JG Pasterjak wrote: The new law will require everyone to purchase a Chevy Volt. jg
Thats it. I'm moving to Costa Rica.
JG Pasterjak wrote: The new law will require everyone to purchase a Chevy Volt. jg
Thats it. I'm moving to Costa Rica.
A tax on buying stuff is annoying but understandable. I don't like the precedent of a tax on not buying stuff. Just seems like an idea with all sorts of bad potential uses.
I think what really sux about this whole idea is that once again, government has done nothing to tackle the COSTS of a product. It's the same thing they did when Medicare "Part D" was institiuted. "We" (the government) will make it easier for you (all citizens) to HAVE a product...but if you can't afford it, ACCORDING TO OUR COST ANALYSIS, well, too bad.
When Mass. instituted RomneyCare (funny, how no one seems to dwell on that LITTLE point), the state "figured" that it would cost a family of 4 about $4000/year for insurance. Unfortunately, the reality was that no one wouls SELL that insurance to a typical family of 4 for under $6000.
As others here have pointed out, we might be able to buy insurance...but we won't be able to afford a house or car or food. One of those 3 will suffer.
Ironically, this added cost of living, will put the brakes on any recovery...assuming it FINALLY occurs in 2014.
I disagree with the ruling. I disagree with the law. A whole E36 M3-ton of laws/regulations/whatevers need to be completely revamped, but that is a whole 'nother can of worms that I am not opening.
Haha people are Saying they're moving to Canada because of Obamacare.
In reply to SyntheticBlinkerFluid:
Inorite?
I'm honestly on the fence as to whether I'm for or against the mandate requiring coverage. What I'm not on the fence about is that we have this enormous unfunded liability called MEDICAID that's supposed to take care of all the goddamned poor people (poor: you live in a house with air conditioning and cable and drive a car and own a cell phone,) which apparently hasn't worked, so now we're going to create a NEW program that adds 4 trillion dollars to the debt over the next 20 years?
Again, I can ALMOST agree with the idea of requiring some sort of healthcare coverage; otherwise we all pay the tab (a tab which the hospitals deliberately rack up if you DON'T have the dough; knowing they can stick it to the taxpayer.)
Saying "Hey sucker, you need to have health insurance or Medicaid now or you're gonna get taxed" does not require over TWO THOUSAND berkeleyING PAGES OF LEGISLATION AND 4 TRILLION DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER MONEY!
SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Haha people are Saying they're moving to Canada because of Obamacare.
I'll be waving over here with my insurance laughing at them with their insurance.
Duke wrote: I'm absolutely incensed at Justice Roberts. Not for breaking ranks with the other conservatives, but for handing down a bullE36 M3, post-rationalizing decision *just so he can be seen* breaking ranks with the conservatives.
What I am amazed at is that there are Judges that are expected to take a particular bent on a topic!!
I mean, they are JUDGES!! I really can't imagine how the fact that you could identify the leanings of a judge would not automatically disqualify them from being a judge.
In this case, Roberts might actually be acting as a Judge not some political hack. The fact that the others are split though does not bode well for their impartiality though (I am guessing their votes were predicable)
Knurled wrote:ThePhranc wrote: The government now has the power to force people to buy things if they want it or not.Does your state require you to have auto insurance?
Only if I want to own a car.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:Knurled wrote:Only if I want to own a car.ThePhranc wrote: The government now has the power to force people to buy things if they want it or not.Does your state require you to have auto insurance?
a decent amount of the population around here owns and drive cars without it.
Great Facebook quote -
Most of the people on my Facebook timeline barely made it through high school, and now they're all Constitutional Scholars.
Lol.
Fletch1 wrote: I'm still trying to learn this Obummercare. What do you guys think will happen to those of us who have insurance through our employer?
The government has just confirmed it is ILLEGAL to NOT buy a particular commodity.
What do you think is going to happen to the price of that commodity? Hrm. I wonder...
