The Obamacare Penalty: Yes, It Can Be Avoided

[sportage]

This is silly. Seeking ways to avoid this penalty.
This assumes people would rather pay a penalty than have healthcare for them and their families.
That people rather go uninsured, victims to the healthcare for profit system, than have coverage.
And it assumes the younger healthy of society feel they are above the human frailties that require medical attentions from time to time.
And it assumes one would rather sit in the ER waiting room than visit a doctors office.
This assumption really insults people and assumes people rather be lazy, uninsured, and irresponsible.
But be not surprised by this assumption.
Because that is exactly what people like Rush Numnuts thinks about his listeners in the first place.
And yes, it is an insult... FYI.

 

[diesbudt]

This fee can not be a tax. The Supreme court would have called the Law unconstitutional had the Obamacare fine be a "tax". They stated so when the Republicans tried challenging the constitutionality of the law in the Supreme court. Since it was not a tax, they passed the ACA.

This is why the law specifically uses this method to obtain the fine/fee from people who do not have medical insurance. They cannot force a payment, they cannot take it out of your electronic money accounts. They can not touch it, unless they owe you money for something, in which they will take it out of that.

I like this whole "Pass it to see what is in it" strategy our government wanted to use. Makes laws full of loopholes

 

[boomerang]

This is silly. Seeking ways to avoid this penalty.
This assumes people would rather pay a penalty than have healthcare for them and their families.
That people rather go uninsured, victims to the healthcare for profit system, than have coverage.
And it assumes the younger healthy of society feel they are above the human frailties that require medical attentions from time to time.
And it assumes one would rather sit in the ER waiting room than visit a doctors office.
This assumption really insults people and assumes people rather be lazy, uninsured, and irresponsible.
But be not surprised by this assumption.
Because that is exactly what people like Rush Numnuts thinks about his listeners in the first place.
And yes, it is an insult... FYI.

The fatal flaw in your reasoning, and I hesitate to call it reasoning, is the assumption that a young healthy person, with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, who can't find a decent paying job, who more than likely is living at home has the money for "affordable health care". These are the people that must get into the system if the system is to work. And that's not an opinion. That Jack, is fact.

This was an awfully big program to build on false assumptions. What do we want? Healthcare! when do we want it? Now! The battle cry of the left. Is it viable? Who knows, we just want it!

 

[boomerang]

I get the impression that our leftie friends think that Limbaugh clued everybody in to some great secret. That's hardly the case. This has been common knowledge since the law was enacted.

And LOL at the outrage against Rush. Why, he's going to try and skirt around this his own damned self! There's a lot of ignorance in this country. Besides the fact that if he did, he'd be breaking no law, people with his kind of money self-insure. Why would he be the slightest bit concerned about a $250K medical bill? Why would he constrain himself by the bureaucracy of the insurance industry?

 

[shady28]

This fee can not be a tax. The Supreme court would have called the Law unconstitutional had the Obamacare fine be a "tax". They stated so when the Republicans tried challenging the constitutionality of the law in the Supreme court. Since it was not a tax, they passed the ACA.

This is why the law specifically uses this method to obtain the fine/fee from people who do not have medical insurance. They cannot force a payment, they cannot take it out of your electronic money accounts. They can not touch it, unless they owe you money for something, in which they will take it out of that.

I like this whole "Pass it to see what is in it" strategy our government wanted to use. Makes laws full of loopholes

You have it backwards. The Supreme Court said it is only legal if it is classified AS A TAX, not a penalty for not purchasing something.

 

[raildogg]

The fatal flaw in your reasoning, and I hesitate to call it reasoning, is the assumption that a young healthy person, with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, who can't find a decent paying job, who more than likely is living at home has the money for "affordable health care". These are the people that must get into the system if the system is to work. And that's not an opinion. That Jack, is fact.

This was an awfully big program to build on false assumptions. What do we want? Healthcare! when do we want it? Now! The battle cry of the left. Is it viable? Who knows, we just want it!

