live in where legislators go through great pains to implement new law that they specifically cannot enforce. What gross naivety to think it is going to be so easy to simply exempt one's self from a law. If one can simply opt out by choosing a different method of filing income taxes, this becomes an optional tax. Call it what you want.
It's amazing how little people know about something yet still feel the need to ignorantly bitch about it.
I am not happy about the law, but at least I took the time to learn about it before I passed judgement.
Anything in there sound like an establishment of moral superiority? No? I'm not going to define "moral" for you, so I guess we'd better let this one go.
It's not what I believe, it's what I know.
That's kind of pompous talk right there... careful. And apparently you don't know your own government very well. I don't mean this as an attack on you, but seriously, have you ever known our current government (a la the last 20 or so years) to EVER let someone go without giving them money? Try refusing to pay that speeding ticket... Thinking this will be the exception to the rule you'll soon see that you are gravely mistaken.
Nothing is ever free, they pay for it one way or another. In general it's higher overall tax rates so everyone is paying for it whether the want and use it or not.
thats fine with me i wouldnt mind higher tax rates everyones going to need it one day
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 15:24
thats fine with me i wouldnt mind higher tax rates everyones going to need it one day
Brother, you should check out Austria, where they pay as much as 50% of their income in taxes and have a socialist healthcare system. They're all so brainwashed at this point, they will bitch about how substandard the level of care is and then espouse the wonderful benefits of socialism in the next breath.
What makes you say they can "prosecute" you for not buying health insurance? I know they can fine (they're saying it's a tax) each person/per year for not having a qualified insurance plan... and I guess the IRS can garnish your accounts if you don't pay your taxes, but what do you know about them "prosecuting" folks?
I consider fines a form of prosecution.
Furthermore, healthcare is not a right.
A right confers no obligation on any other person and Obamacare is simply another wealth redistribution program which transfers the costs of one persons healthcare to everyone. Someone is going to pay, care to guess who that is? Do you have a job...ok pay up.
I'll best lobbyists for certain, liberal goods and services are salivating and wondering when their business will become a government mandate.
Brother, you should check out Austria, where they pay as much as 50% of their income in taxes and have a socialist healthcare system. They're all so brainwashed at this point, they will bitch about how substandard the level of care is and then espouse the wonderful benefits of socialism in the next breath.
THIS!
Remember kids, socialism is all well and good until you run out of other people's money! akumadiavolo- I'm having a hard time figuring out what exactly your name is and it's correct pronunciation- do you really think we should tax ourselves into equality (meaning make the rich pay outrageous taxes and the poor don't pay any or an even close to "fair" share)? Do you really think that will make our country better? Sure it'd be nice to eliminate the gap, but raising taxes punishes those who make more money so thus there is no desire to try to attain wealth, thus people stop putting their best foot forward and we fall into pre-90's USSR territory. Count me out, comrade!
The IRS may not be able to prosecute for this, but repeated noncompliance may put a person on their radar. With 40000+ pages of tax code, they can find something to make your life miserable with. The nail that sticks up is the one that gets hammered...
Sharpienads
07-05-2012, 15:52
Yes it is wrong, but you can not ever, in any way be prosecuted for disobeying. That is all I was saying.
As for which news station is the worst that is usually colored by your political beliefs. Libtards will say fox is the worst, conservatards say CNN in the worst. As a moderate I think they are all pretty equal is levels of bullshit and none of them are worth watching/trusting. It's all just about which agenda you buy into.
What makes one a moderate? It's not a trick question, I've just never heard a self-described moderate explain it.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 15:52
That's kind of pompous talk right there... careful. And apparently you don't know your own government very well. I don't mean this as an attack on you, but seriously, have you ever known our current government (a la the last 20 or so years) to EVER let someone go without giving them money? Try refusing to pay that speeding ticket... Thinking this will be the exception to the rule you'll soon see that you are gravely mistaken.
May I be mistaken at some point? Yes. But as the law is going to go into effect that is just the way it is. And as I have said I prefer not to speculate on what could happen in the future. I will deal with the facts as they exist right now. Right now the laws says no criminal action can ever be taken and the only penalty is the lose of a tax refund. They may change it later, or they may not. But I will factor that in when and if anything changes.
And the speeding ticket analogy is not apt. The law says you have to pay a speeding ticket or face a series of penalties for refusing. The health care law says the only penalty that can be face is lose of future refunds. In both cases the law is, or will be, followed as it is written.
As far as being pompous I find that be be ridiculous. I am saying that this is the way it is, the law backs up what I am saying 100%. I am saying what I know to be 100% factual. That is not a belief, it is knowledge. Just like saying the world is round is not a belief, it is a fact.
What a wonderful little fantasy world you live in where legislators go through great pains to implement new law that they specifically cannot enforce. What gross naivety to think it is going to be so easy to simply exempt one's self from a law. If one can simply opt out by choosing a different method of filing income taxes, this becomes an optional tax. Call it what you want.
I am basing what I am saying on what the law says, you are basing it on what you think could happen despite it being contradictory to the actual law. I wouldn't call it naivete to deal in facts over speculation. This could just be a stepping stone to more harsh penalties, but that is not the issue at this point.
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 16:06
THIS!
Remember kids, socialism is all well and good until you run out of other people's money! akumadiavolo- I'm having a hard time figuring out what exactly your name is and it's correct pronunciation- do you really think we should tax ourselves into equality (meaning make the rich pay outrageous taxes and the poor don't pay any or an even close to "fair" share)? Do you really think that will make our country better? Sure it'd be nice to eliminate the gap, but raising taxes punishes those who make more money so thus there is no desire to try to attain wealth, thus people stop putting their best foot forward and we fall into pre-90's USSR territory. Count me out, comrade!
As I already said I do not agree with the law. You must have conveniently skipped that part. I do think socialism is a novel concept, but it has not and will not ever work on a large scale such as a national government. For the time being, until people can move beyond a desire for personal wealth and power(unlikely to ever happen IMO), socialism is doomed to fail anyplace it is tried.
What makes one a moderate? It's not a trick question, I've just never heard a self-described moderate explain it.
