Healthcare Law Prediction Thread UPDATE: ACA UPHELD

[Axon]

Breaking news:

Congress has imposed a $5,000 a gallon tax if you don't buy milk each week. They have also enacted a tax on the cost of a gallon of milk: $5000 a gallon. They agree milk 'does a body good', so this is clearly for the common good of the nation.

I was surprised Scalia upheld this one

 

[zinfamous]

I was surprised Scalia upheld this one

I wasn't surprised, though, when Judge Thomas upheld the Porn tax--requiring all men (and 15% of the women in the country, described as having certain "psychosexual disorders") to spend no less than 3% of their after-tax monthly salary on pornographic material.

it has been widely and long-noted by the healthcare industry that regular masturbation is part of a healthy individual's normal lifestyle.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Obama: If you make under $250,000 a year your taxes will not go up one dime........

Except for the $5000 a year health care tax.

srsly, i wish they would overturn this. after that i want them to overturn the requirement that i have to pay to fund the police and firemen in my town.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Uhm, let's see. How about the Bill of Rights? What about this ruling says the government can ban speech? What about this ruling says the state can conduct unreasonable and warrantless search and seizure? What about this ruling says the state can compel you to incriminate yourself? What about this ruling says the state can ban or endorse religion? What about this ruling says the state can ban sodomy? For that matter, what about this ruling overturns Roe V. Wade and permits the state to ban early term abortions?

Need I go on?

What I don't understand is why you think it's OK if the state forcibly taxes you then buys you health insurance, but isn't OK that they require you to take what would otherwise have been that same money and buy the insurance yourself, having choices about which policy to buy instead of the government deciding for you? Which abridges freedom of choice more?

So your answer is that our rights are limited to the bill of rights. If it's not there too bad.

Can you be taxed for not owning a car that gets 45mpg? Why not?

 

[woolfe9999]

So your answer is that our rights are limited to the bill of rights. If it's not there too bad.

Can you be taxed for not owning a car that gets 45mpg? Why not?

They can tax cars that get poor mileage, or give tax breaks on those with good mileage. The latter they have already done. The power to tax is in the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights is all, eh? You act as though your freedom to speak, and the privacy of your home, possessions, sex life and reproductive decisions are unimportant whereby preserving 100% of your economic choices is what we really should be concerned about. The second fallacy is assuming that one decision affecting an economic choice means all economic choices will be controlled.

If you don't like the healthcare bill, vote republican in November. They want to repeal it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

They can tax cars that get poor mileage, or give tax breaks on those with good mileage. The latter they have already done. The power to tax is in the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights is all, eh? You act as though your freedom to speak, and the privacy of your home, possessions, sex life and reproductive decisions are unimportant whereby preserving 100% of your economic choices is what we really should be concerned about. The second fallacy is assuming that one decision affecting an economic choice means all economic choices will be controlled.

If you don't like the healthcare bill, vote republican in November. They want to repeal it.

You didn't answer my question. I specifically asked if you could be taxed for not having a car which gets 45 mpg or better.

 

[cliftonite]

You didn't answer my question. I specifically asked if you could be taxed for not having a car which gets 45 mpg or better.

You already are. You pay more in gasoline taxes.

 

[postmortemIA]

You already are. You pay more in gasoline taxes.

how? if a person buys 1000 gals/yr for prius, he pays same tax as somebody buying 1000 gals/yr for hummer.

 

[sportage]

So under the new republican theory, if someone runs their car into your car on the road, why force that driver to carry auto insurance?
You pay, they don't. Their fault becomes your loss.
Oh... You can take them to court to collect damages. lol.
Good luck with that.

Why should healthcare requirement be any different? Their illness becomes your loss.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

The thing about healthcare is that it really is a unique industry that cannot be compared to anything else. Everyone, no matter how healthy, will need health care at some point in their lives. It simply makes no sense to have these uninsured people out there racking up enormous bills that the rest of us have to pay for through increased premiums. Get them into the system and accounted for like the rest of us.

There is no other answer here besides simply not providing coverage to any uninsured person. This may be acceptable to some Republicans, but this is America and we don't let people die on the streets. We're better than that.

 

[Carmen813]

Woohoo, my freedom increased today. Seriously.

I'm guessing most of you don't have pre-existing conditions

 

[woolfe9999]

You didn't answer my question. I specifically asked if you could be taxed for not having a car which gets 45 mpg or better.

