This is actually happening sooner than I expected ...

[dblack]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

 

[leftwinger]

According to the Tax Policy Center’s ACA Tax Calculator, someone earning $100,000 this year would pay about $2,400 in penalties for being uninsured. Compare that to the average premium of a Bronze-level plan at just shy of $2,700.

per person too I believe. Married.......double cost. kids? ouch.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Not surprising at all. Insurance rates have also been rising dramatically in many areas.
Colorado health-insurance rates to jump 20 percent on average for individual buyers in 2017 – The Denver Post

BO lied like a son of a bitch about his plan.

You can keep your Doctor.
LIE

You can keep your plan
BLATANT LIE

Cost for the insured will go down
HUGE BLATANT LIE

He just wanted to make government the insurer of last resort...what a lying piece of shit!

 

[Andylusion]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

Once the left-wing realizes that they can beat people into submission, and not have the Supreme Court knock out their illegal laws.... You can be sure that the push to bash the public into comformity will come faster and with greater damage.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

This fails as a slippery slope fallacy, nothing but hyperbolic nonsense.

 

[The Professor]

According to the Tax Policy Center’s ACA Tax Calculator, someone earning $100,000 this year would pay about $2,400 in penalties for being uninsured. Compare that to the average premium of a Bronze-level plan at just shy of $2,700.

per person too I believe. Married.......double cost. kids? ouch.

But ... but the Supreme Court said it was a tax, not a penalty. A penalty would have been illegal; but a tax isn't illegal, just incredibly stupid. For the first time in the history of this country the SCOTUS came up with a tax on .... (drum roll): NOTHING! That's right, you're taxed because you didn't do something. I mean everyone understands that you have to have a license to go deer hunting, but by applying the perverted rationale of the SCOTUS you can also be required to have a license not to hunt deer. How about a tax on not buying a computer or not owning property? It sounds stupid because it is stupid.

Yes, Obama lied but he needed help from a corrupt agenda-driven Supreme Court to get his plan into law.

I still want to know what the administration had on Justice Roberts that made him come up with such an obviously ignorant and indefensible argument in support of the mandate.

 

[Andylusion]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

This fails as a slippery slope fallacy, nothing but hyperbolic nonsense.

And yet people are pushing for it. So...... regardless of your claim it is nonsense.... it is in fact happening. I'm constantly amazed by people who look straight at reality and deny the existence of reality. Reminds me of people who denied the CARD Act caused interest rates to go up... even though.... interest rates went up. I'm mind boggling.

 

[Stasha_Sz]

I still want to know what the administration had on Justice Roberts that made him come up with such an obviously ignorant and indefensible argument in support of the mandate.

As my old dear, departed Granny would say: "he's got nekkid pictures of 'em!"

 

[jon_berzerk]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

of course

 

[dblack]

Bend over, morons. You're about to get mandated. Good and hard.

Do we need a stiffer individual mandate penalty?

This fails as a slippery slope fallacy, nothing but hyperbolic nonsense.

??

Let's talk about this slippery slope 'fallacy'. It's your usual go-to, but you really don't seem to understand it. Showing how a decision or policy will lead to bad results isn't a fallacy unless you fail to support your claim. The interesting thing about slippery slope arguments is that they are verifiable over time. Eventually, you find out whether the claimed outcome happens or not.

Here I assume you're referring to previous arguments over the individual mandate that claimed the penalties weren't severe enough to produce the desired incentive, and that that would lead to calls for increasing them. Calls like those discussed in the article I posted. So, as you might now understand, this post isn't a 'slippery slope fallacy' at all. It's the opposite. It's proof that previous claims of 'slippery slope' were bullshit. It's happening just as predicted.

 

[Arianrhod]

According to the Tax Policy Center’s ACA Tax Calculator, someone earning $100,000 this year would pay about $2,400 in penalties for being uninsured. Compare that to the average premium of a Bronze-level plan at just shy of $2,700.

So the difference is: Pay $2,700 for insurance or $2,400 for nothing. Tough call.

Your 100K a year consumer might give that some thought as he lines up in front of the Apple store to get the new iPhone.

 

[dblack]

According to the Tax Policy Center’s ACA Tax Calculator, someone earning $100,000 this year would pay about $2,400 in penalties for being uninsured. Compare that to the average premium of a Bronze-level plan at just shy of $2,700.

So the difference is: Pay $2,700 for insurance or $2,400 for nothing. Tough call.

Your 100K a year consumer might give that some thought as he lines up in front of the Apple store to get the new iPhone.

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

 

[Arianrhod]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

"Oh, hi, yeah, I'm calling you from the freeway. Just involved in a smackup, and I think my car's totaled. Can you send an agent out here with a policy form for me to fill out? Thanks."

Kind of difficult to sign up for health insurance when you're in the ER with a heart attack, or when that lump you've been ignoring for years turns out to be melanoma. Magic time.

 

[dblack]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

 

[Arianrhod]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

 

[dblack]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

???

 

[Arianrhod]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

???

Did you or did you not say "I don't think any of this is right or righteous"? I'm assuming the "it" in that sentence stands for "insurance."

 

[dblack]

Or, simply reduce your payroll deduction so don't get a refund and avoid the penalty altogether. Pay for nothing until you need it.

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

???

Did you or did you not say "I don't think any of this is right or righteous"? I'm assuming the "it" in that sentence stands for "insurance."

You can assume that, but you know better. It's government dictating that we buy insurance from their corporate sponsors that isn't right.

 

[Arianrhod]

Do you feel that way about auto insurance? Life insurance?

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

???

Did you or did you not say "I don't think any of this is right or righteous"? I'm assuming the "it" in that sentence stands for "insurance."

You can assume that, but you know better. It's government dictating that we buy insurance from their corporate sponsors that isn't right.

Your response "I don't think any of this is right, or righteous" was in reference to my question about auto and life insurance. No mention of government until your second sentence.

So I'll ask you again: Do you or do you not approve of auto and life insurance?

 

[dblack]

I don't think any of this is right, or righteous. But when government stoops to illicit laws to benefit their corporate sponsors, I'm ready, willing and able to fight back any way I can. Abusing such a system, to the best of my ability, is my patriotic duty.

So, no insurance for anything at all in Randtopia. Who is John Galt?

???

Did you or did you not say "I don't think any of this is right or righteous"? I'm assuming the "it" in that sentence stands for "insurance."

You can assume that, but you know better. It's government dictating that we buy insurance from their corporate sponsors that isn't right.

Your response "I don't think any of this is right, or righteous" was in reference to my question about auto and life insurance. No mention of government until your second sentence.

So I'll ask you again: Do you or do you not approve of auto and life insurance?

Auto and life insurance are fine. Forcing people to buy shit they don't want isn't.