Why The Individual Mandate Is Not A ‘Massive Tax Hike’ On The Middle Class

[Stephanie]

Every year, the government taxes me for not having children. What's the difference?

then you should be asking the Government change that, not using it to justify what the Government is DOING now

You need to learn to think. The other poster was, as have many, acting as if getting taxed for not doing something is somehow unprecedented and outrageously novel.

Getting taxed for not having children has been around for decades in this country.

no kidding

 

[demiurge]

No, listen to the radio, just think.

It IS a big tax hike. And I'm glad Roberts ruled that showed it is. It means that future discussion on the matter will be about the truth of the matter, not some bullshit weasel words like 'penalty.' The electorate can decide if its an acceptable burden based on who they put into Congress.

It ISN'T the biggest tax hike in history.

As a % of gdp (and absolute numbers are meaningless in this discussion because of inflation) it hits in at the tenth biggest.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/Obamacare-tax-chart.jpg

Is that too much? I can certainly see good reasons to state either way.

However, one thing that Obama is right about, is business as usual in health care can't go on. We pay for more of our GDP in health care than any other country, including the socialist ones with single payer.

We have the most inefficient health care in the in world in terms of how we spend our money, and that has to stop. The #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US is health care.

 

[NYcarbineer]

99% of Americans won't pay the mandate tax, and the tax starts out at less than 100 dollars a year.

Do the math. How 'massive' is that??

Second question. Who here will even be paying the tax?

 

[clevergirl]

No, listen to the radio, just think.

It IS a big tax hike. And I'm glad Roberts ruled that showed it is. It means that future discussion on the matter will be about the truth of the matter, not some bullshit weasel words like 'penalty.' The electorate can decide if its an acceptable burden based on who they put into Congress.

It ISN'T the biggest tax hike in history.

As a % of gdp (and absolute numbers are meaningless in this discussion because of inflation) it hits in at the tenth biggest.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/Obamacare-tax-chart.jpg

Is that too much? I can certainly see good reasons to state either way.

However, one thing that Obama is right about, is business as usual in health care can't go on. We pay for more of our GDP in health care than any other country, including the socialist ones with single payer.

We have the most inefficient health care in the in world in terms of how we spend our money, and that has to stop. The #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US is health care.

The Revenue Act of 1950 and 1951 was temporary Obamacare is not set up to expire. The 1968 surcharge was temporary. The 1982 Reagan tax increase followed on the heels of his 1981 tax cuts. He agreed with the tax increase if spending cuts were promised from Congress of a $3 reduction in spending for every $1 increase in taxes



This is to highlight that unlike the Obamacare tax- these tax increases were either temporary- intended to be temporary or were measured against government spending cuts, Obamacare is a entitlement program, that like medicare will continue to consume more and more of our GDP.