Knurled wrote:ThePhranc wrote: The government now has the power to force people to buy things if they want it or not.Does your state require you to have auto insurance?
Only if I CHOOSE to drive. If I never get a driver's license or own a car, I am under no obligation to buy auto insurance. Unless I am legally required to get a license and drive a car, your argument is invalid.
Duke wrote:Fletch1 wrote: I'm still trying to learn this Obummercare. What do you guys think will happen to those of us who have insurance through our employer?The government has just confirmed it is ILLEGAL to NOT buy a particular commodity. What do you *think* is going to happen to the price of that commodity? Hrm. I wonder...Knurled wrote:Only if I CHOOSE to drive. If I never get a driver's license or own a car, I am under no obligation to buy auto insurance. Unless I am legally required to get a license and drive a car, your argument is invalid.ThePhranc wrote: The government now has the power to force people to buy things if they want it or not.Does your state require you to have auto insurance?
Actually the price of said commodity doesn't have to go down yet...
Even though the government just made a health insurance mandate under the guise of "health care," (It's not. Has nothing to do with health care.) the cost to the consumer probably won't decrease. If anything, you'll see a slight increase as the risk pool has just got deeper.
The increase won't be HUGE, since buried in that mandate is the "percentage payout clause" that forces PRIVATE insurance businesses to pay out a certain percentage of what they take in directly to health care providers.
Which, you know... really does the opposite of what needs to be done to actually reduce health CARE costs.
berkeleying idiots. (not you guys.)
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:Knurled wrote:Only if I want to own a car.ThePhranc wrote: The government now has the power to force people to buy things if they want it or not.Does your state require you to have auto insurance?
Only if you drive on public roads.
I want everybody to find their nearest VA Hospital and go sit in the lobby for an hour. Welcome to our new health insurance! 
Javelin wrote: I want everybody to find their nearest VA Hospital and go sit in the lobby for an hour. Welcome to our new health insurance!
There's... quite a few differences there, but still funny. 
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:Duke wrote: The government has just confirmed it is ILLEGAL to NOT buy a particular commodity. What do you *think* is going to happen to the price of that commodity? Hrm. I wonder...Actually the price of said commodity doesn't have to go down yet...
Do you seriously think the cost is ever going down once everyone is required to buy it? 
Which, you know... really does the opposite of what needs to be done to actually reduce health CARE costs. berkeleying idiots. (not you guys.)
My point exactly - this Act addresses absolutely the most cosmetic part of the problem - poor people can't afford health insurance - and treats it with something that is virtually guaranteed to make the problem worse, while completely ignoring the fundamental issue . It's like requiring chemo patients to use rogaine.
Absolute berkeleytards in politics.
In reply to Duke:
They aren't trying to solve problems. They are trying to get votes. That is the funny thing - each side is just pandering to their base and the general populace gets all pissed off. Nothing gets solved.
Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Duke: They aren't trying to solve problems. They are trying to get votes. That is the funny thing - each side is just pandering to their base and the general populace gets all pissed off. Nothing gets solved.
Amen.
Now (post SC vote): Thoughts on the November election.....?
bravenrace wrote: What I don't understand is how people who think we can't afford to pay doctors and hospitals think that we CAN afford to pay for those things and a government to admistrate it. A government that in my lifetime I have yet to see run any program efficiently.
Very true. Unfotunately once most realize how bad it turns out, it will be too late.
81cpcamaro wrote:bravenrace wrote: What I don't understand is how people who think we can't afford to pay doctors and hospitals think that we CAN afford to pay for those things and a government to admistrate it. A government that in my lifetime I have yet to see run any program efficiently.Very true. Unfotunately once most realize how bad it turns out, it will be too late.
You guys are talking like health care has been socialized and the government runs it now.
Politics summarized.
Greedy bastards fooling the unenlightened and stupid
You'll need to log in to post.