Yes, there are cases of this. A young person trying to make a living and gets a notice that his 2014 premiums are going to double or triple if a same or similar plan is used. I guess some people have to pay a big, big price for this so-called "Affordable" Care Act to work. So basically this is redistribution of wealth in a way. Some people have to subsidize so others can get more affordable care. It may sound good but when it's done through brute force, I'm not sure if its all that good or not.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

The fatal flaw in your reasoning, and I hesitate to call it reasoning, is the assumption that a young healthy person, with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, who can't find a decent paying job, who more than likely is living at home has the money for "affordable health care". These are the people that must get into the system if the system is to work. And that's not an opinion. That Jack, is fact.

This was an awfully big program to build on false assumptions. What do we want? Healthcare! when do we want it? Now! The battle cry of the left. Is it viable? Who knows, we just want it!

Lots of other countries have universal healthcare. Maybe instead of talking about how it's not applicable to the US, maybe you could save yourselves some time and figure out how to make it applicable to the US.

 

[1prophet]

Of course Rush and the Republicans would skirt the law.

If Obama's friends can use loop holes to avoid paying taxes don't see why the average Joe is somehow not allowed to.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/11/general-electric-taxes_n_2852094.html

General Electric Avoids Taxes By Keeping $108 Billion Overseas

GE said in a Feb. 26 regulatory filing that it was holding $108 billion in profits overseas as of the end of last year. That is up from $102 billion a year before. GE said in the filing that it reinvested most of these profits in foreign business operations and does not intend to bring those profits back to the U.S.
The practice of holding profits overseas has been highlighted as a strategy to avoid paying taxes. GE paid no U.S. taxes at all in 2010, according to The New York Times -- an allegation GE spokesman Seth Martin called "untrue" in an email to The Huffington Post Monday.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway...dent-obama-at-the-altar-of-industrial-policy/


The Unholy Marriage Of GE And President Obama At The Altar Of Industrial Policy

The angry Left has been calling for President Obama to fire Jeffrey Immelt from his position as head of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. I think that would be a good idea, but for different reasons.
Sen. Russ Feingold, Moveon.Org, and the regular scribes at the Huffington Post see the GE Chairman and CEO as unfit to advise the president because his company invests some of its resources abroad and, despite worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, paid no taxes in 2010. No illegalities are alleged, mind you; GE—like every other U.S. multinational—responds to incentives, including those resulting from tax policy and regulations concocted in Washington

As a US citizen you are required by law to report and pay taxes on overseas income, since corporations are people according to the Supreme Court maybe they should start paying too.

 

[WackyDan]

This is silly. Seeking ways to avoid this penalty.
This assumes people would rather pay a penalty than have healthcare for them and their families.
That people rather go uninsured, victims to the healthcare for profit system, than have coverage.
And it assumes the younger healthy of society feel they are above the human frailties that require medical attentions from time to time.
And it assumes one would rather sit in the ER waiting room than visit a doctors office.
This assumption really insults people and assumes people rather be lazy, uninsured, and irresponsible.
But be not surprised by this assumption.
Because that is exactly what people like Rush Numnuts thinks about his listeners in the first place.
And yes, it is an insult... FYI.

Perhaps you haven't seen the stats on the enrollments yet... 80+% of enrollees are net new medicaid recipients... The others are individuals or families that currently buy their own private plan... Who have been told their private plan is cancelling and to enroll in one of the exchanges. Only to find out that the plan via the exchange is 30% higher to 2x higher than their current private plan.

Way to go democrats.

 

[boomerang]

Lots of other countries have universal healthcare. Maybe instead of talking about how it's not applicable to the US, maybe you could save yourselves some time and figure out how to make it applicable to the US.

Democrats only let Democrats play in their sandbox. Early in his first term, Obama made sure everyone knew that his side won and he didn't have to listen to what Republicans had to say. He makes a proclamation from time to time that he wants to work with Republicans, that he welcomes any good ideas, etc. Curiously, Republicans never have any ideas he wants to entertain.

If you've got an answer to that conundrum, write our Dear Leader and let him know. In the meantime, unless something changes, Democrats are going to have to figure out how to make the legislation they passed in the dead of night, the legislation that needed to be passed so that we could find out what was in it, work.

This is a one party problem that requires a one party solution. The Dem's won't have it any other way.