At least it wasn't the Republicans that supported Obamacare. Mod Note: Thread splinter from "Republican Voter Suppression Efforts"
Yes, because suppressing a citizen's right to vote really is nothing compared to the evils of ensuring they have access to affordable healthcare.
Affordable health care? How can a person who has very little money pay for the "tax" even when they can't even afford their own health care?
You're probably going to be exempt from the tax one way or another. Health care is going to be more affordable thanks to expansive subsidies, and if you're at 133% of the federal poverty level or lower, you're going to be covered by Medicaid anyway, and therefore will meet the mandate's requirements.
For the sake of argument, if someone were to not want the Health Care they would be penalized for not purchasing the Health Care, therefore they are pretty much going to be broke for refusing to buy the health care. Also, the contract provided by the Obamacare could in fact take away your rights, so you lose either way. Not a good look on the future.
s A couple of things, first the topic of this thread is not Obamacare. Two, you appear to be grossly misinformed. My guess is you have been listening to too much infotainment (i.e. Rush Limbaugh, Levin, Beck, Fox News, et al.). Under the so called Obamacare plan no one earning less than 400% or less of the poverty level will pay more than 9.5% of their income on healthcare insurance under any circumstance and may pay as little as nothing for their healthcare insurance. The amount healthcare insurance costs an individual in this income bracket is based on a sliding scale based on income. The penalty for not purchasing healthcare insurance is – get ready for this - $95 dollars or 1% of income over the filing fee minimum. Additionally, the IRS cannot fine you for not paying the amount due or collect this amount from you if you refuse to pay it. So you think $95 is going to break you? If so, you are in dire straits and will qualify for some level of government support. If you are earning more than 400% of the poverty level, why should I and others subsidize all of your healthcare insurance costs and your irresponsible financial decisions? You should be a responsible citizen and pay what you can afford to cover your health insurance. “Impose an annual penalty of $95, or up to 1% of income over the filing minimum[79], whichever is greater, on individuals who are not covered by an acceptable insurance policy; this will rise to a minimum of $695 ($2,085 for families), or 2.5% of income over the filing minimum[79], by 2016.[17][80] Exemptions to the mandatory coverage provision and penalty are permitted for religious reasons or for those for whom the least expensive policy would exceed 8% of their income.[81] On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that this penalty "must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance." According to the Supreme Court, Congress does not have the power under the Commerce Clause to mandate insurance coverage, but it does have the power to levy the penalty as a tax. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that "about 4 million" (3.9 million or 1.2% of the population) will pay the penalty in 2016.[82]” - Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act#Effective_by_January_1.2C_2014 And just what rights would those be exactly?
Actually I don't listen to those since they are biased. However, I read the bill and I am not misinformed, it seems you are. And, I said it could take your rights depending on the contact.
I am sure your reading of the law explains why you are so obviously misinformed. I repeat, just what rights would Obamacare take away exactly? You read the law, you made the claim, you should know. And $95 is going to break you?
Well clearly the contract states that if one were to purchase the health care that they would have to follow certain rules or action would have to be taken. The poor people barely have $95.
First, it is a law and not a contract, one of them minor details again. Yeah, the law requires that people buy insurance or pay a fine/tax of $95 dollars. It requires people to be financially responsible with respect to their healthcare – just like auto insurance. So the right you are bemoaning and claiming is the right to pass on your healthcare costs to me by not purchasing healthcare insurance? You have no such right to be financially irresponsible and to pass your healthcare costs on to me. Show me where in the constitution you have a right to be irresponsible, you cannot because it doesn’t exist. So I again challenge you to show me what rights are being surrendered? You claim to have read the law and you have claimed that this law "takes away" your rights. Well then, for the third time, I again challenge you to name those rights. If $95 is too tough for you, what the hell are you doing on a computer? Additionally, the $95 is easily avoidable by obtaining healthcare insurance. And as previously pointed out to you and you should know if you read the law as you have claimed, your healthcare insurance is subsidized so that healthcare insurance does become affordable. You don't have a right to be fiscally irresponsible. You don't have a right to make me pay for your healthcare when you are perfectly capable of doing so yourself. Your argument thus far has basically boiled down to your perceived right to be financially irresponsible with your healthcare and have others pick up the costs for your medical coverage when you are perfectly capable of paying those costs yourself. Just as you don’t have a right to make me pay for your new car, you don’t have a right to make me pay for your healthcare insurance when you are perfectly capable of paying for it.
Now you're moving the goalposts. Your initial complaint was that someone who can't afford healthcare would be penalized for not being able to afford it. This is incorrect. Now you say that someone who refuses healthcare despite being able to afford it will be broke. This is also incorrect, as Joe points out above. I'm curious, which non-sequitur will you employ now to evade having to admit you're wrong? Gonna have to be a bit more specific on that one, chief.
Poor people who barely have $95 dollars will covered by Medicaid, and therefore won't have to pay the tax. And most people who are outside of the extended poverty limit covered by Medicaid will already have coverage through their employers. The mandate tax will only affect people who consciously make the decision to not purchase health care for non-religious reasons, and those people will almost certainly have no trouble paying the tax penalty. Also, it is a law, not a contract. The only rule is that you have to have healthcare, and the only action taken against you is a tax penalty.