I do not follow either party line. I agree with a lot of what the conservatives say and with a lot of what the liberals says. But at the same time I disagree with a lot of what each side says. I don't have a tendency to side with either group and think a lot of what each side does or says is stupid. I think a mixture of the two philosophies is the best way to approach just about every major issue that occurs. Often neither side is completely right or wrong, but they seem unwilling to compromise it seems.
Not to say anyone here does this but I actually thoroughly research each and every issue I speak or vote on instead of just siding with whichever side I feel I agree with more often. I am sickened by the number of times you ask a person what they think of an issue, and they have a strong opinion, but then can't justify it outside of the most basic propaganda that their particular party is spewing and refuse to even acknowledge any of the stances or counterpoints from the other side.
The IRS may not be able to prosecute for this, but repeated noncompliance may put a person on their radar. With 40000+ pages of tax code, they can find something to make your life miserable with. The nail that sticks up is the one that gets hammered...
That's very true. Sadly, I know from my father's firsthand experience they can also stop short of garnishing your wages and simply put a hold on your accounts so nothing goes in or out... They can wait 10 days and say, "oops, we made a mistake" and release your accounts. During those 10 days, you can't use your credit cards, checking account, withdraw cash, autodraft and ETF payments stop, etc. You likely go delinquent on your bills, cause accounting at your job to get a bounce back on your paycheck (raising an undo red flag with your employer), the list goes on... Even if you've done nothing wrong and owe them $0, you're SOL and have a mess to clean up one way or another.
I consider fines a form of prosecution.
Furthermore, healthcare is not a right.
A right confers no obligation on any other person and Obamacare is simply another wealth redistribution program which transfers the costs of one persons healthcare to everyone. Someone is going to pay, care to guess who that is? Do you have a job...ok pay up.
I'll best lobbyists for certain, liberal goods and services are salivating and wondering when their business will become a government mandate.
I consider fines a form of "persecution", sure... but not exactly "prosecution".
I agree healthcare is not a right!
I feel it should not be anyone else's responsibility other than my own, and maybe my parents and/or spouse (depending on the phase of life) to prepare in advance for the expense of my medical bills and I sure as heck don't want to be responsible for someone elses bill.
If I need treatment, I pay for it with my own insurance policy that I wisely purchased in advance, or with my own money that I earned, begged for, borrowed, stole, etc.
You are spot on with the last comment. I absolutely guarantee there are already plans being made by lobbyists and far-leaning congressmen to get the next mandated product under-wraps. This can only become more sickening with time.
I consider fines a form of "persecution", sure... but not exactly "prosecution".
I agree healthcare is not a right!
I feel it should not be anyone else's responsibility other than my own, and maybe my parents and/or spouse (depending on the phase of life) to prepare in advance for the expense of my medical bills and I sure as heck don't want to be responsible for someone elses bill.
If I need treatment, I pay for it with my own insurance policy that I wisely purchased in advance, or with my own money that I earned, begged for, borrowed, stole, etc.
You are spot on with the last comment. I absolutely guarantee there are already plans being made by lobbyists and far-leaning congressmen to get the next mandated product under-wraps. This can only become more sickening with time.
I think it is both, wish I'd said that in the opening thread, hindsight is 20/20.
Not to say anyone here does this but I actually thoroughly research each and every issue I speak or vote on instead of just siding with whichever side I feel I agree with more often. I am sickened by the number of times you ask a person what they think of an issue, and they have a strong opinion, but then can't justify it outside of the most basic propaganda that their particular party is spewing and refuse to even acknowledge any of the stances or counterpoints from the other side.
Part 1- That seems like an awful lot of work, and many don't have time to go through lines and lines of information on every issue they have interest in, so good for you that you have that kind of time on your hands. I'm sorry that we're all not so informed at such great detail on every little issue out there, sometimes we have to cut corners and take things at face value as they're presented to us by whatever means we choose to take them.
Part 2- You talk to a lot of really uninformed people. I don't claim to know everything about every single issue, but I know where my political beliefs fall on the spectrum, and despite being more of a right-leaning Libertarian (pro guns, anti-big government, anti-drug war, to name a few), I am for the most part vehemently against 90% of the liberal agenda. I look at the issues and see them from both sides, hell I even acknowledge and respect the other side of the coin, but I, like most in this community, choose to regard those arguments as, well I can't think of a nicer way of saying moronic. I think most of us on here are pretty informed on the issues we discuss and that are out there in our current society, and I think we can look at things objectively and see where the other side is coming from, and we just flat out disagree, no matter what. You can dress a liberal anti-gun (for example) ideal up into something nice and patriotic, but in the end it's still a liberal anti-gun ideal and I find it un-American and despicable.
I think it is both, wish I'd said that in the opening thread, hindsight is 20/20.
Fair enough [Beer]
akumadiavolo
07-05-2012, 16:41
Part 1- That seems like an awful lot of work, and many don't have time to go through lines and lines of information on every issue they have interest in, so good for you that you have that kind of time on your hands. I'm sorry that we're all not so informed at such great detail on every little issue out there, sometimes we have to cut corners and take things at face value as they're presented to us by whatever means we choose to take them.
Part 2- You talk to a lot of really uninformed people. I don't claim to know everything about every single issue, but I know where my political beliefs fall on the spectrum, and despite being more of a right-leaning Libertarian (pro guns, anti-big government, anti-drug war, to name a few), I am for the most part vehemently against 90% of the liberal agenda. I look at the issues and see them from both sides, hell I even acknowledge and respect the other side of the coin, but I, like most in this community, choose to regard those arguments as, well I can't think of a nicer way of saying moronic. I think most of us on here are pretty informed on the issues we discuss and that are out there in our current society, and I think we can look at things objectively and see where the other side is coming from, and we just flat out disagree, no matter what. You can dress a liberal anti-gun (for example) ideal up into something nice and patriotic, but in the end it's still a liberal anti-gun ideal and I find it un-American and despicable.
I know that is what most people do, and that is the problem. That is why so many people have no idea what their opinion is actually about. If you don't have the time to do the proper research the correct thing to do is stay quiet and have no opinion, not to just take on the opinion of someone else. If you don't have the time to do it right, don't do it at all.
