so what happens if you refuse to pay the fine for not having health insurance?

[OutHouse]

so you are a 28 year old, in good health, dont want health insurance and tell the gov to buzz off and not pay the fine.

what will they do to you? Lien your property? well you rent, Take your car? you ride the bus/train. throw you in jail? make you a criminal? keep a running tab and charge you principal and interest for every year you dont pay and nail yo when you do give in?

seriously what will happen?

 

[justoh]

Dunno, but to such a person I would suggest keeping a few hundred thousand dollars handy for the emergency room, otherwise other people will have to pay for his/her recklessness should some horrible accident occur.

 

[Zaap]

I notice how to liberals, providing healthcare is nothing more than an extortion racket, in one form or another.

Now they're all lock-step like greedy little lemmings to tie their big bloated out of control government millstone around the throats of all the young, healthy people who dare not to go along with all their bullshit.

A lefty will never give a minute's worth of thought about making anything better/more affordable/less expensive/more widely available/ run by people that actually have experience making those things happen- but will do endless conniving on how to rook more people into tossing boatloads of money down the rathole of government that they worship.

How dare anyone not be onboard with the mastermind schemes of the most corrupt and most short-sighted among us.

 

[michal1980]

Dunno, but to such a person I would suggest keeping a few hundred thousand dollars handy for the emergency room, otherwise other people will have to pay for his/her recklessness should some horrible accident occur.

How is this changed if you get free insurance from the government?


The people not paying for heath care today, wont be paying tomorrow.

roughly 10% of the uninsured make over 400% the poverty line. (the line were handouts end for ACA).

The other 90% have been getting free emergency care before ACA, and will get free care after ACA. Nothing changed.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's between suggested that you set up your withholding so there won't be a tax refund and then you are good. All they can do is go after that.

 

[Genx87]

They cant do anything provided you dont have a refund. The Supreme court took the legs out of the mandate. The only way they can collect is via taking it from your tax refund.

 

[FerrelGeek]

They cant do anything provided you dont have a refund. The Supreme court took the legs out of the mandate. The only way they can collect is via taking it from your tax refund.

So basically, Roberts screwed over everyone with his cutesy little ploy of calling the ACA 'fine' as a 'tax'. That gave him the grounds to call the ACA constitutional, but SCOTUS took the teeth out of the IRS to collect the fine/tax. So Roberts stuck us all with a botched abortion of a healthcare bill that is guaranteed to be unfundable.

So, lets see if Obama writes an EO authorizing the IRS to to go after wages / assets of those that won't pay the fine/tax.

 

[Genx87]

The Roberts court essentially gutted the mandate yes. And I believe if the govt tries to collect beyond its authority it will be grounds to make it unconstitutional. I also believe the govt has limitations on raising the tax. The decision seemed like a victory for Obamacare. But there was a poison pill that has neutered its ability to force people into the system if they know how to skirt around it.

 

[Brainonska511]

They cant do anything provided you dont have a refund. The Supreme court took the legs out of the mandate. The only way they can collect is via taking it from your tax refund.

As was stated to you in another thread, the USSC had nothing to do with making the fine poorly enforceable (that section was written with few teeth):

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=35653454&highlight=#post35653454

 

[Orignal Earl]

I notice how to liberals, providing healthcare is nothing more than an extortion racket, in one form or another.

Now they're all lock-step like greedy little lemmings to tie their big bloated out of control government millstone around the throats of all the young, healthy people who dare not to go along with all their bullshit.

A lefty will never give a minute's worth of thought about making anything better/more affordable/less expensive/more widely available/ run by people that actually have experience making those things happen- but will do endless conniving on how to rook more people into tossing boatloads of money down the rathole of government that they worship.

How dare anyone not be onboard with the mastermind schemes of the most corrupt and most short-sighted among us.

I think it's so cool how easy it is for so many people here, to group together millions of individuals. Then take those groups and imagine all sorts of wackiness.
It's like haveing a imaginary friend that is evil and blaming him for all the wrongs you perceive in the world

 

[Doppel]

Dunno, but to such a person I would suggest keeping a few hundred thousand dollars handy for the emergency room, otherwise other people will have to pay for his/her recklessness should some horrible accident occur.

Good heavens.

Really a person can't ask a question without a Brownshirt evangelizing the party platform? Give it a rest.

 

[Genx87]

As was stated to you in another thread, the USSC had nothing to do with making the fine poorly enforceable (that section was written with few teeth):

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=35653454&highlight=#post35653454

Interesting.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Good heavens.

Really a person can't ask a question without a Brownshirt evangelizing the party platform? Give it a rest.

