For what it's worth. My experience with ObamaCare

[N8RV]

Why do you think they are calling it a Cadillac plan? Comparing it to transportation is pretty much the point.

So, where does the Tata Nano fit into your analogy? Not everyone can afford a car with anti-lock brakes, airbags, an engine capable of propelling it to highway speeds, that's capable of meeting EPA requirements for air pollution, etc. Why can't we have the $2k Nano? Or the $5k Mexican produced Beetle?

I'm not a fan of Obamacare, but let's keep the debate on the reality. You can still get your Chevy Sonic of the insurance world, and you can still get your Cadillac, we arn't forcing everyone in to the upper end of the market. There's plenty of real issues with it, the constitutionality of forcing everyone to buy, the fact the penalties are much cheaper than the insurance for young and healthy people who are needed in the mix to subsidize the older and sicker, etc. The "Cadillac plan" is false and removes the focus from the real issues.

Well, as I said, all analogies have failing points. You sorta lost me with references to particular car models, but I don't agree with your premise -- we CAN'T still get a Chevy Sonic (whatever that is -- assuming it's a cheap, bare-bones car.) THAT is the entire point of the analogy. A Chevy Sonic or a Yugo, for that matter, is bare-bones. It doesn't have electric windows (neo-natal care), a cigarette lighter (drug dependence treatment), heated seats (low-cost drug supplement), etc. Unless you're just an ideologue who completely buys into the premise that the ACA is Constitutional, necessary and well-designed, I don't understand your confusion. The Bronze Plan (as I understand it) has a lot of the stuff that people neither want nor need -- and certainly don't want to pay for.

I don't mind that you don't like my analogy, but your argument is not solid. If I don't want all the extras in the cheapest ACA-approved insurance plan, I have no choice. I can't buy basic transportation that fits my wants and needs -- I have to buy THEIR "basic" car ... which just happens to have electric windows, a cigarette lighter and heated seats.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

A Chevy Sonic or a Yugo, for that matter, is bare-bones.

Is it? That's why I said you can't buy a Nano. I'll Google it for you: Tata Nano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Maybe that'll put some perspective on my post for you.

 

[dross]

Two things, directed in general upthread, not at any particular person:

1. Force is the ONLY power the government has. Everything the government does requires the initiation of force. If you don't understand that, you don't understand anything.
2. As someone smart once said, "When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul's support." So when you tell me that Obamacare will help some people, I don't disagree, but they are being helped at the point of a gun stuck in another person's face.

 

[Kutnupe14]

What socialism is good?

If I help pay for a highway, but walk everywhere am I a victim of socialism?
If help fund the FDA, ensuring that imported beef is fit for consumption, yet I'm a vegan, am I a victim of socialism?
If I help fund the military, supported 2 of the last 3 wars (one I was very much against action being taken), am I a victim of socialism?
If I have no kids but have to pay into an educational system, am I a victim of socialism?

People like to try and avoid the dirty word "socialism," but they're fooling themselves. Our nation couldn't survive without it having an obvious (though apparently un-admitted) presence.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Ah, the inability to realize when one is participating in legalized plunder.

Bastiat is disappointed:

The Law, Frédéric Bastiat

 

[N8RV]

Is it? That's why I said you can't buy a Nano. I'll Google it for you: Tata Nano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Maybe that'll put some perspective on my post for you.

Thanks. So it's basically an ugly, cheap Smart Car. Got it.

But how does that relate to the issue of the ACA and my analogy?

Had we taxpayers been on the hook for a few million Nanos for the unwashed masses and the rest of us been left to our trucks, sedans, SUVs and whatever else we were happy with, the problem would have been solved with far less damage to our society and to our healthcare system as a whole. We would all still be grumbling -- after all, access to healthcare is not a Constitutional right, regardless what a misguided SCOTUS has to say -- but the vast majority would have kept their insurance policies intact.

That could never have happened though, because it would not pave the way to a single-payer system, which is exactly what the intended goal has been from the beginning.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

If I help pay for a highway, but walk everywhere am I a victim of socialism?
If help fund the FDA, ensuring that imported beef is fit for consumption, yet I'm a vegan, am I a victim of socialism?
If I help fund the military, supported 2 of the last 3 wars (one I was very much against action being taken), am I a victim of socialism?
If I have no kids but have to pay into an educational system, am I a victim of socialism?

People like to try and avoid the dirty word "socialism," but they're fooling themselves. Our nation couldn't survive without it having an obvious (though apparently un-admitted) presence.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[Leadeye]

It cost me $150 more per month and I have to carry maternity insurance, what does an old geezer like me need with that? I put that question to my insurance agent, his only answer is obiecare.

I figure this law will make buckets of money for insurance companies, big pharma, private/public business, and lawyers.

 

[88GT]

If I help pay for a highway, but walk everywhere am I a victim of socialism?
If help fund the FDA, ensuring that imported beef is fit for consumption, yet I'm a vegan, am I a victim of socialism?
If I help fund the military, supported 2 of the last 3 wars (one I was very much against action being taken), am I a victim of socialism?
If I have no kids but have to pay into an educational system, am I a victim of socialism?

People like to try and avoid the dirty word "socialism," but they're fooling themselves. Our nation couldn't survive without it having an obvious (though apparently un-admitted) presence.

Wow, you had such a wonderful chance to knock it out of the park and you swung, missed, and struck out.

