ACA (a.k.a. Obamacare) Upheld

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,797
572
126
Now that all US citizens will be required to have healthcare, a man like Obama WILL bring in expanded medicare that everyone CAN afford. Or some form of government public option the poor can buy into.

I've heard the idea floated that if Obamacare was found unconstitutional that the best thing to do would be for the President to request a one page bill be introduced in the Senate.

Something that said in effect.

"The eligibility age for medicare is removed. Any citizen can buy into medicare."

That sure as hell would've had lower premiums than any for profit plan offered by any health insurance company.


This doesn't kill private employer healthcare.

This is true.

For example, a German citizen who is in the top 10% of income earners can choose not to enroll in the German Health care system and get the entirety of their care from private insurance. The benefit for them is that they get quicker access to doctors for non-emergency care.
 

ThePresence

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
27,727
16
81
As a liberty-loving, small-government conservative, this is a dark day for me.

However, there are some silver linings.

1. I admire SCOTUS and particularly CJ Roberts very much today.

2. The election was IMO virtually handed to Romney today. The election is now about Obamacare. To repeal or not to. ACA is wildly unpopular.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,648
2,924
136
My understanding is that it is a tax increase of 1%, as well as a deduction for that tax increase (gained through buying insurance).

So if you don't buy insurance, you must pay the tax or face the penalties of not paying your taxes. That's where the teeth are.

It is not my understanding that you can not buy insurance, and not pay the tax, without recourse from the government.

The court also ruled that you are not a lawbreaker for not buying insurance. You are just not entitled to the deduction and must pay the 1% tax hike. Its like if you don't have a mortgage and don't get that deduction

It is and it isn't and I need to do some research to see the ultimate resolution since I'm mainly working off of memory now.

IIRC when the ACA was passed Obama and Congress made sure that we knew it was not a tax increase; taxes would stay the same and you would pay a penalty if you didn't have insurance. Part of that provision acknowledged that certain low-income people still wouldn't have coverage or be able to afford the penalty, so Congress made sure that enforcement of the penalty would not label them felons or otherwise inconvenience them. That created a gaping loophole for people to avoid the mandate without penalty.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,773
10,077
136
another debt that will lead this country to go bankrupt. All thanks to the left.

We'll have to bailout their bankrupt states, like California, shortly. Don't worry though, their redistribution works wonders when they can print money.
 

DrewSG3

Senior member
Feb 7, 2005
366
48
91
I don't disagree that:
A. Your situation was unfair (Those should pre-existing conditions should not prevent you from getting insurance.
B. Something needed/needs to be done

However...
Forcing everyone to buy insurance or pay a penalty (Sorry it is not a tax Supreme Court) is not the solution. Unfortunately, we have experienced one of the many failures on both sides:
A. Republicans won't offer a solution, only criticism.
B. Democrats offer a solution but one that is undeniably unconstitutional.

Out of curiosity, did you ever look at anything like this (Speaking about the concept not about the religion in this instance) http://mychristiancare.org/Medi-Share/

-GP

Not sure how you can say it's unconstitutional, when the Supreme Court just said it was constitutional.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
688
126
#1 is still equitable, isn't it? The government doesn't force a resident of the U.S. to go to the hospital when they feel chest pains - they can choose to stay home or seek alternative treatment. It's by taking to government-built roads or hospitals that you are forced to have insurance of either kind.

Not quite. The requirement is for you to have health insurance even if you never set foot in a hospital, right?
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
I think this is a great day. Once America becomes accustomed to near universal care, which every developed nation should have, they wont let it go, and then Washington can get to work transforming it from the cluster fvck compromise it now is into a full fledged universal health plan.

Why? I will never pay 1 dime out of pocket until I see the poor paying out of pocket / I will fight with weapons befor I submitt to these low life supreme retards. Wife retires this year and she won't pay either. I have No cash reserves Gold is all we have and the government will never see 1 ounce of that Gold not 1 ounce. I also Took away from government. 2x of all money have have given to government since 1968 Just as scripture says to . Nice you guys think that this changes something it doesn't / The poor will still not pay in 1 dime . As soon as my wife retires we will be offically poor . Right were I want to be on paper. We will make money under the table just like millions of Americans are doing now . Good luck with your Mandatory payee healthcare ./ Your pay checks will get smaller as you pay for the poors health care / I have Bone Cancer I could careless about this government and its unconstitutional laws. Death is a thing I would be happy to embrace. They kill unborn babies yet elderly that desire to die they lock into old folks home / These people Have NO LIFE at all. Let the young live Let the old that wish to pass on . Let them go if they desire. But that would be bad for the economy and Jobs Market/ Its all about jobs and removing all money from the elderly threw old folks care centers . Were they recieve little care or family visits. It really doesn't matter times run out on todays warring cavemen. A new time has arrived and I will take pleasure in seeing the dead decaying bodies of the 1% 2012 the year that the liars were removed from our mist.
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
4
76
Again, if it is a tax it can be eliminated via budget reconciliation.

