Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

  1. #11
    ThunderCougarFalconBird
    roughdraft274's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,080

    Re: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Not getting an unnecessary tax used as a giant blowjob to the insurance lobby is an incentive?

    B.F. Skinner would like a word with you.
    You're taxes are less if you have health insurance, the same that it is less if you own a house, have a kid get married blah blah blah. Therefor you are incentivized towards that behavior. It is not controlling, it is not forcing.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    uh that is so small as to be stupid. Do you want registration? given less than 3% of criminals get their guns from private sales, its pretty much a waste of resources
    **Thirty Minutes Later**
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    you are confused. I never denied that many criminals get guns in private sales.

  2. #12
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by roughdraft274 View Post
    Not really. There is no difference. Either way you pay less taxes if you do something, and pay more if you don't. Same with having kids etc.

    The tax on not having health insurance is no different then if they had increased everyone's taxes by a certain amount and then gave everyone a credit for that exact same amount. Either way the results are identical in every way. Tax code has been written to incentive certain behaviors for a long time, and obamacare isn't some new found way to control people.
    It is a bit more complicated than that. Most (85% to 90%) now have their medical care insurance provided by (or heavily subsidized by) their employer (or the gov't). This means that neither the employer nor the employee now pays much (if any) of that insurance expense using after tax income; yet an uninsured person is now expected to either use their after tax income to buy their own "mandated" insurance or to pay a an additional tax for not doing so.

    I am not personally affected, or so I believe, since the PPACA law exempts (from the uninsured tax penalty) those that would have qualified for Medicaid expansion (single up to 200% of the FPL) living in states that opted out of it.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  3. #13
    ThunderCougarFalconBird
    roughdraft274's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,080

    Re: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    It is a bit more complicated than that. Most (85% to 90%) now have their medical care insurance provided by (or heavily subsidized by) their employer (or the gov't). This means that neither the employer nor the employee now pays much (if any) of that insurance expense using after tax income; yet an uninsured person is now expected to either use their after tax income to buy their own "mandated" insurance or to pay a an additional tax for not doing so.

    I am not personally affected, or so I believe, since the PPACA law exempts (from the uninsured tax penalty) those that would have qualified for Medicaid expansion (single up to 200% of the FPL) living in states that opted out of it.
    Bolded part is a bunch of bull ****. I pay half my premiums and my employer pays the other half, and my half comes out of my paycheck, after taxes. It is not taken out before hand. Yes, employers I believe do get some kind of tax breaks on it, but they don't pay taxes on it for the same reason that they don't pay taxes on money they pay employees, it's a business expense.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    uh that is so small as to be stupid. Do you want registration? given less than 3% of criminals get their guns from private sales, its pretty much a waste of resources
    **Thirty Minutes Later**
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    you are confused. I never denied that many criminals get guns in private sales.

  4. #14
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    There is a huge difference between doing something (e.g. getting married) to change your taxation status and having your taxation status change for not doing something (spending your after tax income as directed by the gov't). Giving the federal gov't the power to mandate spending your after tax income as directed or paying an additional tax penalty is new ground. Allowing individuals a tax deduction/credit if they buy "private" medical insurance is different than saying buy it or pay an additional tax.
    Really? So if the federal government had levied an income tax of $695 on all Americans, and then offered a $695 tax credit for people with health insurance, you'd have been fine with it?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  5. #15
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: GOP eyes Dem help on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Really? So if the federal government had levied an income tax of $695 on all Americans, and then offered a $695 tax credit for people with health insurance, you'd have been fine with it?
    It would never have passed so it is a non-issue. Why not levy a tax of $1000 per child and then offer a tax credit of $1000 per child to married parents? Is it not better to have two parent households? Using the federal income tax code for social engineering purposes could be done in many ways.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •