Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I used to be HIGHLY skeptical of the HCR. Then this happened. And now I support it 100% [View all]Lionessa
(3,894 posts)26. This is not correct, the tax doesn't get you a health insurance plan, it just doesn't, it's a
PENALTY that uninsured will pay to support the states setting up the market place, it DOES NOT give anyone insurance directly.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
59 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I used to be HIGHLY skeptical of the HCR. Then this happened. And now I support it 100% [View all]
Taverner
Jun 2012
OP
It prohibits CERTAIN methods of enforcement. But if it is a tax, then IRS has enforcement authority
nanabugg
Jun 2012
#22
The argument that judicial nullification would have paved the way for single payer was laughable
bluestateguy
Jun 2012
#5
I am mostly in agreement with your analysis, but have a slight twist to offer
slackmaster
Jun 2012
#7
As a mandate, like car insurance, the government only needed proof that you had health insurance
Taverner
Jun 2012
#11
The mandate didn't become a tax. It is being compared to a tax, but it isn't a tax.
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#12
No it did not. You are mistaken. It was compared to a tax to justify it, but it isn't being
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#16
You just don't get it, even if those who don't have insurance pay the tax, they don't get healthcare
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#24
Nowadays, so much is privatized especially in the military and now with charter
JDPriestly
Jun 2012
#54
I am completely failing to see why "they will ensure all Americans are covered"
phantom power
Jun 2012
#17
i see. and where are large corporations taxed? or is it all on the backs of individuals?
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#23
so corporations *have to* buy plans for their employees? or they can just give them a voucher
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#27
thanks for the link. i forsee a lot of corps dropping their health care policies. Seems like
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#59
This is not correct, the tax doesn't get you a health insurance plan, it just doesn't, it's a
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#26
so you pay the tax but still get no insurance? so how about people with no income (e.g. homeless)
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#28
i just read that some states were saying they wouldn't expand medicaid, & it seems the SC said
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#36
As well as many working poor who still won't be able to afford insurance, but will be penalized by a
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#35
give me an income figure. "well above the poverty level" tells me nothing, and in fact, i don't
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#51
yeah, this is the part i'm not seeing how it works -- but i'm feeling like this will eat up their
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#42
It seems as though you keep suggesting that the tax will provide insurance, it won't.
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#38
so how about if you have no job & no income, then say 4 years later get a job. do they come
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#39
'spelled out' = not really. there are lots of permutations. as for medicaid, it's already been cut
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#49
just to be clear, it was ALWAYS a tax, collected by the irs, paid to the u.s. treasury.
unblock
Jun 2012
#31
right. the only thing that "changed" was the argument. the law itself didn't change.
unblock
Jun 2012
#50
YUP ... they avoided calling it a Tax because lots of bluedogs would have balked.
JoePhilly
Jun 2012
#57