51 votes and it dies. Having it be a tax assures destruction of the law. This is the reason the democrats wanted it to not be a tax...

I don't know why there aren't more comments on this.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
I wasn't sure what i'd do on election day but I'm with the 2/3's majority against this so I'm voting and against Obama.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
As I come late to this thread, let me sum it up.

1. Some posters think its a horrible decision on the part of SOTUS, other think its the correct decision. Regardless which side of the fence you are, it is what it is, learn it and live it.

2. Even if Obama had to nurse and water down the so called Obama care bill to get it through the friendlier 2008 to 2010 congress, Obama did get the bill through.

3. Up until now in the 2012 POTUS race, the OBAMA care issue has been on somewhat of a back burner. Simply since the GOP was hoping that SCOTUS would do their heavy lifting for them, and kill Obama Care. Now that SCOTUS didn't exactly read and follow the GOP script, now the question becomes, how many GOP candidates will make it part of their 2012 election platform to legislatively repeal Obama care? Not only is that repeal a higher 2/3 majority bar, its also politically dangerous. On one hand GOP candidate X may gain voters opposed to Obama care, but it may lose them voters in favor of Obama care.

4. Obama care is not going to particularly adversely impact the the diminishing minority of folks who can obtain subsidized heath insurance from their employers, but because the set of employers able to offer that heath care option to their employees has been dropping like a rock since 1980, it may drop even faster now.

5. So if we look at overall health care costs as a obligation Americans owes to themselves, maybe we will see health care costs as a part of GDP, will get smaller than larger. As we eliminate the profits of health insurance companies who have always been simple parasites. Benefiting only themselves and no one else.As the USA is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not have semi-socialized medicine.

And no Virgina, there is no Santa Claus and no the USA does not have the overall best medical care in the world for anyone but a very few of its citizens.
 

mshan

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2004
7,868
0
71
Out of curiosity, how many people on this thread would the penalty actually apply to? (i. e. don't have insurance)

- If you fall in that category and are lucky enough to remain healthy, then the tax may seem outrageous.

- But if you don't have insurance and get sick or get hit by someone else in car accident and sustain major injuries and have to utilize the emergency room, then having the government actually require you to pay back for some of the cost of the services the rest of us ended up to have to pay for (i. e. insured and always paying premiums) seems quite fair.



Plus, bending the cost curve on inflation in health care costs, along with out of control defense spending, is ultimately what matters in terms of getting our long-term debt under control. Everything else is chump change compared to those two pots of money.

If you have to pay a penny today extra to save a dollar every year in the future (reduced premiums in terms of inflation adjusted dollars), that upfront costs doesn't seem so unreasonable.
 
Last edited:

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,203
7
81
Why? I will never pay 1 dime out of pocket until I see the poor paying out of pocket / I will fight with weapons befor I submitt to these low life supreme retards. Wife retires this year and she won't pay either. I have No cash reserves Gold is all we have and the government will never see 1 ounce of that Gold not 1 ounce. I also Took away from government. 2x of all money have have given to government since 1968 Just as scripture says to . Nice you guys think that this changes something it doesn't / The poor will still not pay in 1 dime . As soon as my wife retires we will be offically poor . Right were I want to be on paper. We will make money under the table just like millions of Americans are doing now . Good luck with your Mandatory payee healthcare ./ Your pay checks will get smaller as you pay for the poors health care / I have Bone Cancer I could careless about this government and its unconstitutional laws. Death is a thing I would be happy to embrace. They kill unborn babies yet elderly that desire to die they lock into old folks home / These people Have NO LIFE at all. Let the young live Let the old that wish to pass on . Let them go if they desire. But that would be bad for the economy and Jobs Market/ Its all about jobs and removing all money from the elderly threw old folks care centers . Were they recieve little care or family visits. It really doesn't matter times run out on todays warring cavemen. A new time has arrived and I will take pleasure in seeing the dead decaying bodies of the 1% 2012 the year that the liars were removed from our mist.

wtf_is_this_shit_Very_Disturbing_Childrens_Book_Socks_with_sandals-s400x297-59009-580.jpg


http://files.sharenator.com/wtf_is_...ook_Socks_with_sandals-s400x297-59009-580.jpg
 
Last edited:

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,773
10,077
136
I wasn't sure what i'd do on election day but I'm with the 2/3's majority against this so I'm voting and against Obama.