In general I would say most people here, or anywhere, are not sufficiently informed. Just this week people were railing on Obama for spending the 4th of July in Paris, even though it was a bullshit lie that has been disproven long before the thread was even created, but people sure had a strong opinion about it because no one took the time to do a 3 second google search to see if it were true. I see that as a major issue in just about any community, online or otherwise. It's the hivemind or circlejerk effect that occurs when surrounded by like minded people. I see it just about everywhere I go. They hear something that agrees with or enforces their opinion and they accept it and embrace it without doing the due diligence on it. I am not saying I have never fallen into the trap, because I have, but unlike most people I do try my hardest to be well informed on every opinion I have.
I know most people also view the opposing point of view as moronic, but I find that to largely be a result of ignorance of the issue rather than a fully formed and insightful opinion. I tend to be against 90% of the liberal and conservative agendas. As I said before I largely think both sides are wrong and the best solution almost always falls in the middle. Both sides dress up their opinion and spread the best propaganda they can(both for their own opinion and against the others) it's just a matter if you can see through it or not. People tend to not even try to see through the bullshit if they agree with the general broad stroke of what one side is saying.
....
In general I would say most people here, or anywhere, are not sufficiently informed. Just this week people were railing on Obama for spending the 4th of July in Paris, even though it was a bullshit lie that has been disproven long before the thread was even created, but people sure had a strong opinion about it because no one took the time to do a 3 second google search to see if it were true. I see that as a major issue in just about any community, online or otherwise. It's the hivemind or circlejerk effect that occurs when surrounded by like minded people. I see it just about everywhere I go. They hear something that agrees with or enforces their opinion and they accept it and embrace it without doing the due diligence on it. I am not saying I have never fallen into the trap, because I have, but unlike most people I do try my hardest to be well informed on every opinion I have.
I know most people also view the opposing point of view as moronic, but I find that to largely be a result of ignorance of the issue rather than a fully formed and insightful opinion. I tend to be against 90% of the liberal and conservative agendas. As I said before I largely think both sides are wrong and the best solution almost always falls in the middle. Both sides dress up their opinion and spread the best propaganda they can(both for their own opinion and against the others) it's just a matter if you can see through it or not. People tend to not even try to see through the bullshit if they agree with the general broad stroke of what one side is saying.
Ditto [Wave]
I am 95% for the conservative A-G-E-N-D-A, now if we can only find the people who actually DO it and put their [wads of] money where their [gaping piehole] mouth is.
With all this crap about Obamacare, we once again come to a conclusion that is so obvious so often and that is "it's still better than just about anywhere else", so I hate this new "tax", can't stand the "leader", despise the direction the country is going - yet, it's still better than even the best of the alternatives, Europe as a whole, England, France, Germany, Canada. While we are trying to become those places, apparently, we are not yet there so I'll enjoy it while I can and fight for my rights.
I've got a friend of mine who, after the decision, blasted out several emails about how "this country has gone to shit", "I hate being an American" and that sort of garbage and I tell him "you're free to leave at any time and we'll see you back here real soon".
All of us, and I'm no exception, need to get up off our asses and actually do something about this mess instead of bitching about it endlessly. Tens of thousands of people in California were found to sign a petition to require the adult industry to use condoms (how anyone would ever police that is beyond me, what a job...), yet to get 100 conservatives together and march or protest or sign a petition and fight for their right takes a miracle - unless you are the Tea Party and have a hip new movement. I'm sick of MY inaction, sick of my fellow conservatives inaction, sick of the party that I LOOSLY relate to (because, frankly, republicans are NOT conservatives like myself). I don't care much for the candidate that is running but I am going to work for his campaign because the alternative is more change, change to making us helpless and hopeless and creating an even bigger gap between "left" and "right".
This crazy stuff is going to send us into a civil war - I've said it since Bush was elected and left hated right, right hated left and I kept getting screwed by both sides trying to be "moderate", it has to end and it probably will in bloodshed. We have no real leaders out there, Bush wasn't it, Obama isn't it and Romney sure as hell isn't it. Where is our Reagan? Where is the person that puts their foot down and says "enough of this crap, this is America"? God damn it is frustrating. I love my country, shed blood for my country, spilled others blood for my country and I will die an American through and through, but this all has to end, we have to take a stand.
Hmph. Rant over :D
The irs will have it so fucked up that no one will be able to decifer it.
They cannot prosecute you, all they can do is hold any refund you may have. Therefore it is another POS by a POS, that caonnot be inforced and more headaches for the people.
Bailey Guns
07-05-2012, 17:48
It took me all of about 45 seconds to find out how the IRS will handle "noncompliance".
This is from Senator Patrick Leahy's website:
Fact vs. Fiction
Fiction
If you don't buy health insurance, you will be sent to jail.
Fact
Taxpayers who are required to purchase health insurance and do not will receive a notice from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with the amount of the penalty they owe. Individuals who fail to pay the penalty are not subject to criminal prosecutions and the government cannot file notice of lein or levy any property for a taxpayer who doesn’t pay the penalty.
The obligation for individuals to purchase health insurance beginning in 2014 was included as part of the Affordable Care Act. The provision requires individuals to maintain minimum essential coverage for themselves and their dependents or pay a penalty of $95 in 2014. Families would pay half the amount for children, and the requirement includes a cap on the total allowable fine per family. If affordable health insurance coverage is not available to an individual, then the penalty would be waived. Along with the individual responsibility requirement, the Affordable Care Act also provides subsidies to some individuals beginning in 2014 to help pay for their health insurance premiums and other costs associated with their health insurance.
Taxpayers who are required to pay a fine but fail to do so will receive a notice from Internal Revenue Service (IRS). If an individual still neglects to pay the fine, the IRS can attempt to collect the funds by reducing the amount of their tax refund in the future. Individuals who fail to pay the penalty, however, will not be subject to criminal prosecution. The government cannot file notice of lien or levy on any property for a taxpayer who does not pay the penalty.
