• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax

These are from your own article. Obama will win this battle in court easily.





You should have read more carefully over your article and realized that this had nothing to do with Obama flip flopping over whether or not it was a tax, rather that Obama has found a perfectly viable legal argument for showing that the Constitution was perfectly fine with forcing people to pay for health insurance.

You stepped in your own bear trap. And I could care less about what Obama flip flopped about he's a politican and both sides of the isle have been doing that since day one.



Its a stupid idea for the tea parties to try and make the notion that Obama is violating the constitution. He's a constitutional scholar and former constitutional professor along with a brilliant lawyer who deeply respects the document and will wipe the floor with anyone trying to use it as leverage over his administration.

DOUBLE WOW!! Boy, you Obama faithful can really do a mean tap dance.
 
You are continuing to ignore the real numbers I posted. Forget the damn tax penalty, I never said they would have to pay it.

Just answer this question.... how will this family be able to afford health insurance, EVEN with the subsidy????? Health insurance will cost them over $10,000 a year. They have to pay that amount then wait a year for a tax rebate. Their total out-of-pocket expenses will be over $5,000, EVEN with the subsidy !!!!

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the premiums are capped as a % of income. With an income of $32000 your premiums wont be $10,000. You'll have to make nearly six figures to pay that much in premiums if you're a family of four.

Also, some help is better than no help. That family you're talking about can't afford health insurance now.

Canada's system is better in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Its not a product or service it promotes the general welfare of people in the country. Forcing people to purchase insurance lowers the cost of insurance for everyone. Forcing people to pay for insurance and have free check ups prevents many emergency room visits that put a strain on the healthcare industry and raises the prices of insurance for people.

You're not going to beat Obama at his own game. Constitutional law is his domain.

Do you get a thrill up your leg every time you hear him speak?
 
Forget about the tax label for a second. Im wondering how many people right here in our merry little band of bloggers are low income wage earners that choose not to get insurance because they see themselves as young, healthy, and not really in need of health care yet. You do realize that that choice will be stripped from you...right? You will now be FORCED to buy insurance for health care that you may or may not use for 1-3-5-maybe 10 years. or more. And while its not a position I recommend I know several people in that group...conservatives and liberals alike...
 
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the premiums are capped as a % of income. With an income of $32000 your premiums wont be $10,000. You'll have to make nearly six figures to pay that much in premiums if you're a family of four.

Also, some help is better than no help. That family you're talking about can't afford health insurance now.

Canada's system is better in my opinion.

:roll: Do I have to take you by the hand and lead you to the water trough ?????

The family's insurance premium will be: $10,108.
Their share of the premium will be: $1,028.
The government subsidy will be: $9,081.
Their maximum out-of-pocket expense will be (not including the premium): $4,167.

Total yearly out-of-pocket costs (max): $5,195.

The $9,081. government subsidy is a tax credit. That means they only get the money back (a percentage of it) when they file income tax the next year. That means they have to pay the monthly premiums out of their budget, which will be next to impossible for a family with that much annual income.

And no, they won't be better off, they'll be MUCH worse off. This plan is not any help, it's like a lead weight thrown to a drowning man.
 
:roll: Do I have to take you by the hand and lead you to the water trough ?????

The family's insurance premium will be: $10,108.
Their share of the premium will be: $1,028.
The government subsidy will be: $9,081.
Their maximum out-of-pocket expense will be (not including the premium): $4,167.

Total yearly out-of-pocket costs (max): $5,195.

The $9,081. government subsidy is a tax credit. That means they only get the money back (a percentage of it) when they file income tax the next year. That means they have to pay the monthly premiums out of their budget, which will be next to impossible for a family with that much annual income.

And no, they won't be better off, they'll be MUCH worse off. This plan is not any help, it's like a lead weight thrown to a drowning man.

Socialism making people poorer by the day equally.
 
Forget about the tax label for a second. Im wondering how many people right here in our merry little band of bloggers are low income wage earners that choose not to get insurance because they see themselves as young, healthy, and not really in need of health care yet. You do realize that that choice will be stripped from you...right? You will now be FORCED to buy insurance for health care that you may or may not use for 1-3-5-maybe 10 years. or more. And while its not a position I recommend I know several people in that group...conservatives and liberals alike...

Hmmmmmmm........ I'm 56. I'm not low income. I have never had health insurance. I've been to the doctor 1 time in my life (age 18+) that wasn't covered by workmans comp. and paid cash.

Do I count? :mrgreen:
 
Truth be told, this health care debacle will probably benefit me when it goes into effect..... but it's still wrong and I will always oppose it, and all things like it.
 
Truth be told, this health care debacle will probably benefit me when it goes into effect..... but it's still wrong and I will always oppose it, and all things like it.

I can't see it benefitting anyone. I think Obama screwed the pooch with everone on this deal.
 
Hmmmmmmm........ I'm 56. I'm not low income. I have never had health insurance. I've been to the doctor 1 time in my life (age 18+) that wasn't covered by workmans comp. and paid cash.

Do I count? :mrgreen:

Sure...maybe you count as an outstanding model for healthcare insurance reform. Assuming you carried insurance for 30 years at say a baseline of 4000 a year...if there was an interest bearing account dedicated to your case you would have what...about 560,000 paid for in health insurance (assuming normal rates of interest...total investment doubling approx every 9 years based on standard secure market rates). Thats probably about 150k low I'm thinking...but...anyway...

so maybe you should be OK for a few years and not have to pay...if they reform health insurance. Maybe with existing private plans we wouldnt need to create a 1-2 trillion dollar debacle like this thing is shaping up to be. Might at least have been worth looking at before they passed a 2000 page law that none of them had read.
 
I can't see it benefitting anyone. I think Obama screwed the pooch with everone on this deal.

