I can't even believe this has to go to the Supreme Court!! It's so obviously unconstitutional that a blind man can see it.

If this passes, I am seriously contemplating moving out of the country, because they have won the first battle into making everyone the government's slaves.

3/27/2012 4:01:29 AM

3/27/2012 4:58:39 AM

Wait, there are only tax penalties? Do the people who would have to buy insurance even pay taxes?

3/27/2012 8:35:58 AM

Probably Not

3/27/2012 8:56:10 AM

Maximum yearly income to not have to file income taxes:

Single $9,350
65 or Older $10,750
Head of Household $12,050
65 or Older $13,450
Married Filing Jointly $18,700
Not Living with Spouse at End of Year $3,650
One Spouse 65 or Older $19,800
Both Spouses 65 or Older $20,900
Married Filing Separately $3,650

Anyone meeting such a requirement to not file is also exempt from the individual mandate tax penalty.

[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 9:13 AM. Reason : .]

3/27/2012 9:10:22 AM

and the taxes and the penalties and the penalty of the tax involved with the penalty of and through the tax because of the tax and the taxes and the tax and did we mention the new taxes and penalties and the taxes and the federal government wages new penalties and not taxes. and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes and the taxes


well that depends on your definition of the word tax. and by tax we mean tax penalty.


but then that depends on your definition of the word 'is'.

3/27/2012 9:18:17 AM

Good luck moving to a country that doesn't have universal health care that also has internet service.

3/27/2012 10:27:35 AM

America, the last bastion of freedom that also has nice things.

3/27/2012 10:28:29 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universal_health_care.svg

Good news! China is on the list! That is literally your only option, if you don't want to live in the 3rd world and also don't mind the Great Firewall.

Though you might also want to consider the lucrative drug trade in South and Central America as a potential source of wealth.

[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 10:34 AM. Reason : x]

3/27/2012 10:33:18 AM

I would like to know were exactly GB would move.

3/27/2012 10:33:52 AM

I am so happy that my taxes will help Karen and the Rodriguez family and Carlo

It feels so good to be forced to share my prosperity with my fellow man. Makes me want to give out hugs for free today. Come on guys. Come and get a hug too. I'm opening my wallet and arms today.

I am so happy right now I can't express it

3/27/2012 11:00:23 AM

shut the fuck up, you dont have any prosperity as a 20 year old college jackoff

3/27/2012 11:01:28 AM

It's cheaper than paying higher premiums when hospitals recoup emergency room visits for preventable conditions through your healthcare provider.

3/27/2012 11:02:21 AM

That little rainbow chart conveniently does not include an example of one of the main types of person the supreme court argument is really about - people who are young, healthy, and have enough money to buy health insurance, but either do not want to buy health insurance as a personal choice and would be penalized under the mandate for failing to do so, or have very cheap and very basic catastrophic coverage and would see their premiums likely increase as their individually purchased health insurance would be from a company which can no longer create a risk pool of only young, healthy people due to the abolishment of pre-exisiting condition exclusions and limitations on rate differences based on sex, age, etc.

3/27/2012 11:12:33 AM

Aw I made HoopsMalone people upset because I offered more of my money to the poor.

Actually I try very very hard to save the world by doing things like purchasing an electric car, using solar energy at home and working at a job I feel supports a good moral cause

I also volunteer weekly at various community centers doing work for the poor because despite what your internet trolling dumbasses think... the world is full of people willing to help their fellow citizens.

I do this after growing up in a home where the combined parents income was around 20k a year . I could have chosen your route and constantly bitched and complained about how the government won't spot me a $20 every 5 minutes, but instead I took my own initiative.


pwnt. keep complaining on the internet.

3/27/2012 11:12:47 AM

Just A Perfect Day

Drink Sangria In A Park

And Then Later

When It Gets Dark We Go Home

Just A Perfect Day

Feed Animals In The Zoo

And Then Later A Movie, Too

And Then Home

3/27/2012 11:16:42 AM

dude. you're a sophomore trolling from metcalf hall or something. give it up.

3/27/2012 11:18:34 AM

Quote :

"That little rainbow chart conveniently does not include an example of one of the main types of person the supreme court argument is really about - people who are young, healthy, and have enough money to buy health insurance, but either do not want to buy health insurance as a personal choice and would be penalized under the mandate for failing to do so, or have very cheap and very basic catastrophic coverage and would see their premiums likely increase as their individually purchased health insurance would be from a company which can no longer create a risk pool of only young, healthy people due to the abolishment of pre-exisiting condition exclusions and limitations on rate differences based on sex, age, etc."

Yeah, that demographic really needs some help.

3/27/2012 11:21:09 AM

mandating 20-30 year olds to get insurance is going to be so great

get that vibrantfrail demographic out of the hospital and out of mom and dads basement the streets.