Notice how many times in that paragraph the word Penalty is used? It almost sounds like they wanted to be damn sure you didn't think it was something else :D
how is healthcare not a right? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
how is healthcare not a right? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
Because you can LIVE without healthcare
how is healthcare not a right? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
Health insurance does not equal health care. There are still only so many doctors and only so many hours in the day. Even if there was a huge influx of people starting healthcare-related doctorates following the passage of the law, it still takes 7+ years for them to join the workforce.
Rucker61
07-05-2012, 19:28
Health insurance does not equal health care. There are still only so many doctors and only so many hours in the day. Even if there was a huge influx of people starting healthcare-related doctorates following the passage of the law, it still takes 7+ years for them to join the workforce.
A lot of folks now are getting health care without health insurance. Like someone mentioned earlier, hospitals can't turn anyone away. Hospitals tend to only collect some of the money they're owed, so this will provide funds to those who provide health care. With health insurance, perhaps they can use non-hospital care providers and leave the ERs to those who truly have emergencies.
Any got any idea what the current capacity of the health care system in the US is burdened at?
how is healthcare not a right? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
Healthcare is not a right because each individual has conditions or does things that other individuals do not have or do. What you do to your body is different than what I do to mine. Why should anyone else be subjected to the costs you impose on your body or me on mine?
Don't tell me, "well I'll cover you". That is just a cop-out to free ones self from being responsible for ones self.
Life means quite literally, your life and that is all. It doesn't mean a healthy life because life is what you make it. Personal responsibility and all that.
I'll the address the general welfare clause question too. General welfare does not refer to an individuals welfare, general welfare applies to things that all 300 million of us citizens share in together exactly the same.
The interstate road system for instance, each one of use can use it, it is good for the general welfare. Healthcare is specific to each individual and does not fall under general welfare, it falls under individual welfare.
Teufelhund
07-05-2012, 20:37
The IRS may not be able to prosecute for this, but repeated noncompliance may put a person on their radar. With 40000+ pages of tax code, they can find something to make your life miserable with. The nail that sticks up is the one that gets hammered...
THIS. Once again, I wish I was as smart as good ole' TF. This guy was able to enunciate in three sentences what I couldn't spit out in several posts worth of incoherent rambling.
It took me all of about 45 seconds to find out how the IRS will handle "noncompliance".
This is from Senator Patrick Leahy's website:
Good luck fellas. I'm sure tax evasion is something they just invented to nail Al Capone. I've had health insurance since I was old enough to work, so I won't find out first-hand.
IMHO there is going to be widespread noncompliance to this and not because people like you and me who see the right to choose whether we want medical care and what kind as a very very basic liberty. The penalty maxes out in 2016 at about $700 per individual or $2000 per family. Because you can not be denied insurance due to preexisting conditions you can buy a 100M policy in the ambulance on your cell and they cant deny you. Do the math. Shit for somone like me from a get over viewpoint i should send in my penalty check every year gift wrapped with a bow and a scratch and sniff. This thing will have teeth sooner or later and it will be sooner. The teeth will have to grow very large. The alternative is rapidly accelerating debt/gdp well beyond Greece levels and or insurance company insolvency. Or... Dare I say it... Repeal of the prexisting condition part leaving us with a turd without the squirt of perfume.[GasM] IMHO
i don't pretend to be an expert, but considering i work in the healthcare industry and my entire lot of in laws are all canadian, i feel i have some knowledge on this topic.
even if you get past the unconstitutional aspect of this, its still a nightmare. even if you live in a dream world and assume that this will actually provide everyone with good, affordable healthcare, its still a nightmare. probably the biggest mind blow to me is how anyone, even hardcore liberals, can honestly with a straight face believe the government is going to run this effectively and efficiently. i challenge anyone to provide ONE example of the government running anything effectively and keeping costs down. its a physical impossibility. they estimate this to be a back breaking cost. thats what they estimate. so you have to assume it will cost much more, i mean history has proven this time and time again.
then consider that between medicare and medicaid, technically everyone should be covered that can't afford it. i mean medicaid covers the poor and medicare covers the elderly and disabled. the cut off for medicaid isn't really that low in my opinion. my wife and i easily survived off of $35,000 a year for the two of us, still managed to pay 4,500 in student loan back and bank a few thousand. we live frugally but not ridiculously so. i figure you can get by comfortably if you're smart and you try at around $25,000 per two people and the cut off for medicaid, last i checked, was around that mark. and yet, medicaid and medicare are complete boon doggles. so we take those, multiply it and assume we are now going to get good, affordable healthcare? its lunacy.
the long lasting aspect of this is that really logic leads me to believe the government will have to pass more mandates over time to keep this even remotely under control financially. there will have to be requirements for those covered such as no smoking, no drinking, etc. probably rules against certain fat and sugar containing foods. as oppressive as that sounds, from a business standpoint it makes sense. i mean if you have to try to offset the given corruption, fraud and waste that will accompany this (just look at medicare and medicaid for examples of this) then you have to limit costs by ensuring the pay in outweighs the pay out. additionally, as is obvious, you are going to have to have major restrictions on end of life care. recently a study came out of england showing that thousands of people are purposely killed in their healthcare system because they are too expensive with very little overall benefit to society. it sucks for their family, but honestly from a business standpoint it again makes sense. if you detach yourself from the fact that these are humans and could as easily be your family, its easy to see why they would be so cruel.
now our system won't be precisely like england's, but like anything the government touches it will grow in size and strength. thats a given, particularly as it becomes not worthwhile for businesses to provide private care. as the last true "end of life" care nation, if we lose the market for those types of drugs and treatments, less and less developments will be made in that area as it simply won't be worthwhile. these are all long term effects but over the next 50 years i believe all will come to fruition. the country won't implode, but most of us alive today will look back to how things were when we were young and be shocked at how much it changed, and how so few noticed. do it over a long enough period of time and people surprisingly turn a blind eye to all kinds of oppression. sadly, in the short term obama fans will think they were proven right. the healthcare plan won't completely destroy the country over night and quite possibly in the short term may appear beneficial overall.