Socialism isn't a problem when it's voluntary. Collective ownership is great if everybody does so by his own volition and choice, and he can exit if he wants to. It's when the government becomes part of that collective and starts forcing others to participate against their will that it becomes a problem. None of your scenarios are even examples of socialism because none of them involve the collective/government ownership and administration of the means of production. In fact, the only thing they have in common is government administered and tax-payer funded. That is not socialism. And there are plenty of government-administered, tax-payer funded expenditures that are legitimate in a nation of self-governed people. Highways and the military are Constitutional powers given to the federal government. The FDA is a regulatory bureaucracy that operates outside the market forces and, in fact, manipulates them by introducing the element of coercion. And we all know from Econ 101 that true market forces require the absence of coercion. Government-administered education is social welfare, not socialism. It requires the confiscatory theft of one person's property so that that property can be used to fund the personal and private whims of another.

Your last statement is jaw-dropping. It appears that you think government expenditures of any kind qualify as socialism simply because it draws from the taxes paid by the population. That's simply not true. This nation would flourish without socialism. I don't actually believe we're all that socialist in this country. We have a lot of wealth redistribution for the purpose of preserving a power base, but that's just theft and slavery, not economic socialism.

 

[zippy23]

subsidy is the key word. someone else is paying for that, and yes, it is the downfall of medicine, i'm in the health care field, i have relatives in the field(doctors and nurses), administration is laying off the high paid people, keeping the lower payed, lessed skilled, workers and working them more, care is going down, prices going up, this is a complete disaster, and no one in gov't seems to be doing anything about it, the people are laying down and taking this. how sad, they will control our entire lives with this.

 

[forgop]

My experience with ObamaCare was a $25k/year pay cut.

 

[88GT]

My experience with ObamaCare was a $25k/year pay cut.

Ouch!

 

[easy]

... my self-employed daughter when she turned 27 last year. I paid... I'm hoping, down the road, she will pick up the tab.

Really? Maybe let her grow up?

 

[rambone]

An individual who does not participate would be taxed $95 for tax year 2014, due in 2015. That's if you file taxes. I pay more on license plates taxes for a car i own. (That I also have to have insured)

Again, don't participate. Don't pay the tax. And just let them try to collect. Non-participation and non-payment of taxes by the masses will easily doom the program far more than what politicians are trying to do.

This is disinformation. $95 is the bare minimum fine, only applicable to those earning below-poverty level salaries. If you make more than $9,500 per year, your fine is higher. It incrementally increases in 2015 and 2016. After that it is up to 2.5% of your family income.


2014 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 1% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $95/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $95 per adult and $47.50 per child, capped at $285 per family, or
• 1% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

2015 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 2% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $325/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, capped at $975 per family, or
• 2% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

2016 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 2.5% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $695/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $695 per adult and $347.50 per child, capped at $2085 per family, or
• 2.5% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

Police State Health Care: The Cost of Non-Compliance | Police State USA

 

[tenring]

[h=3]Better Read the Fine Print[/h] There is an extremely unpleasant surprise awaiting some Medicaid users. The Seattle Times has the scoop on an older couple who discovered the fine print for Medicaid: "If you're 55 or over, Medicaid can come back after you're dead and bill your estate for ordinary health-care expenses." In other words, Medicaid is a loan payable with your assets when you die. This isn't new, but it's a far bigger problem thanks to ObamaCare, which is going to force many people onto Medicaid who have more assets for seizing than the previously typical Medicaid enrollee. It's just yet another way ObamaCare's a lousy deal.

 

[findingZzero]

Really? Maybe let her grow up?

Some idiots are too busy knowing it all to ever learn anything.

 

[-Jake-]

meh.

 

[olhorseman]

This is disinformation. $95 is the bare minimum fine, only applicable to those earning below-poverty level salaries. If you make more than $9,500 per year, your fine is higher. It incrementally increases in 2015 and 2016. After that it is up to 2.5% of your family income.


2014 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 1% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $95/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $95 per adult and $47.50 per child, capped at $285 per family, or
• 1% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

2015 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 2% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $325/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, capped at $975 per family, or
• 2% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

2016 Penalties:
Uninsured individuals will be penalized 2.5% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold — no less than $695/year.
Uninsured families will be penalized at one of the following rates (whichever is greater):

• $695 per adult and $347.50 per child, capped at $2085 per family, or
• 2.5% of their annual income above the minimum tax threshold.

Police State Health Care: The Cost of Non-Compliance | Police State USA

My information is correct. An "individual" in "2014" could have a penalty of $95. But the "individual" would have to make over $19,500 (modified adjusted gross income) before the "individual" would pay over $95. It is 1% on the amount over the minimum tax threshold. The information on the webpage you provided stating 1% of family income is incorrect. Please refer to Sect. 1501 of the actual law and not some websites interpretation.

An additional piece of info from Sect 1502
‘‘(g) ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The penalty provided by this section shall be paid upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and except as provided in paragraph (2), shall be assessed and col- lected in the same manner as an assessable penalty under sub- chapter B of chapter 68.
‘‘(2) SPECIAL RULES.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law—
‘‘(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty im- posed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
‘‘(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES.—The Sec- retary shall not—
‘‘(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the pen- alty imposed by this section, or
‘‘(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.’’.

 

[BravoMike]

My current plan increased by $2,000 for 2014..... Your welcome....

 

[dmarsh8]

Two things, directed in general upthread, not at any particular person:

1. Force is the ONLY power the government has. Everything the government does requires the initiation of force. If you don't understand that, you don't understand anything.
2. As someone smart once said, "When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul's support." So when you tell me that Obamacare will help some people, I don't disagree, but they are being helped at the point of a gun stuck in another person's face.

^^that's good right there ^^ no.2 inparticular.