Just like everyone gives Bush too much credit...I think you are giving Obama too much...all he did was signed that piece of **** that the house and senate rammed down everyones throat.
 
Just like everyone gives Bush too much credit...I think you are giving Obama too much...all he did was signed that piece of **** that the house and senate rammed down everyones throat.

You forgot the part at his behest.
 
:roll: Do I have to take you by the hand and lead you to the water trough ?????

The family's insurance premium will be: $10,108.
Their share of the premium will be: $1,028.
The government subsidy will be: $9,081.
Their maximum out-of-pocket expense will be (not including the premium): $4,167.

Total yearly out-of-pocket costs (max): $5,195.

The $9,081. government subsidy is a tax credit. That means they only get the money back (a percentage of it) when they file income tax the next year. That means they have to pay the monthly premiums out of their budget, which will be next to impossible for a family with that much annual income.

And no, they won't be better off, they'll be MUCH worse off. This plan is not any help, it's like a lead weight thrown to a drowning man.

Ahh, so what you're doing is assuming that the family will reach their deductible limit every year. Ok then.

How can a family in this situation be worse off because of the health care bill? They can elect to still not have health insurance and live exactly like they already live. The plan you're describing is still much more forgiving than any plan they'd have now, previously they'd be paying that extra $9081 themselves.

At his behest...pass socialized medicine. Thats pretty much it.

This bill is most definitely not socialized medicine.
 
Last edited:
This bill is most definitely not socialized medicine.

I know its picking at nits...but its law, not just a bill anymore...and as to the socialized part...no...not yet. It will be.
 
Ahh, so what you're doing is assuming that the family will reach their deductible limit every year. Ok then.

How can a family in this situation be worse off because of the health care bill? They can elect to still not have health insurance and live exactly like they already live. The plan you're describing is still much more forgiving than any plan they'd have now, previously they'd be paying that extra $9081 themselves.



This bill is most definitely not socialized medicine.

A family that doesn't meet their deductible means they don't have doctor bills and aren't a burden on society anyway.

Even if they don't meet their deductible, they still have to pay their share of the premium and foot the bill for the subsidy until getting part of it back the next year. They will also have to pay out of pocket up to the deductible.

They may not be any worse off if they don't buy insurance, but they sure as hell aren't any better off are they ???

How many millions of families will be in this situation ??? This bill relies on almost 100% participation to control costs. Instead there will be millions of families like the one in my example, plus millions of young people that choose to pay the penalty rather than buy insurance. Costs for insurance will skyrocket.

This bill is a "charlie foxtrot" waiting to happen.
 
Last edited:
Just like everyone gives Bush too much credit...I think you are giving Obama too much...all he did was signed that piece of **** that the house and senate rammed down everyones throat.

I think he had a little more to do with it than just signing it. There's a year's worth of more... he wanted it, he pushed for it, he gave it over to Congress who mucked with it and turned it into a pile of crap, and then since he had over a year's worth invested, he HAD to sign it. Obama enabled the house and senate to ram it down everyone's throats.
 
Obama enabled the (democratic majority) house and senate to ram it down everyone's throats. enact a bill over the period of more than a year in the usual manner in which our representation works.

Fixed that for you. Conservatives call anything they don't like "rammed down our throats." What's this freudian obsession with that phrase anyway?
The public was well in favor of this bill until the GOP spin machine told them it was going to pull the plug on grandma. Even now, when people have the bill's provisions actually explained to them, the bill is favored by a solid majority of the country.

It fixes a few of the serious problems our citizens have with access to healthcare. Most of us will still be getting the exact same health plan from the exact same company going to the exact same doctor.
 
Last edited:
Fixed that for you. Conservatives call anything they don't like "rammed down our throats." What's this freudian obsession with that phrase anyway?
The public was well in favor of this bill until the GOP spin machine told them it was going to pull the plug on grandma. Even now, when people have the bill's provisions actually explained to them, the bill is favored by a solid majority of the country.

It fixes a few of the serious problems our citizens have with access to healthcare. Most of us will still be getting the exact same health plan from the exact same company going to the exact same doctor.

The GOP spin machine ????

If the Dems had given the public time to actually read the bill before ramming it down our throats, there would have been widespread opposition before it passed.
 
Fixed that for you. Conservatives call anything they don't like "rammed down our throats." What's this freudian obsession with that phrase anyway?
It has to do with being force fed - intimating a person may not be eating or may be on a hunger strike where others then must force feed them something they do not want. Not sure about it being freudian.

The public was well never in favor of this bill until the GOP spin machine told them the public it was going to pull the plug on grandma increase their taxes, drive doctors out of medicine, lower quality of medical care, and would INCREASE the deficit.

There - I fixed it for you. That's accurate and actually - the GOP was right.


Even now, when people have the bill's provisions actually explained to them, the bill is favored by a solid majority of the country.
Source ?

It fixes a few of the serious problems our citizens have with access to healthcare. Most of us will still be getting the exact same health plan from the exact same company going to the exact same doctor.

Yeah... that's not entirely true is it. Higher costs (per CBO), restrictive networks, and now a tax, and the doctors? Yeah, well... you probably won't keep your doctor unless they're in the restrictive networks. If they're not in network, you're on your own. And let's face it... before his law goes into full effect, there's a chance it won't be funded or will be shelved for years, will be re-written or something else... especially if Congress has a power shift in 2010. Maybe now that Berwick is in, he'll be able to redistribute health care... wealth... err.. money... whatever.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/business/18choice.html

Let's go to the people to see how they are supporting healthcare:

52% expect costs to increase
17% expect costs to go down
17% expect costs to remain the same
56% favor repeal
38% oppose repeal
 
Back
Top Bottom