probably the thing that bothers me most about this law is what we lose that makes us different. sure, healthcare is expensive in america. it could be made somewhat cheaper through various small changes but it will probably always be more expensive. afterall, we pay doctors a lot more and reward being the best by giving big pay checks. its why the best specialists in the world are often found here. what people forget is that while some don't have health insurance, anything can be obtained in this country with money. if you need a heart surgery and have no health insurance, you can get in and get it done immediately if you can come up with the funds. although people are often too lazy or prideful to do so, that money can be raised through various charities and church groups found all around the country. however, as the government takes over more of the healthcare, this will become less possible, much how it is in canada and england, where everyone is on the list and whether you have the money or not you wait. sometimes thats the difference between life and death. its why canadians come here and pay cash all the time. my in laws have done it many times. you know the statitistic about average wait time for an MRI in toronto being around 9 months? thats not an exaggeration, my in laws live there and it took ten months for my wife's uncle to get his MRI for his back. luckily it was a disc out of place, imagine if it was a tumor on his spine.
to say we don't need reform is crazy. to say this is the reform we need is lunacy.
how is healthcare not a right? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
The most simple way I can explain this to you, is to compare your statement with specific amendments that guaranty other rights.
The 2nd Amendment says you have the right to bear arms. Are you REQUIRED to possess/purchase a firearm?
The 1st Amendment says you have the right to free speech. Are you REQUIRED to publicly express yourself?
Another way to look at this, is please submit a single example of someone being bared from health care. You can't find one, because there isn't one. Having the right to something, doesn't mean that it is provided for you. Every individual still has to provide their own means to secure whatever it is they want. You want a gun, you still have to go out and buy it yourself; no one is going to do it for you.
_________
Well spoken Tim.
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
healthcare is a right in 99% of the rest of the world
this fake ass shit that oboma came up with sucks a dick and needs to be thrown out
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
healthcare is a right in 99% of the rest of the world
this fake ass shit that oboma came up with sucks a dick and needs to be thrown out
I had all kinds of responses to this. I'll go with this one.
You're too selfish and emotionally invested in this event that happened to you to rationally and reasonably discuss why healthcare is not a right.
I had all kinds of responses to this. I'll go with this one.
You're too selfish and emotionally invested in this event that happened to you to rationally and reasonably discuss why healthcare is not a right.
it would seem to me that people who didnt want to pay a little more in taxes for the greater good of the country are the selfish ones.....just me though :)
it would seem to me that people who didnt want to pay a little more in taxes for the greater good of the country are the selfish ones.....just me though :)
I knew you were going to say that, you're so predictable and I don't even know you.
If I volunteer my money to help someone that is one thing.
If you take my money through the force of government and give to someone else then you've just put your own desires ahead of mine. Tell me which one is selfish.
....
If I volunteer my money to help someone that is one thing.
If you take my money through the force of government and give to someone else then you've just put your own desires ahead of mine. Tell me which one is selfish.
+1. Has been my stance all along.
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
healthcare is a right in 99% of the rest of the world
this fake ass shit that oboma came up with sucks a dick and needs to be thrown out
IMHO Cofi you are both right and wrong.
I like you have seen a girl friend unable to get decent medical services.
A individual with a work ethic - well she works her ass off.
I didnt have to watch her die though, thats rough.
Health Care is not a right.
Police services are not a right.
Fire protection is not a right.
Now If I see another human or a animal suffering or in need of help Im going to try to help them IF I am able. An extension of that is to have educated and trained professionals do the job more efficently.
Where i agree with you is it seems evident to me that we should provide health care along with fire and police services. I also agree with you that single payer is the only option, demonstratably half the price of our insurance method (%GDP per citizen). If we insist on insurance being the exclusive provider of humanitarian services provided by the goverment than i think police and fire should also be mandated insurance only. Im paying the extra money and getting getting Blackwater for my police insurance!
Our capability to provide humanitarian services as a nation are constrained by our resources. There is no magic wand. Our debt to GDP is over 100%. We own half of our own debt via the Federal reserve buying US Treasuries. These are remarkable indeed incredible indicators and the results of these magic wand practices may soon render our debate on health care and other subjects moot. The dems wave the wand and things appear. The repubs wave the wand and things appear. They cage fight for the wand. THe affordable health care act is so encompassing, so innefficent,so ill thought out, so pandering to special interests, that I have a hard time discerning its true pupouse if any.
The derivitive known as insurance is a symptom of the magic wand. Just because we hold a policy does not guarantee that we will all get 3 millon dollars of medical treatment. WE pay in say 180 thousand over a liftime ( minus profit and operating cost of insurance) but get 3 millon out? Who makes up the difference? The wand. Money for nothing and the chicks for free. Interesting times!
hollohas
07-06-2012, 11:01
It took me all of about 45 seconds to find out how the IRS will handle "noncompliance".
This is from Senator Patrick Leahy's website:
Fact vs. Fiction
Fiction
If you don't buy health insurance, you will be sent to jail.
Fact
Taxpayers who are required to purchase health insurance and do not will receive a notice from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with the amount of the penalty they owe. Individuals who fail to pay the penalty are not subject to criminal prosecutions and the government cannot file notice of lein or levy any property for a taxpayer who doesn’t pay the penalty.
The obligation for individuals to purchase health insurance beginning in 2014 was included as part of the Affordable Care Act. The provision requires individuals to maintain minimum essential coverage for themselves and their dependents or pay a penalty of $95 in 2014. Families would pay half the amount for children, and the requirement includes a cap on the total allowable fine per family. If affordable health insurance coverage is not available to an individual, then the penalty would be waived. Along with the individual responsibility requirement, the Affordable Care Act also provides subsidies to some individuals beginning in 2014 to help pay for their health insurance premiums and other costs associated with their health insurance.
Taxpayers who are required to pay a fine but fail to do so will receive a notice from Internal Revenue Service (IRS). If an individual still neglects to pay the fine, the IRS can attempt to collect the funds by reducing the amount of their tax refund in the future. Individuals who fail to pay the penalty, however, will not be subject to criminal prosecution. The government cannot file notice of lien or levy on any property for a taxpayer who does not pay the penalty.
