Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Left - Authoritarian

Left - Centre

Left - Libertarian

Centre - Authoritarian

Centre - Centre

Centre - Libertarian

Right - Authoritarian

Right - Centre

Right - Libertarian

Other

Don't care to do the test / View poll

[Andir]

Even if there were, I'd quite possibly check into forming a private company (if it's not overly complicated to have a privately owned insurance company) just to fund my own insurance that I would pay into pretty much like I do now ... just to get around it.  And like I said, I'm sure others will too.  I also said that I was paying for his mistake of going to the emergency room.  Maybe you skimmed that...?

But then again, I'm one of those people he says don't exist.  If I can't afford that cancer treatment, I'll say my goodbyes.  I've lived well enough to enjoy it.

[Kebooo]

Why now is it so important to mandate insurance or fine someone (we should call it a tax)? Well, all the younger people previous to us got to take advantage of their youth, now we don't.  I've already had to pay more because of being a single young male with car insurance.  I'd like to avoid paying health insurance, at least until I'm 30.  I figure if I die, I die.  If no one in my family wants to help me out with whatever brain transplant I need that's going to cost a million gajazillion, then it's time for me to go.  I'm going to have to go eventually, right?

[Leafsnail]

If you want to die, I'm sure you'd be able to opt out of any state funded healthcate plan.

[Kebooo]

If I don't get insurance I will be fined.

[Aqizzar]

And the real kicker: there is no penalty for not having insurance.  It's specifically written into the bill that there is no provision to enforce it, and can be none without another bill to amend it; precisely because of reservations like yours.  So there ya go.

[Cthulhu]

Even if there were, I'd quite possibly check into forming a private company (if it's not overly complicated to have a privately owned insurance company) just to fund my own insurance that I would pay into pretty much like I do now ... just to get around it.  And like I said, I'm sure others will too.  I also said that I was paying for his mistake of going to the emergency room.  Maybe you skimmed that...?

But then again, I'm one of those people he says don't exist.  If I can't afford that cancer treatment, I'll say my goodbyes.  I've lived well enough to enjoy it.

That is an awesome idea.

All of us strapping young lads with good health and delusions of invulnerability need to from Bay12 Insurance.  It costs one dollar, and covers nothing, but it's insurance, and it means we don't have to pay a fine.

[Leafsnail]

If I don't get insurance I will be fined.

You will be fined $0 by noone.  Ouch.

[Vector]

And the real kicker: there is no penalty for not having insurance.  It's specifically written into the bill that there is no provision to enforce it, and can be none without another bill to amend it; precisely because of reservations like yours.  So there ya go.

... Then does it actually do anything?

[Cthulhu]

If I don't get insurance I will be fined.

You will be fined $0 by noone.  Ouch.

Let's not get sarcastic now, this is a big deal.

If this bill doesn't actually enforce itself, what does it do?  Why did we have this huge war between Republicrats and Demoblicans for a bill that apparently doesn't do anything?

Is this what my government is spending its time on?

[Kebooo]

If I'm not going to be fined anything, and it can't be enforced, how on earth is it a mandate, and why has every political analysis of this I've read not stated this?  Why are various states challenging the constitutional basis of an insurance mandate if it can't be enforced in any way?  If there's no way to fine someone, why bother challenging it?

[Andir]

If I'm not going to be fined anything, and it can't be enforced, how on earth is it a mandate, and why has every political analysis of this I've read not stated this?  Why are various states challenging the constitutional basis of an insurance mandate if it can't be enforced in any way?  If there's no way to fine someone, why bother challenging it?

Precedent.  If the States can assert control (which they should be doing anyway...) then the Fed doesn't have the ability to enforce future requirements on the citizens (which they shouldn't be doing anyway...)  That's my guess at least.

If this bill doesn't actually enforce itself, what does it do?  Why did we have this huge war between Republicrats and Demoblicans for a bill that apparently doesn't do anything?

Is this what my government is spending its time on?

Power grabbing.

[Aqizzar]

Yes of course.  Governments are always after new meaningless nebulous power over every aspect of your life.  Trust no one, especially the law, especially when you need the government to do something for you.

There's two thing the bill does.  Most of the bill was concerned with new regulations on what insurance companies have to do.  Y'know, important shit like not kicking customers off the rolls as soon as they try to use the insurance they paid for, not shoveling money into hypochondriac tests that don't do anything, not making doctors only prescribe the medicines with highest profit margin, and actually paying the money they make on providing health care, to the tune of 85% of expenditures, as opposed to the 35ish% like they do now.  Along with setting up a public insurance pool that people without employer-provided insurance can buy into, which would actually be affordable, unlike the private insurance plans now that are usually more expensive than dieing.

As for the "mandate", basically the Democrats had to sell the thing, and the Republicans wouldn't take yes for an answer.  So they squared the circle by making the "mandate" unenforceable, and really really hope nobody notices that.  The Democrats so enough people buy into the system that it actually works; the Republicans so they can keep making political hay out of the idea by making people think they're under some new onerous law.

[Kebooo]

Seriously, no offense meant to your word, but could you link me to some independent publication that confirms the fact it's not enforceable in any way?  Everything I have read or seen has said the opposite of this, including third party analysis.  I'll certainly be happy if I'm not fined, but I truly see no reason to add in a fine if you can't fine someone.  I just need to see some more evidence before I decide not to get health insurance and then suddenly see I'm fined $1000.

[Aqizzar]

Certainly, it would only be profession of me to have a link ready.  I'll have to find the analysis again, but I swear it's actually in the bill.  I'd like to know what third-party analysis you've seen, for completeness.

Update: Okay, my original source is proving exceedingly difficult to find, but here's a good explanation from respected Washington Post reporter Ezra Kline.  To wit-

Most people will never notice the mandate, as they get insurance through their employer and that's good enough for the government. But of those who aren't exempt and aren't insured, the choice will be this: Purchase insurance or pay a small fine. In 2016, the first year the fine is fully in place, it will be $695 a year or 2.5 percent of income, whichever is higher. That makes the mandate progressive.

And what happens if you don't buy insurance and you don't pay the penalty? Well, not much. The law specifically says that no criminal action or liens can be imposed on people who don't pay the fine. If this actually leads to a world in which large numbers of people don't buy insurance and tell the IRS to stuff it, you could see that change. But for now, the penalties are low and the enforcement is non-existent.

I guess you can refuse to believe him if you want, but I or anyone can say the same about any source.  I'd wish he'd actually pointed to the paragraphs in the bill that say that, because I distinctly remember the text, but it's a big-ass bill.

[MrWiggles]

Economic Left/Right: -3.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.85