This amuses you, for some reason?
i t s a g r e a t d a y t o b e a l i v e
Does that mean everyone who paid the penalty will get a refund? It should!
I can't believe there are so many idiots in this country. "I hate the guvment slamming healthcare insurance down my throat. All those other sick people should go bankrupt while I do just fine. I'd rather die than have to pay for insurance!"
Congratulations - you may get that wish since you're uninsured when you get sick.
I know it seems hard to believe but there are people who in fact have their own money to buy all the healthcare they need. You can not get ahead with insurance - it's a heck of a lot worse than Vegas odds. Most people put in far more than they will ever get out. It's also one of the reasons health care is so expensive in the US. Free markets and freedom of choice will bring costs way down and quality way up.
fgfrg wrote:
I know it seems hard to believe but there are people who in fact have their own money to buy all the healthcare they need. You can not get ahead with insurance - it's a heck of a lot worse than Vegas odds. Most people put in far more than they will ever get out. It's also one of the reasons health care is so expensive in the US. Free markets and freedom of choice will bring costs way down and quality way up.
Moron.
I was 33 when I was diagnosed with stage 2 colon cancer... was a high school athlete, got plenty of exercise, never smoked, reasonably healthy diet. I did everything “right” but got sick anyway.
The price of my treatment was well over a million dollars. Chemotherapy runs $20k per day. Do you have that kind of cash in your rainy day fund? ‘Cause I sure didn’t, even though I had (and still have) a decent career that puts me firmly into the upper middle class tax bracket. Insurance saved my life.
Obviously most people don’t think bad things will happen to them, but most people also have no concept whatsoever of how much medical treatment actually costs.
So, let's get this straight. The GOP claimed that they would repeal and replace Obamacare/ACA. They failed to repeal it, but removed an important component. The ACA without that component has now been ruled unconstitutional, although we don't know if that will hold up. Let's assume it will. The GOP will now have succeeded in killing Obamacare, have no replacement in mind, and will now blame all future problems on the Democratic majority in the House.
People with pre-existing conditions are now up a creek, because they can be dropped from insurance or priced out of the market. Rather than try to fix something, the GOP decided to break it and pass it off as a victory.
Do I have that right?
Great... but why wasn't this put on TRO for the 8 years in the interim?
The irreversible damage has already been. As they said (also on other BHO subjects), it's putting "facts on the ground" that matters, who cares if it get declares illegal many years down the road?
can't stop a rogue exec wrote:
Great... but why wasn't this put on TRO for the 8 years in the interim?
The irreversible damage has already been. As they said (also on other BHO subjects), it's putting "facts on the ground" that matters, who cares if it get declares illegal many years down the road?
Because it was only the reversal of the so-called "Individual Mandate" (tax) that caused it to violate USA Constitution, supposedly by the logic (Congress nullified SCOTUS rationale).
Plaintiffs argued that they've been harmed by an explosion of people on state-supported insurance rolls - claiming that when Congress repealed the tax penalty last year it nullified the US Supreme Court's rationale for deeming the ACA constitutional in 2012.
The Democratic attorneys general argued that overturning Obamacare would toss millions of people from health insurance rolls by reversing Medicaid expansion - which would end tax credits and allow insurers to start denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. (none of these are actual constitutional arguments, simply policy issues!)
Insurance is very unnatural and we should let nature take its course.
OTOH, if they had kept the IM (individual mandate) BUT instead simply reduced the rate to $0.00, the tax would still exist, and keep ACA legal. That's how judicial logic works.
(I lived in PA when they had an "occupational tax" mandated by law, so the next govt simply reduced them all to $0).
"Wow, but not surprisingly, ObamaCare was just ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL by a highly respected judge in Texas. Great news for America!
As I predicted all along, Obamacare has been struck down as an UNCONSTITUTIONAL disaster! Now Congress must pass a STRONG law that provides GREAT healthcare and protects pre-existing conditions. Mitch and Nancy, get it done!
FACT: You can keep on making your "shared responsibility payment" (nice euphemism) if you want.
Fine line for debate wrote:
OTOH, if they had kept the IM (individual mandate) BUT instead simply reduced the rate to $0.00, the tax would still exist, and keep ACA legal. That's how judicial logic works.
(I lived in PA when they had an "occupational tax" mandated by law, so the next govt simply reduced them all to $0).
That's exactly what they did. That's why it's STILL legal...
In the TCJA, Congress reduced the ACA’s shared-responsibility payment to zero, effective January 1, 2019.
See TCJA § 11081.
The question of constitutionality is straightforward: Is the Individual Mandate a constitutional exercise of Congress’s enumerated powers when the shared-responsibility payment is zero?
Because the Supreme Court upheld the Individual Mandate under Congress’s Tax Power, the Court will begin there before proceeding to an Interstate Commerce Clause analysis. The Court finds that both plain text and Supreme Court precedent dictate that the Individual Mandate is unconstitutional under either provision
The essential feature of any tax: It produces at least some revenue for the Government.
United States v. Kahriger (1953).
Sand Dunes wrote:
Insurance is very unnatural and we should let nature take its course.
You said you were leaving till you broke 15 mins.
Right all along wrote:
The essential feature of any tax: It produces at least some revenue for the Government.
United States v. Kahriger (1953).
How about those 0% tax rates built into the tax tables?
How about Trump paying $0 tax for many years?