I don't see one place in this explanation that says they won't continue to send you this "notice" ( I read that as "BILL") and charge interest on it every month you don't pay the penalty. Sure, they may not be able to garnish your wages or put a lien on your house, but nowhere does this say your "penalty" will ever go away if you don't pay.
Are you going to lose your house for not paying? Nope. Are you going to be prosecuted for not paying? Nope. Are you going to have a massive delinquent tax bill if you don't pay for years? According to all of the explanations I have seen, nothings says a non-paid penalty WON'T follow you for life so one has to believe it be on you like white on rice.
And the IRS will find a way to get you to pay it somehow. All of the arguments say there are only two specific ways they CAN'T make you pay...prosecution and lien/levy. I am sure the IRS won't have any problems finding another way to get you to pay other than the refund route. I don't think we have any IRS experts here but we all know that the IRS ALWAYS gets their money one way or another.
Maybe I missed the part where the laws says a non-paid penalty will go away, so please school me if that's the case.
The tax/penalty is the least of my worries though. It's the idea behind it that worries me. What is the next thing they will charge us a tax/penalty for not buying? This Supreme Court ruling just opened the Pandora's box of taxing/fining American Citizens for not buying something that our brilliant government believes everyone needs to buy in order to help the greater good. The power that the Feds were just handed with the precedent this ruling created is downright scary.
Cofi, it is not my responsibility to provide the means for other people's desires. You can not make something a right, when it puts an undue burden on others.
You still haven't attempted to answer my question as toba single instance of someone in this country being denied health care.
Xring, the difference between what you pay into insurance and what your limits are, is not made up by the magic wand. That is built into the business model, just like every other business where volume of customers makes up for the high costs of a few.
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
healthcare is a right in 99% of the rest of the world
this fake ass shit that oboma came up with sucks a dick and needs to be thrown out
99% of the rest of the world? [ROFL1] yep all over the continents of asia, africa and south america the benevolent governments are treating their people.
you may want everyone to be healthy, happy, blah blah blah but this leads down a slippery slope which i believe is the original purpose of this post by roberth..
once you created this program where everyone is forced to pay for each other's health you then open the door to rules to control each other's lifestyle in the sake of driving health care costs down.
go look at your neighbor to the north. he smokes? well thats a healthcare burden to the country. if he contiunes smoking we must tax him more.
neighbor to the east. hes a fat POS? well he must log 7 hours of intense work out time at a government approved gym with a instructor signing of on his activity. Why? cuz his fat ass drives up health care costs. if he doesnt we will tax him more.
is that little billy to your south drinking a slurpee and having a candy bar? well those are deemed unhealthy by the government panel in charge of deciding what those in the healthcare system can eat. well little billy's folks will get a tax for him eating those.
what we will see happen from this dumb law if it is not repealed is another horribly under funded system. eventually it will become a marginal tax pulling all of its funding from borrowed funds and the rich. its all about winning some elections in the short run for the libtards.
hollohas
07-06-2012, 11:17
The derivitive known as insurance is a symptom of the magic wand. Just because we hold a policy does not guarantee that we will all get 3 millon dollars of medical treatment. WE pay in say 180 thousand over a liftime ( minus profit and operating cost of insurance) but get 3 millon out? Who makes up the difference? The wand. Money for nothing and the chicks for free. Interesting times!
There is no wand. The people who choose to buy insurance but never need it are who make up the difference. But the fact remains, it was their CHOICE to buy it. Those of us who buy it hope we will never need it. I hope that I never need to use even a small fraction of what I will pay in insurance over the years but I pay it anyway, just in case. That is how insurance works, they depend on many policy holders not to need it so they can afford to pay the bills for those who do.
But I believe making people buy it is not the American way. Us choosing to help one another is the American way. That's what charities/churches/friends/family, etc. are for, to help others in need. Although, no one is entitled to help. It is not our government's job to give us everything we need to be happy, healthy and wealthy. It is our job as citizens of this country to go out and get those things for ourselves.
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
Healthcare is not a guarantee of health, it's not magic that makes you invulnerable to sickness. The fact that you used the term "pressured" in your example tells me that the family made that decision, it was not forced on them. If they didn't agree they could have said no and asked to continue treatment or gone to another doctor. Having health care would not have changed your ex-girlfriends mothers outcome unfortunately, she wasn't denied treatment. The only difference is that everyone else would have had to share the burden of debt and hospital bills (socialism!). Sometimes there is nothing that can be done in the medical world, socialized health care is not going to change that, you paying a higher tax is not going to change that.
It cracks me up when people say they will gladly pay more taxes so that everyone is equal and healthy. Ok then do it, no one is stopping you. This clown of a president even set up a website so people like you, Matt Damon (file photo), and Warren Buffet can willingly add more to the pot. www.pay.gov (http://www.pay.gov) My guess is that much like them, you aren't going to go willingly give your money away, and what you actually mean by that is you think everyone else should have to pay the giver-ment to pay for those who won't get insurance themselves.
http://www.neptunuslex.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/damon_team_america.jpg
Also I think you need to do some fact checking on your claim that in 99% of the world healthcare is a right
http://www.gadling.com/media/2007/07/healthcareworldbig.jpg
hollohas
07-06-2012, 11:42
It cracks me up when people say they will gladly pay more taxes so that everyone is equal and healthy. Ok then do it, no one is stopping you. This clown of a president even set up a website so people like you, Matt Damon (file photo), and Warren Buffet can willingly add more to the pot. www.pay.gov (http://www.pay.gov) My guess is that much like them, you aren't going to go willingly give your money away, and what you actually mean by that is you think everyone else should have to pay the giver-ment to pay for those who won't get insurance themselves.
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/2634771/2/istockphoto_2634771-hitting-a-nail-on-the-head.jpg
That is how insurance works, they depend on many policy holders not to need it so they can afford to pay the bills for those who do.
