Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 07-02-2012, 10:23 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie_T View Post
If it cancels out who paid for the insurance? Why bother if it cancels out? Aren't you missing something in your analysis?
The individual pays for the insurance. The payment for the insurance is NOT the tax that SCOTUS refers to. You get to select who you pay it to, and most likely, that will be a private insurance company. The policy they sell you must meet certain minimum criteria, (just like auto liability insurance must have a mandated minimum coverage level) but like auto insurance, you are free to negotiate for a lower cost, greater coverage, etc. If you already purchase health care coverage, you will not see an increase in your overall expenditures. Quite the contrary, since more people will be contributing to the insurance pools, you will most likely see a reduction in your premium payments.

If you are NOT taking responsibility for your own health care costs, you will see an increase in your expenditures commensurate with the cost of actually taking that responsibility. The individual mandate gives you an incentive to purchase your own insurance by billing you if you do not.

The "tax" that SCOTUS refers to is the penalty part of the individual mandate. As Romney and the Republicans defined the individual mandate, a person would pay a penalty for not purchasing health care. Obama and the Democrats used this same terminology when they adopted the individual mandate that Republicans had been pushing for two decades. SCOTUS said that Romney's, the Republican's, Obama's, and the Democrat's "penalty" for people who didn't pay was functionally equivalent to a tax on everyone and credits/rebates for those who chose to purchase health insurance.

SCOTUS used a comparison to a recent tax credit. Congress passed a law that said if you installed energy-efficient windows in your home, you were eligible for a $50 credit toward your tax bill. SCOTUS said that another way to say that is anyone who chose not to spend the money on energy efficient windows was punished with a $50 tax penalty.

SCOTUS said that the terminology didn't matter; functionally, the individual mandate was the same thing as a tax and a tax credit.

If you'd like to read more on this, check out page 39 of the SCOTUS decision. The numbering system of the online document is different. It's page 45 of the electronic version here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...sion-text.html
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 10:33 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by samfloor View Post
Obamacare cuts Medicare by $500 billion. don't know if they are relacing that with anything.
From what I understand of them, PPaACA should take over most, if not all, of Medicare Part C and possibly Part D, as well as some people in other parts. The services will still be provided - they'll likely be expanded - but under the umbrella of PPaACA instead of Medicare.
__________________

__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 10:13 AM  
Member

Massillon, Ohio
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 49 | Kudos: +13
So basically, if you have a job and get insurance thru your employer's benefits program, you don't have to worry about the extra tax, right? But if you either have a job that doesn't pay enough for you to afford insurance or are unemployed, you are "fined" a "tax" to help the government cover your insurance.. so what of those that don't pay the fine/tax? They then sent to prison, to be fed and housed on the taxpayer's dollar? Looks like more of a burden to Johnny (or Jenny) Taxpayer, and on our overcrowded prisons that should be dealing with dangerous criminals, instead of those who cannot afford to pay for their own insurance. Or they get on the welfare insurance, which nobody will be paying because they are in jail from not paying the fine/tax, which will make them raise taxes on the ones already paying their insurance...
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 11:07 AM  
MRB
Senior Member
 
MRB's Avatar

Sacramento, California
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 389 | Kudos: +56
I don't know how Obama care is going to impact me or what extra annually it will cost me. Time will tell. I have a Blue Cross PPO now and can go pretty much wherever I want, whenever I want. I have hypertension so I pay $274.00 month just for myself. I do write off the monthly premium on my taxes due to being in business.

This policy gives 100% coverage for accident and emergency admintance to hospital. Regular admintance to hospital has $3800.00 deductable which over $3800.00 they pay 60% to $6800.00, then after $6800.00 they pay 100%. Outpatient surgery has $500.00 deductable then anything over $500.00 is covered 100% They give me 7 well care visits to the doctor per year and after that they pay 60% of the over 7 visit billing. They also pay for 60% to 80% for prescriptions. However, for non generic perscriptions they don't pay much over 10% by my observations.

This probably isnt the best policy out there but it works for me for now and so far I'm content with it. Probably will up grade it later.

I dont see the physician much but he does get me into his office twice a year for blood pressure checks.

I just wonder how this government health care thing will change what I have or can get and how it will directly affect me as an individual especially after 2014.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 12:28 PM  
Administrator
 
samfloor's Avatar

Missouri
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,845 | Kudos: +114
I am not in favor of Obamacare, but you know the sad part, if this had been proposed by a conservative, the Republicans would love it.

And for you old timers, Pres. Nixon once proposed universal free healthcare.
__________________
AKA....Rusty, Floorist, etc.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 09:13 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutlass327 View Post
So basically, if you have a job and get insurance thru your employer's benefits program, you don't have to worry about the extra tax, right?
Correct. This is not the only way to avoid the penalty tax, but yes, this is one way to do it. You could also purchase your own health insurance directly from a provider. I think there's been talk of a public insurance option, but don't hold me to that.
Quote:

But if you either have a job that doesn't pay enough for you to afford insurance or are unemployed, you are "fined" a "tax" to help the government cover your insurance..
No. If you earn under 4 times the poverty rate, you are eligible for subsidies to help you purchase insurance. If you have *no* income, you are (probably) eligible for medicare. If you choose not to accept the subsidy, you may be fined a partial amount, or you might not be fined at all.

I'm a little fuzzy with the exact cutoffs, but I think you get the general idea.

Quote:
so what of those that don't pay the fine/tax?
Refusing to pay the assessed tax would be treated the same way as refusing to pay taxes in general. Eventually, they'll attach your property, garnish your wages, etc.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 09:22 PM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by samfloor View Post
I am not in favor of Obamacare, but you know the sad part, if this had been proposed by a conservative, the Republicans would love it.

And for you old timers, Pres. Nixon once proposed universal free healthcare.
Of course they would! It was PROPOSED by Republicans!
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 08:16 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
Obamacare will create jobs, I understand that the IRS plans to add some 4,000 agents, and a $303 million budget increase to enforce Obamacare.
__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 09:26 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivalarrival View Post
.......If you earn under 4 times the poverty rate, you are eligible for subsidies to help you purchase insurance. ......
Let me get this straight.... If I am in a household of 4 and make less than $92,000 dollars I am eligable for subsidies? (http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/12poverty.shtml/) So, in other words over 95% of the population is eligable for "subsidies"? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Househo..._United_States)
Oh good grief.
__________________
"A society that puts equality ... ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom."

--Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 03:11 PM  
Ric
Senior Member

Denver, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 232 | Kudos: +28
Images: 6
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.