And you didn't answer any of the points I made in that post, or the previous, so I guess we're even.

The answer to your question is, under the logic of this ruling, probably "yes" if certain conditions are met, such as the tax being relatively small, non-punitive and not enforceable by criminal penalty. If you'd read the decision, you'd have known that already.

 

[zinfamous]

You didn't answer my question. I specifically asked if you could be taxed for not having a car which gets 45 mpg or better.

can you be taxed for choosing not to enter into the agreement of accepting "life?"

I mean, I didn't purchase this life--this shell, this human husk. Were you able to choose the husk that best suits your lifestyle?

 

[LongTimePCUser]

how? if a person buys 1000 gals/yr for prius, he pays same tax as somebody buying 1000 gals/yr for hummer.

Do you stop driving your hummer after you have hit your quota of 1000 gal / year?

The right way to look at it is to ask how much gasoline tax you pay when you drive your hummer your usual 12,000 miles per year. Probably a lot more in tax than the Prius owner who drives 12,000 miles per year.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

how? if a person buys 1000 gals/yr for prius, he pays same tax as somebody buying 1000 gals/yr for hummer.

are you dumb? they both don't drive the same distance with 1000 gallons.

 

[Cerb]

Woohoo, my freedom increased today. Seriously.

I'm guessing most of you don't have pre-existing conditions

But, you need both pre-existing conditions, and the money for pay insurance premiums. My pre-existing conditions are common enough that I'm insurable, but not at any cost that I've ever been able to pay without using insurance provided by an employer. So, I just see a punitive tax.

 

[werepossum]

The thing about healthcare is that it really is a unique industry that cannot be compared to anything else. Everyone, no matter how healthy, will need health care at some point in their lives. It simply makes no sense to have these uninsured people out there racking up enormous bills that the rest of us have to pay for through increased premiums. Get them into the system and accounted for like the rest of us.

There is no other answer here besides simply not providing coverage to any uninsured person. This may be acceptable to some Republicans, but this is America and we don't let people die on the streets. We're better than that.

Well said. It's not acceptable to let people die from lack of insurance. I'd like to see Obamacare replaced with a simpler bill mandating the good things in the bill and also charging each state with reaching 90% coverage in five years, 95% coverage in ten years, and 100% coverage in fifteen years. Let each state do its own thing, whether it's Obamacare (at the state level) or Romneycare or Tenncare or the free market. Then we'd see which systems work best. I highly doubt that the best system for poor, fat, heavily black Mississippi is the best system for white, affluent Alaska, or that the best system for new jersey 1,200 people per square mile is the best system for Wyoming with 1/200th that population density.

Woohoo, my freedom increased today. Seriously.

I'm guessing most of you don't have pre-existing conditions

Congrats, dude.

But, you need both pre-existing conditions, and the money for pay insurance premiums. My pre-existing conditions are common enough that I'm insurable, but not at any cost that I've ever been able to pay without using insurance provided by an employer. So, I just see a punitive tax.

I'm not sure when it starts, but there will eventually be a high risk pool which should make insuring those of us with pre-existing conditions more affordable. Eventually, if private for-profit or not-for-profit insurance survives - which I think unlikely simply because our entitlement mentality says that other people's money should buy our health care - I expect all insurance policies will be the same price regardless of pre-existing conditions or probably even age.

 

[Cerb]

I'm not sure when it starts, but there will eventually be a high risk pool which should make insuring those of us with pre-existing conditions more affordable. Eventually, if private for-profit or not-for-profit insurance survives - which I think unlikely simply because our entitlement mentality says that other people's money should buy our health care - I expect all insurance policies will be the same price regardless of pre-existing conditions or probably even age.

Personally, I hope it doesn't, at least for basic care. That entitlement mentality is perfectly fine, as long as there is reciprocation. If others pay for my care now, and my taxes pay for others' care once I am producing more than consuming from our economy, I don't see the downside.

I doubt insurance will come to cost the same to everyone, though I can see it disregarding some natures of your personal risk.

 

[werepossum]

Personally, I hope it doesn't, at least for basic care. That entitlement mentality is perfectly fine, as long as there is reciprocation. If others pay for my care now, and my taxes pay for others' care once I am producing more than consuming from our economy, I don't see the downside.

I doubt insurance will come to cost the same to everyone, though I can see it disregarding some natures of your personal risk.