Interesting view point. Here is mine. what is insurance? You enter into a contract with a enity. A IOU AKA derivitive states the terms of this contract, basicly in return for giving them federal reserve notes now they will provide a amount of federal reserve notes in the future based on a set of conditions. The counterparty risk is unknown ie the solvency and intent of the insurance company. Their solvency and profit which determines salaries and bonus's depends on not paying out a large percentage of the derivitives they have entered into. Your policy is a bet for them pure and simple just like any derivitive. There vested interest is in not paying so they make sure the legal terms of the contract/bet provide them with escapes from paying. In many cases they flat out just dont pay even if the terms are met. The majority of counterpartys aka sick people wont lawyer up- more profits. The individual who enters into this contract is in a advesarial relationship with the insurance company. Those who have a good lawyer might get benefits if they "need" them.
"Need" as you state it has very little to do with it IMHO. A algorithm is being run and the purpouse is profit.
Xring, spend two weeks working bodily injury claims, and when the first request for Remote Healing (the healer concentrates on your ailments, from their office, while you are at your home) comes across your desk, just remember how you are going to break the mold of the evil insurance company because your insured NEEDS six months of remote healing, a year and a half after her 10mph fender bender.
hollohas
07-06-2012, 13:40
"A algorithm is being run and the purpouse is profit.
Well no kidding it's purpose is profit. Insurance companies ARE businesses after all and that is the reason for running a business, TO MAKE MONEY. However, if insurance companies didn't payout benefits as often as some people claim they don't then they would fail because people would choose to take their insurance business elsewhere. Their vested interest is keeping policy holders, not running them off because they fail to payout. No one would even bother buying insurance if they always had to hire a lawyer to get their benefits like you say they do.
If you don't like insurance companies, then don't buy insurance. Just pay for your medical expenses from your own pocket.
The whole "insurance companies are the devil" argument is no better than the "corporations are the devil" argument we hear form the 99%'ers.
Sharpienads
07-06-2012, 13:59
If you don't like insurance companies, then don't buy insurance. Just pay for your medical expenses from your own pocket.
The whole "insurance companies are the devil" argument is no better than the "corporations are the devil" argument we hear form the 99%'ers.
Insurance companies are evil! I just won't buy insurance... oh, wait...
"However, if insurance companies didn't payout benefits as often as some people claim they don't then they would fail because people would choose to take their insurance business elsewhere. Their vested interest is keeping policy holders, not running them off because they fail to payout."
Thats the beauty of a good algorithm.
hollohas
07-06-2012, 14:54
Insurance companies are evil! I just won't buy insurance... oh, wait...
Yup.
too me i would think we would want all our fellow americans healthy as can be.....i have love for everyone in this country rich/poor if it means i have to have a higher tax rate so be it.....i watched my ex girlfriends mom die of throat cancer because the hospitals pressured her to go into hospice care and just die because it would be cheaper for them.....that is not right
healthcare is a right in 99% of the rest of the world
this fake ass shit that oboma came up with sucks a dick and needs to be thrown out
I don't get your point. Cancer patients are the number 1 people group denied care in both Canada and England and there systems are completely government controlled. Makes sense too as cancer survival rates are comparatively low and costs as astronomically high. Medicare and Medicaid is infamous for their denial of anything that isn't pretty basic and routine. Worst yet is they pay practices less each year and with AMP coming out soon that will only go further down. As their reimbursement drops, practices don't accept their plans any more. Pretty soon either no one gets covered or practices go out of business. There are people who fall through the cracks and it's a shame but it happens in every system they are just different people. If your mom doesn't get cancer care under her government plan in this perfect eutopia, then what? Will you call for private care over government care? No system is perfect but the one with less government is more flexible, independent, less corrupt and likely provides better care. Getting care to those who can't afford it or have pre existing conditions should be handled at a local level and through charitable organizations. Most Americans do care about others. Don't confusion anger of taxation and government tyranny for an uncaring attitude. I do care but I help with my own money willingly, I don't vote to force others to also throw in their money by force.
Xring, spend two weeks working bodily injury claims, and when the first request for Remote Healing (the healer concentrates on your ailments, from their office, while you are at your home) comes across your desk, just remember how you are going to break the mold of the evil insurance company because your insured NEEDS six months of remote healing, a year and a half after her 10mph fender bender.
I couldn't help myself...
fn4i8bAfnMY
Byte Stryke
07-06-2012, 16:16
I don't get your point. Cancer patients are the number 1 people group denied care in both Canada and England and there systems are completely government controlled. Makes sense too as cancer survival rates are comparatively low and costs as astronomically high. Medicare and Medicaid is infamous for their denial of anything that isn't pretty basic and routine. Worst yet is they pay practices less each year and with AMP coming out soon that will only go further down. As their reimbursement drops, practices don't accept their plans any more. Pretty soon either no one gets covered or practices go out of business. There are people who fall through the cracks and it's a shame but it happens in every system they are just different people. If your mom doesn't get cancer care under her government plan in this perfect eutopia, then what? Will you call for private care over government care? No system is perfect but the one with less government is more flexible, independent, less corrupt and likely provides better care. Getting care to those who can't afford it or have pre existing conditions should be handled at a local level and through charitable organizations. Most Americans do care about others. Don't confusion anger of taxation and government tyranny for an uncaring attitude. I do care but I help with my own money willingly, I don't vote to force others to also throw in their money by force.
one reason the United States has the great medical care we have is the free market. GOOD Doctors stay because there is money here. Now the Government is going to make it "affordable" and I See allot of doctors leaving soon. How long would you stay if the government increased your taxes but cut your pay?
Well no kidding it's purpose is profit. Insurance companies ARE businesses after all and that is the reason for running a business, TO MAKE MONEY. However, if insurance companies didn't payout benefits as often as some people claim they don't then they would fail because people would choose to take their insurance business elsewhere. Their vested interest is keeping policy holders, not running them off because they fail to payout. No one would even bother buying insurance if they always had to hire a lawyer to get their benefits like you say they do.
If you don't like insurance companies, then don't buy insurance. Just pay for your medical expenses from your own pocket.
The whole "insurance companies are the devil" argument is no better than the "corporations are the devil" argument we hear form the 99%'ers.