3/27/2012 11:34:04 AM

^^ Whether that demographic is worthy of "help" is a value judgement, and irrelevant to my point. I am simply pointing out that there are demographics with reason to believe that they will be worse off as a result of the law - and not just in a "tax the millionaires to pay for government sponsored medical care" kind of way. That this demographic, which is not obscure, at least in relation to some of the examples in the chart, is excluded from the chart, is notable.

3/27/2012 12:35:03 PM

Quote :

"Yeah, that demographic really needs some help."

That's right...Take more from the young working class. After all, we've got another good 25-35 years before we need to think about our own retirement.

3/27/2012 12:40:09 PM

That demographic ends up costing the system money in the future as they grow older and the preventative measures they chose not to take catch up with them. No, the ACA doesn't help them much, but it forces them to take responsibility for the costs and externalities of spending your 20's not getting checkups, screenings, etc. The "I'll deal with my health when my health starts failing" people are not cost-free, exactly the opposite, and drive up premiums once they finally do get on insurance.



[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM. Reason : .]

3/27/2012 12:41:23 PM

Quote :

"That's right...Take more from the young working class. After all, we've got another good 25-35 years before we need to think about our own retirement. "

Fuck you, got mine. Isn't that all this really boils down to?

3/27/2012 12:59:38 PM

That's what it boils down to, although it's not in the direction you think. We're getting dumped on by the older generation that thinks they're entitled to a retirement paid for by posterity, not the other way around.

We all know that there won't be lavish retirement plans waiting for us. In fact, there's moral hazard in telling people that, as they age, they can stop working and neglect their health, because hey...the working class will pay for it.

[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM. Reason : ]

3/27/2012 1:14:01 PM

Just popping by to make sure the OP really is an advocate for Small Government and not operating under the misconception that if the government mandates health care then next they'll say we need cars or need to eat veggies etc. That type of slippery slope is usually better for the homophobes who say if we allow gay marriage we'll allow beastiality etc.

If he just loves small government, then its okay, I guess.

3/27/2012 1:27:25 PM

^^What does the ACA have to do with retirement?

3/27/2012 1:36:01 PM

It doesn't have to, destroyer's just broadening the topic so he can pontificate on a sufficiently abstract level to avoid any brushes with practicality. Countdown until he ties in the Fed.


[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 1:40 PM. Reason : .]

3/27/2012 1:40:11 PM

Quote :

"I would like to know were exactly GB would move."

Pretty sure the American Imperialist government can find me in an country I go.

The majority of people in this thread seem okay to be owned. Not a single finger is lifted to protest. Not only are they not protesting against being owned, they're encouraging it.

Good dog.

3/27/2012 1:50:11 PM

lol@ the luxury and freedom we have in the USA as "being owned" like "dogs."

3/27/2012 1:52:30 PM

yeh, laugh. laugh at it. you have so much freedom. simmer in it.

3/27/2012 1:53:42 PM

Quote :

"^^What does the ACA have to do with retirement?"

Your response stated that the young, healthy working class doesn't need help. If you take into account everything (not just health care - education, debt, etc), the younger generation actually does need help.

3/27/2012 1:56:41 PM

It's over their head, luke.

3/27/2012 1:58:55 PM

lol

3/27/2012 2:00:41 PM

If the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional, then there's a problem with the Constitution.

3/27/2012 2:01:34 PM

Nice try.

If you think the Affordable Care Act is constitutional, then there is a problem with you.

3/27/2012 2:02:54 PM

Of course it's unconstitutional. No one gives a shit about that. The Constitution might as well be tossed out at this point. Anyone that does genuinely care about constitutional principles is considered an extremist.

The real absurdity of the affordable care act is the shitty economics of it. Obama said it best back in 2008:

Quote :

"So, I focus more on lowering costs. This is a modest difference. But, it’s one that she’s tried to elevate, arguing that because I don’t force people to buy health care that I’m not insuring everybody. Well, if things were that easy, I could mandate everybody to buy a house, and that would solve the problem of homelessness. It doesn’t."

[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 2:05 PM. Reason : ]

3/27/2012 2:04:48 PM

wait, i'm confused. How is this mandate any different than being required to purchase Auto Insurance. If this case is struck down, will I eventually be allowed to drive without being insured?


That's an easy one. You don't have to drive.

was just being a smart ass to prove a point

3/27/2012 2:09:19 PM

I'm not giving up on the constitution. I will die for it because I simply cannot live any other way.

3/27/2012 2:09:39 PM

geniusboy, you will open your skinnyfat wallet and share with the masses whatever the federal government decides like everybody else

sit your ass down and start paying

3/27/2012 2:14:03 PM

I don't understand why Democrats defend this

btw, where's the unemployed person in the infographic?