He's yet another "foreign" (European no less) sock puppet preaching the party's talking points.

 

[Anarchist420]

seriously what will happen?

it's a tax and all taxes (especially those called "income taxes" even though all taxes deplete individual income) are the price you pay to stay out of jail.

 

[Orignal Earl]

He's yet another "foreign" (European no less) sock puppet preaching the party's talking points.

Usually, it would be considered a good thing to have an unbiased third party opinion
I have noticed a lot of people on this board are not open to that though.
I suppose it is that type of thinking that makes P&N what it is, years n years of unwavering opinions, never progressing.

Edit- sorry for using the word progressing, but outside of the US it is still used as a positive word

 

[dank69]

Interesting.

Even the second time?

 

[John Connor]

What I would like to know is how does the government going to know whether you have insurance or not?

 

[dank69]

What I would like to know is how does the government going to know whether you have insurance or not?

I'm sure you can find that answer in the stickied ACA thread.

 

[bshole]

He's yet another "foreign" (European no less) sock puppet preaching the party's talking points.

Not really. He is an erudite and educated man of letters who made an extremely pertinent and valid point which you ignored. If you can't address the point, just come out and admit it, don't slander the author. Why should the taxpayer subsidize the young and healthy gambling that they won't be injured in an accident?

 

[boomerang]

Usually, it would be considered a good thing to have an unbiased third party opinion
I have noticed a lot of people on this board are not open to that though.
I suppose it is that type of thinking that makes P&N what it is, years n years of unwavering opinions, never progressing.

Edit- sorry for using the word progressing, but outside of the US it is still used as a positive word

Seriously, you don't understand the difference between an opinion and what justoh said? What he stated was a totally biased mini-diatribe that is not even remotely based in reality. It was proven to be just that in michal1980's post.

If you're going to dole out verbal discipline, understand what's actually going on first.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Not really. He is an erudite and educated man of letters who made an extremely pertinent and valid point which you ignored. If you can't address the point, just come out and admit it, don't slander the author. Why should the taxpayer subsidize the young and healthy gambling that they won't be injured in an accident?

Hmmmmmmm Is he your sock puppet by chance?

So what's the difference in the millions that will be subsidized by taxpayers?

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

They cant do anything provided you dont have a refund. The Supreme court took the legs out of the mandate. The only way they can collect is via taking it from your tax refund.

I read that too

My thoughts were simply this: Make sure I owe something every year instead of them owing me something.

Not that it matters since I'm insured, but for the sake of knowledge and future potential...

 

[Orignal Earl]

Seriously, you don't understand the difference between an opinion and what justoh said? What he stated was a totally biased mini-diatribe that is not even remotely based in reality. It was proven to be just that in michal1980's post.

If you're going to dole out verbal discipline, understand what's actually going on first.

I didn't even read what just oh typed.
I've been here long enough to know some people will dismiss any foreign opinion

 

[boomerang]

Not really. He is an erudite and educated man of letters who made an extremely pertinent and valid point which you ignored. If you can't address the point, just come out and admit it, don't slander the author. Why should the taxpayer subsidize the young and healthy gambling that they won't be injured in an accident?

Do you take a stupid pill everyday? We're subsidizing those people right now and there is nothing in the law that changes that. We pay for people that don't have insurance now and we'll continue to pay for people that don't have insurance when the law goes into effect Jan 1. Really, you should have an understanding of the law before making comments.

This is the result of the gushing liberal/progressive enthusiasm for the law. They don't really know what's in it. They don't want to know. They just love it based on a lot of feel-good assumptions. When people start to question it, they lash out in anger. When people start to point out how it really works, they do the la-la-la-la routine. I can't hear you!

Further, if you analyze it, the best part of the law is the option to not have insurance and pay a relatively small tax. Somehow, and I think it's nothing short of miraculous that it was incorporated into the law, the .gov realized that people were not going to be able to pay for something they didn't have the money to pay for. It's miraculous because it's in opposition to the way the .gov operates where they continually buy things they don't have the money for.

 

[boomerang]

So basically, Roberts screwed over everyone with his cutesy little ploy of calling the ACA 'fine' as a 'tax'. That gave him the grounds to call the ACA constitutional, but SCOTUS took the teeth out of the IRS to collect the fine/tax. So Roberts stuck us all with a botched abortion of a healthcare bill that is guaranteed to be unfundable.

So, lets see if Obama writes an EO authorizing the IRS to to go after wages / assets of those that won't pay the fine/tax.

And if Roberts had ruled it to be a fine we wouldn't have Obamacare today because the law would have been unconstitutional.

What does it take to make you happy?