It already does that. Your neighbor can be a land whale who rarely stirs from his couch and that's disregarded even though the cost of his inevitable heart attack and open heart surgery may be higher than your pre-existing condition care. Health insurance premiums don't take into account that a gay man will statistically have higher health care expenses than a straight man, or a gay woman less than a straight woman, or that as a motorcycle rider I'll statistically need more health care than if I drove a Volvo. There are some risk factors we as a society deem not socially acceptable to include in pricing, and some health insurance companies choose not to try including.

There's some moral justification I think in discounting pre-existing factors as probably most aren't the fault of the individual. Of course, they aren't the fault of the insurance company or of the others who'll have to pay higher premiums either. But right now your fellow employees pick up the extra costs of your pre-existing conditions, and I can see that sort of risk flattening spreading. Because health care has gotten so expensive and so many people no longer have good jobs, health insurance will either become more uniform or devolve into accounting and paperwork for government-paid health care.

 

[Bitek]

As a tax it's easier to kill as well. Can't believe no one has brought that up yet. 51 votes...

Research the Byrd rule. It's not going to be that simple

 

[Cerb]

It already does that. Your neighbor can be a land whale who rarely stirs from his couch and that's disregarded even though the cost of his inevitable heart attack and open heart surgery may be higher than your pre-existing condition care. Health insurance premiums don't take into account that a gay man will statistically have higher health care expenses than a straight man, or a gay woman less than a straight woman, or that as a motorcycle rider I'll statistically need more health care than if I drove a Volvo. There are some risk factors we as a society deem not socially acceptable to include in pricing, and some health insurance companies choose not to try including.

Well, I'm not a gay man, and I like Volvos. So, they aught to . Then, what does the scooter-riding rainbow-pin-wearing guy get stuck with? :hmm:

There's some moral justification I think in discounting pre-existing factors as probably most aren't the fault of the individual. Of course, they aren't the fault of the insurance company or of the others who'll have to pay higher premiums either. But right now your fellow employees pick up the extra costs of your pre-existing conditions, and I can see that sort of risk flattening spreading. Because health care has gotten so expensive and so many people no longer have good jobs, health insurance will either become more uniform or devolve into accounting and paperwork for government-paid health care.

Uniform and/or government-paid can work out fine, and when it comes to the nation's general well-being, I'm all for socialist policies and implementations. With a political climate like we have today, though, it would likely become a bureaucratic nightmare, trading the devils we know for devils we don't. Until a bunch of reps in both parties can agree on long-term plans, it's going to be a mess, because political grand-standing and dirty deals will be what make the decisions.

 

[werepossum]

Well, I'm not a gay man, and I like Volvos. So, they aught to . Then, what does the scooter-riding rainbow-pin-wearing guy get stuck with? :hmm:

Uniform and/or government-paid can work out fine, and when it comes to the nation's general well-being, I'm all for socialist policies and implementations. With a political climate like we have today, though, it would likely become a bureaucratic nightmare, trading the devils we know for devils we don't. Until a bunch of reps in both parties can agree on long-term plans, it's going to be a mess, because political grand-standing and dirty deals will be what make the decisions.

QFT

 

[Sonikku]

Hearing the ruling and the correction is like eating the best pie in the world, only for Obama to punch you in the face and run off with the last piece.

 

[blankslate]

Interesting. I found this.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/01/us-usa-campaign-healthcare-idUSBRE85S14820120701

Voter support for President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul has increased following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling upholding it, although majorities still oppose it, a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Sunday showed.
Among all registered voters, support for the law rose to 48 percent in the online survey conducted after Thursday's ruling, up from 43 percent before the court decision. Opposition slipped to 52 percent from 57 percent.

It could be that as people do become more aware of the individual parts that they would generally support without the mandate that are in the bill they'll be more likely to support it despite the mandate.


In other words yeah the mandate is a fairly big turn off but the law has items that garner very favorable support voters. may be willing to live with the mandate to keep the things they like very much.

*edit* more polling data

http://pollingreport.com/health.htm

the more recent results are closer to the top and at a cursory glance it seems that support is trending upwards and opposition is trending downwards, when recent results are compared to ones from earlier in the year.

 

[sactoking]

My guess is that it will continue to gain support until 1/1/14, at which point insurance rates will go up 20-40%, and then people will start to complain.