SCOTUS Healthcare Ruling

[Glocktogo]

Actually they are helping those low and middle class folks who can't afford it by means testing...if they fall below certain income level, they get to go into the public program that the rest of us will pay for. So the burden, like most other social programs, is not on the recipient, but squarely on the shoulders of the producers.

I'm not sure what the income cut off is to qualify for the public option....but I predict that cut-off will rise, year after year so eventually we will all be on the public option.

All except those of us with so-called "Cadillac Plans", who will pay for the health care for those without.

[Hobbes]

I think I can see where we're headed here.

Right now I pay nearly $6,000 a year for health insurance premiums.

Soon, I'll be able to drop health insurance and pay the $700 year "tax" for not having health insurance.
If I get sick I'll just buy health insurance real quick(Pre-existing conditions are not excluded) and check into the hospital.

It's gonna suck for health insurance companies though.
Health insurance company stocks, like humana and wellpoint, are getting crushed on wall street right now by anywhere from 3-8%.

[RidgeHunter]

Didn't he say he would support it on a state level, but not a federal level? I tend to agree more with that stance. If the blue states and citizens of those states agree that they want state run helf care then they probably have that right. I don't believe for an instant that the federal government has that right.

Sure he said that. He's running on the Republican ticket and needs the votes of Republicans that don't need to hear anything else but "I'd repeal something OSAMABAMA did!".

The state's rights thing Republicans are abusing is going to bite them in the ass one day. They're misapplying it to their own peril IMO. It's usually used as nothing but an excuse for actions incongruous with the ideals of their voter base, or used as an excuse for inaction on a federal level.

I'm not sure what the income cut off is to qualify for the public option....but I predict that cut-off will rise, year after year so eventually we will all be on the public option.

That's what I wonder about - the income cutoff. I know the IRS has a different definition of middle-class than I do, so I don't really foresee them being too lenient here. The way I see it is some (working class) people will be paying a penalty and not be eligible for/receive any benefits from it. I see your point about many social programs placing the burden on those who are not the recipients of the benefits, but I see this as decidedly different than most other social programs in that it isn't deigned with one very specific group in mind. E.G. old people, disabled people, poor mothers, etc.

I don't see the mandate portion of this law benefiting the working class, blue-collar Joe in any tangible way. And I actually see it hurting him. And like Iggy laid out with the Heritage Foundation brainstorming in the 80's - that's a Republican idea if I ever heard one.

[sanjuro893]

I think that's a byproduct of all this. Health insurance companies are the "enemy" to many libs. They'll either be forced to become part of the gov't. plan for healthcare, or go belly up.

[Cards81fan]

With the revenues from unprecedented post-war economic expansion.

Revenues? Son, why don't you just call them "Taxes" like a good Republican?

[reddog1]

All we need now is a false flag terror attack, another 911 or OKC.

Then they can invoke martial law, and take our guns, and send us to re-eduacation camps.

Good god, I hope you bastages are ready.

Good luck, and God Bless.

[sanjuro893]

Here's my question" If the president can defy federal law without so much as a how-do-you-do when enforcing immigration laws, what's to keep the states from just saying, "no. we won't obey your healthcare law"? I swear, this administration has done more to undermine and devalue the rule of law in this country than a bunch of anarchists could in 70 years.

[farmerbyron]

That isn't debt. it is debt/GDP. GDP goes up even if debt doesn't.

The graph shows debt in relation to GDP. The point is that we have only been in this dire of finances in WWII and that spending was temporary and followed by massive cuts. The current spending is permanent, and followed by promises of more spending.

[dustingaunder]

Sweet, you repeated my post with more words.

[71buickfreak]

Coming soon- ammunitiOn taxes. $25 per shot will cut down on gun ownership. It's not gun control, it's a tax.

[farmerbyron]

With the revenues from unprecedented post-war economic expansion.

By a generation of pull yourself up by the boot strappers. Not too many people like that around now a days. We are populated by a generation of put your hand outers.

[Cards81fan]

Here's my question" If the president can defy federal law without so much as a how-do-you-do when enforcing immigration laws, what's to keep the states from just saying, "no. we won't obey your healthcare law"? I swear, this administration has done more to undermine and devalue the rule of law in this country than a bunch of anarchists could in 70 years.

Because the states' get a ton of Federal funding for roads, health care, defense, public safety, education, etc.

They got us by the nuts. We're too dependent on those funds to turn them down now. Specifically, in this very ruling, it stated that states can be denied future Medicare and/or Medicaid funding if they do not comply.

[Cards81fan]

By a generation of pull yourself up by the boot strappers. Not too many people like that around now a days. We are populated by a generation of put your hand outers.

And it started with the children of those boot strappers / the Greatest Generation: the baby boomers.

[3inSlugger]

I'm progressively getting more and more pissed as I sit here reading.

[TCummings]

Coming soon- ammunitiOn taxes. $25 per shot will cut down on gun ownership. It's not gun control, it's a tax.

Sad thing is, my mind already thought that.