Comments on: 10.2% Unemployed… will be forced to purchase Insurance

By: DavidS1787

DavidS1787 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 05:08:57 +0000

By: DavidS1787

DavidS1787 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 05:07:34 +0000

the people that passed this bill in jail!!!!

By: Menlo

Menlo — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:49:18 +0000

Whenever I hear claims that sound too outrageous to be true, even if they are coming from a source I trust and respect, I always research them to find the counterarguments and all the details. I don’t generally accept headlines, sound bites, and even news articles.

Details I may not have thought of can matter, even if they don’t change where I stand on something. Sometimes though, they don’t have any valid counterarguments. I at least like to look it up.

This “mandate” would be better if modeled after the one in Germany, where penalties only apply, with back penalties, to uninsured people who seek medical care and cannot pay for it. I would even favor such a proposal in that case.

By: itrytobenice

itrytobenice — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:40:46 +0000

He said he hadn’t realized societal problems could be solved so easily. Now we can get rid of the homeless population by requiring everyone to buy a house and fining them if they fail to do so.

Step 1: Require societal problems to go away.
Step 2: ??
Step 3: Profit!!

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:07:28 +0000

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:07:08 +0000

You will need to send me the link. No state would opt out. See Medicaid. It also has an opt out provision, and no state ever has. They are hooked on the matching funds and no ot out allows opting out of the taxes to pay for programs. See also highway matching funds, etc.

By: Steph C

Steph C — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:49:28 +0000

And we can expect more taxes at the state and local levels to make up the states’ parts to get those federal funds. BCM has it right. We have become slaves.

By: Patricia_C

Patricia_C — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:48:55 +0000

An arm is attached to a body as these penalties are attached to Pelosi’s bill.
But thanks for the clarification.
Paying attention is the first step to learning… and having wise teachers helps those like me to find their way.

I appreciate your insight. It will help me continue to make my point when debating others… but now I can continue to do so with better accuracy.

By: Scope

Scope — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:33:10 +0000

Yesterday, on Chris Wallace, McDonnell said he was against any government run, public option, health program. He said that he was much in favor of state opt-outs. Does that mean we are already looking at a hope than already can never be achieved? He has also pushed for drilling off VA coasts. The newly elected Atty General Cuccinelli has said that he is a big 10th amendment supporter, and, will look for every way possible to buck the federal mandates. Am I correct in thinking that a state is only responsible to the federal government for particular programs, if they take federal monies for those programs? Is it possible for states to stand on their own financially?

By: Scope

Scope — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:33:10 +0000

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:28:00 +0000

no state would opt out.

By: David123

David123 — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:24:49 +0000

would this mean that taxpayers in some states would pay higher federal taxes than taxpayers in other states?

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:14:05 +0000

By: Menlo

Menlo — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:10:27 +0000

The penalties you cited already exist and have for some time. They are NOT part of the health care bill but part of the tax code for evasion of taxes.

As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, this is an income tax in disguise. People who have no income will have no penalty.

The penalty for not having insurance is 2.5 percent of income. It is a tax increase of 2.5 percent from which insured people will be exempt.

This is in truth a tax increase that serves no purpose but to not make Obama look like the liar he is.

By: Patricia_C

Patricia_C — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:31:48 +0000

Na… Like everything else with this “most transparent administration in history”, they’ll be on C-SPAN!

By: Achance

Achance — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:54:03 +0000

By: Patricia_C

Patricia_C — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:51:33 +0000

Nope… Taxes are gonna go up lots and lots and LOTS of dimes!

By: civil_truth

civil_truth — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:45:03 +0000

That would solve unemployment and healthcare in one fell swoop. Especially when we add barbed wire and secret tribunals.

By: Leopard1996

Leopard1996 — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:30:44 +0000

This whole health care bill as it stands now, is going to be the death knell of this economy, because businesses will not hire people unless totally necessary, and for those that are unemployed, I am sure that not all of them will “qualify” for a “hardship” voucher.

All I am waiting for is the first lib, who gets swept up and has to server some jail time, that whole provision will get challenged in the Supreme Court. and I say lib because if it is one of us, no lib lawyer will take the case.

By: izoneguy

izoneguy — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:27:56 +0000

Will everyone be rounded up?

Or will they only check people with W-2 forms?

Won’t this just encourage the black market and off the books work?

The new WAR ON PRODUCERS.

I might just have to fire me…..