3/27/2012 2:22:29 PM

don't worry mrfrog it's almost dead. it's getting laughed at currently:



The US Supreme Court to rule individual mandate unconstitutional before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012

59.8%
CHANCE
Last prediction was: $5.98 / share
Today's Change: +$2.18 (+57.4%)

it's gone up from 34% just yesterday. this stock is rising faster than a god damned atlas V rocket. time to make a quick 40% ROI


/game over for this nonsense.


[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM. Reason : ,]

3/27/2012 2:44:09 PM

Quote :

"That demographic ends up costing the system money in the future as they grow older and the preventative measures they chose not to take catch up with them. No, the ACA doesn't help them much, but it forces them to take responsibility for the costs and externalities of spending your 20's not getting checkups, screenings, etc. The "I'll deal with my health when my health starts failing" people are not cost-free, exactly the opposite, and drive up premiums once they finally do get on insurance"

You are hugely overestimating the level of relationship between forgoing health screenings and future health care costs. The ACA needs young people on the books mostly to spread out the risk to a larger, more diverse pool. Yes, there is potential for long-term benefits born out of the assumption that people would get more regular care, catch diseases earlier, etc. The problem is, the long-term benefits you speak of are relatively unproven quantitatively, and the potential impact much lower in magnitude than the effect of risk spread, anyway. Yes, people in their 20s end up costing the system more money when they become people in their 60s, but it is not because modern medicine can create a healthy senior citizen through regular checkups, if only those irresponsible young people would abide. People in their 60s consume more health care services and consequently cost more because aging leads to age-related illness and disability. I also don't think you can honestly suggest that those regular physicals stop people from choosing the behaviors which lead in middle-age and old-age to chronic conditions like obesity, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes, which have become the most important long-term health cost problems.

You also make the mistake that many fall victim to here - health insurance does not equal health care. What is stopping those "young invicibles", as young people who choose not to buy insurance or buy catastrophic-type plans are often referred to, from taking personal responsibility for their health and paying for those health screenings out of pocket, as needed, during their 20s and 30s? On the flip side, having health insurance coverage doesn't mean those same people who wouldn't get those screenings all of the sudden would change their minds. Some people don't see value in going to the doctor at any price. Some people are kept away by even a $20 or 20% copay/coinsurance. Let's not even get into who is going to be there to treat all of these newly insured people who will apparently be clamoring all at once for a primary care workforce that isn't going to be there ...

[Edited on March 27, 2012 at 3:52 PM. Reason : ]

3/27/2012 3:47:50 PM

Quote :

"In 2008, a group of uninsured low-income adults in Oregon was selected by lottery to be given the chance to apply for Medicaid. This lottery provides a unique opportunity to gauge the effects of expanding access to public health insurance on the health care use, financial strain, and health of low-income adults using a randomized controlled design. In the year after random assignment, the treatment group selected by the lottery was about 25 percentage points more likely to have insurance than the control group that was not selected. We find that in this first year, the treatment group had substantively and statistically significantly higher health care utilization (including primary and preventive care as well as hospitalizations), lower out-of-pocket medical expenditures and medical debt (including fewer bills sent to collection), and better self-reported physical and mental health than the control group. "

http://www.nber.org/papers/w17190

I'm having a hard time accepting the claim that being healthy young has absolutely no causal relationship with being healthy old. Or that being unhealthy young has absolutely no causual relationship with being unhealthy old.

Quote :

" I also don't think you can honestly suggest that those regular physicals stop people from choosing the behaviors which lead in middle-age and old-age to chronic conditions like obesity, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes, which have become the most important long-term health cost problems. "

Seems like common sense to me. Isn't the point of physicals to establish whether your current lifestyle will result in the kinds of health problems to which you're referring?

3/27/2012 4:02:48 PM

Now is the time to communize medicine.

3/27/2012 4:32:28 PM

let the rationing of health care begin

3/27/2012 4:41:47 PM

Rations are better than starvation.

3/27/2012 5:05:13 PM

We work to pay health care to live longer to work harder to survive longer to work.

3/27/2012 5:09:54 PM

Quote :

"The ACA needs young people on the books mostly to spread out the risk to a larger, more diverse pool."

No... no, I don't want to pay for higher health care costs of higher risk groups...

You can dress it up all you want and I will hear the same thing every time. It's about me paying for someone else's consumption.

3/27/2012 5:13:06 PM

You do want to pay for other people's health care...You signed the social contract...

3/27/2012 5:28:12 PM

Back in the day my BCBS group policy at work was over $200/month. I was one of the youngest people working for a company that was comprised mostly over people in the 40-55 year old range. I was able to open a comparable private policy with BCBS for about $125/month. I guess I should have opted for the $200/month policy because it's only fair that I subsidize everyone else's healthcare costs while also paying for my own.

3/27/2012 5:30:14 PM