Unfortunatly there is no place to pay cash for basic medical needs at a reasonable price. i posted on this very forum asking where a clinic with basic medical services that took cash could be found. No answers. The one i was using started accepting medical insurance resulting in a tripling of their rates. So we have what amounts to a monopoly with the medical services and insurance companys and now the goverment in cahoots. If somone wants to buy insurance for high dollar medical procedures thats their choice and should remain their choice even if single payer was instituted. If somone doesnt purchase that insurance or have the money to pay for it they should not receive that procedure if it more than the single payer health care can afford via a balanced budget. Eliminating the option for a normal healthy guy to get antibiotics or a few stiches for cash is wrong. But thats what is going on they want a monopoly. You talk against Obamacare but support the insurance industry, shit they wrote the affordable health care act. What industry wouldnt support a monopoly for its services. The insurance/ medical monopoly is forcing upon me a level of technology in my medical that I choose not to accept.
Thats Liberty. Thats Freedom.
You act like Im a deadbeat or a hypocrite. I dont smoke i dont drink i eat right im fit(sort of) and I exercise. I and my employers paid for health insurance for thirtyfive years. I have never had a operation or a broken bone. Most years i dont even see a doctor. I could sure use all that money i spent on policys/bets/derivitives now. You guys want to buy your policys for next gen medical procedures be my guest. Just dont say I have to pay for your high tech procedures via forcing me into your gambling pool because i want a handful of antibiotics or a few stiches every couple years. If we really wanted affordable health care it would be easy.
1. Outlaw medical malpractice suites
2. eliminate licensing for medical practice
3. establish a online nationwide feedback database for medical practicioners.
HBARleatherneck
07-06-2012, 17:14
delete
hollohas
07-06-2012, 17:16
Unfortunatly there is no place to pay cash for basic medical needs at a reasonable price. i posted on this very forum asking where a clinic with basic medical services that took cash could be found. No answers.
Walgreens Take Care Clinic will take cash and is reasonably priced.
HBARleatherneck
07-06-2012, 17:22
delete
hollohas
07-06-2012, 17:25
i agree with this statement. this is what churches, religious institutions and philanthropic organizations, should be providing.(not building mega churches) and when the good hearted Americans donate to those organizations to fund them, it is of their own free will. Not forced.
The Shriners Hosptial for Children is a super fine example of how a charitable
organization can provide superior care for free...
-snip
1. Outlaw medical malpractice suites
2. eliminate licensing for medical practice
3. establish a online nationwide feedback database for medical practicioners.
i personally dont think they should outlaw medical malpractice lawsuits.
-snip
What do you call the guy who graduated medical school with a C grade?
Doctor.
That is medical malpractice suits must continue. However if the juries were smarter than the bullshit cases would get tossed.
Walgreens Take Care Clinic will take cash and is reasonably priced.
Thank you thats helpful, will they suture or is it pills and thermometers only?
hollohas
07-06-2012, 17:54
Thank you thats helpful, will they suture or is it pills and thermometers only?
Shots, pills, etc. Their site says minor wound closure with skin adhesive only. My family uses it because they take walk-ins. Even our family doctor has so many patients they can't see you for a week. And what good does that do if you're sick now?
http://takecarehealth.com/what-we-treat.aspxhttp://takecarehealth.com/what-we-treat.aspx
x-ring, I agree that the reason health care costs so much, is mostly a direct result of insurance companies. I do have to point out that there are legitimate reasons why insurance works the way it does, and why it costs so much. I've heard the statistic that 1/3 the price of auto insurance even exists because of fraud. I don't have a source for that information, but I know that fraud is a significant reason for high prices.
Roberts' ruling isn't final
By Sen. Rand Paul
In the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision, can you still argue that the Constitution does not support ObamaCare? The liberal blogosphere apparently thinks the constitutional debate is over. I wonder whether they would have had that opinion the day after the Dred Scott decision.
While it is clear to anyone who was awake in high school civics class that the Supreme Court has the power to declare whether a law is valid under the Constitution, that power is not a pronouncement set in stone.
Think of how our country would look now had the Supreme Court not changed its view of what is constitutional. Think of 1857, when the court handed down the outrageous Dred Scott decision, which said African Americans were not citizens. Think of the "separate but equal" doctrine in Plessy v. Ferguson, which the court later repudiated in Brown v. Board of Education.
I have a similar opinion on Roe v. Wade. Constitutional scholars such as professor Robert George of Princeton still dispute the constitutionality of Roe: "The Supreme Court's decision to invalidate state laws prohibiting or restricting abortion lacks any basis in the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the Constitution."
The clause that the court majority used to justify the constitutionality of ObamaCare is one that has been subject to debate over the years.
Hamilton and Madison argued over it. Madison maintained that the powers to tax and spend were limited by the powers enumerated in the Constitution. Because what purpose is there to enumerated powers if a general power — the power to tax — could eclipse them?
In U.S. v. Butler (1936), an earlier Justice Roberts (Owen) got it right when he wrote: "The (tax) invades the reserved rights of the states. (The tax) is a statutory plan to regulate and control … a matter beyond the powers delegated to the federal government. … (The tax is) but (a) means to an unconstitutional end."
Sounds like ObamaCare to me. I'm starting to like the first Justice Roberts more than the current Justice Roberts.
I see this as their attempt to make it like some states, I'll use CO as an example, for auto insurance. In CO, it is mandatory by law to have auto insurance coverage if you intend to drive a car. But not everyone is a good driver, some have terrible records (conversely, health ins some people are not in good health and don't treat their bodies in a healthy manner), so to offset this ins companies charge these higher risks more premium. The really bad drivers, who are too risky to be taken on by most standard companies are still guaranteed insurance since it's law, so there is a guarantee that they can get it, but it's usually through a non-standard company and they aren't given very good policies (low limits, may not be available to have comp and coll, and no bells/whistles like towing and rental). This can force premiums up for everyone else if the pool of bad outweighs the good. In terms of healthcare insurance, they're doing it almost the same except not creating non-standard HC coverages to cover the higher risk people, everyone is (here's that evil word) "entitled". It's all bullshit. Like said before, docs will start quitting because they're not making as much as they used to and becoming a doctor will become something more like non-profit charity work before too long. I see this road leading to some bad places.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.