:'( Do we have to vote for Mittens? :'(

Third party, always loses, but always an option. Much more appealing to me to 'fall on my sword' than vote for the lesser of two evils. Need I remind you that Bush was elected this way? We know how well that turned out.
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
4
76
Out of curiosity, how many people on this thread would the penalty actually apply to? (i. e. not have insurance)

If you fall in that category and are lucky enough to remain healthy, then the tax may seem outrageous.

But if you don't have insurance and get sick and have to utilize the emergency room, then having the government actually require you to pay back for some of the cost of the services the rest of us ended up to have to pay for (i. e. insured and always paying premiums) seems quite fair.

Plus, bending the cost curve on inflation in health care costs, along with out of control defense spending, is ultimately what matters in terms of getting our long-term debt under control. Everything else is chump change compared to those two pots of money.

If you have to pay a penny today extra to save a dollar every year in the future (reduced premiums in terms of inflation adjusted dollars), that upfront costs doesn't seem so unreasonable.

What if you fall into the camp that medicare/caid bend the cost curve of inflation by not paying competitive market rates and decreasing moral hazard?
 
Last edited:

Beavermatic

Senior member
Oct 24, 2006
374
8
81
This is simply wrong. It was just ruled legal as a tax today. End of story.

Actually good sir, your WRONG. The tax is only deemed legitimate until its enacted, then it must be ruled as being legal or illegal as a final decision.


its literally "in limbo" until its enactment of 2014. there is no final say.


Not sure of your understanding of the situation... but the fact remains, the tax must be ruled legal before its ever enacted., and thats a couple years off. Far from the end of story. Loophole after loophole.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,797
572
126
ACA is wildly unpopular.

It is unpopular for some reason, however, if people are asked only about the separate provisions in ACA those provisions have over a 50% approval rating except for one.

In fact some of them are widely popular

The expansion of medicare for example has a 70% approval rating.


2012-03-27-Blumenthal-kaisercomponentstable.png


The source data for the above image is in this document.

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/8285-T.pdf

The favorability information about the components of the ACA start on page nine. The demographic data on who responded to the poll is on the page immediately following the cover page.



Romney is of course trying to spin this. the current administration should mention that this is very similar to Governor Romney's Massachusetts plan.

"Hey Governor, all we did was take your plan and offer it to the entire country. Y U NO, LIKE YOUR PLAN?" :p
 
Last edited:

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
4
76
Actually good sir, your WRONG. The tax is only deemed legitimate until its enacted, then it must be ruled as being legal or illegal as a final decision.


its literally "in limbo" until its enactment of 2014. there is no final say.


Not sure of your understanding of the situation... but the fact remains, the tax must be ruled legal before its ever enacted., and thats a couple years off. Far from the end of story. Loophole after loophole.

Budget reconciliation. 51 votes kills this if it is a tax.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
As a liberty-loving, small-government conservative, this is a dark day for me.

However, there are some silver linings.

1. I admire SCOTUS and particularly CJ Roberts very much today.

2. The election was IMO virtually handed to Romney today. The election is now about Obamacare. To repeal or not to. ACA is wildly unpopular.

You really think the healthcare law can be the central issue in November when his opponent is Mitt Romney? This is and has always been the chief downside of Romney being the nominee.
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
4
76
You really think the healthcare law can be the central issue in November when his opponent is Mitt Romney? This is and has always been the chief downside of Romney being the nominee.

I thought it was that Mitt was the most boring man on earth?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
:'( Do we have to vote for Mittens? :'(

Third party, always loses, but always an option. Much more appealing to me to 'fall on my sword' than vote for the lesser of two evils. Need I remind you that Bush was elected this way? We know how well that turned out.

Sadly there is no real alternative. The court has ruled that the government can tax you on nothing. The excuse for using the commerce clause is unimportant. It is now legal to force people to do what the government has no right to order and it's neither coercion nor punishment. The power to tax is the power to destroy, unless you are a citizen. I don't want Obama to have a chance to stack the court and subjugate us further. Maybe this will bring other independents to vote and that won't be good for Obama. It's on.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
He said it was virtually handed to Romney. I took that to mean like in the Matrix Romney wins, but in reality, it's obvious that the machines earned another victory.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Exactly. For the past 10+ years or so, I have been subsidising everyone else's medical expenses. No more free-riders.
The approximately 30 million illegals in the country who are obviously not citizens fall outside the jurisdiction of this law. If you're not a citizen, you do not have to pay. Your participation will be, by law, limited to consuming health care resources. There will be free-riders aplenty. Guess who's going to pay for them?