HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Activism » Propaganda Debunking (Group) » Help refute: 6 million wi...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 04:50 PM

Help refute: 6 million will now get a tax increase because of Obamacare

So HuffPost posted this article today which is causing the repugs to cream their panties. My rw FB friends are all over it. I have some general ideas for responses, but they're long-winded and muddled. If anyone can provide a clear rebuttal, I would appreciate it.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/health-care-tax-penalty_n_1898005.html?utm_hp_ref=business&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing6%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk1&pLid=208152

5 replies, 1068 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Help refute: 6 million will now get a tax increase because of Obamacare (Original post)
eissa Sep 2012 OP
louis-t Sep 2012 #1
Squinch Sep 2012 #2
Scuba Sep 2012 #3
eissa Sep 2012 #4
progree Sep 2012 #5

Response to eissa (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 04:53 PM

1. It appears the same situation existed in MA.

From what I have read, the trend is now toward getting insurance instead of paying the fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eissa (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 05:56 PM

2. How about:

The greater the number getting the tax increase, the more of them will opt to get the insurance instead, which will bring down the premium for the average insurance policy. Your FB friend's own policy will likely benefit from this greater number. (In an appeal to the "I've got mine" mentality.)

Even though the 6 million is a small percentage of the total number of insured people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eissa (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 07:45 PM

3. So Obama got six million people who were planning on sticking the rest of us if they needed care ...

... to pay their fair share. What's wrong with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eissa (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 09:28 PM

4. I was going to cite Romneycare

and their calls for "personal responsibility" to call them on their hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eissa (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:54 PM

5. Some old Romney statements backing individual mandate ... even at the federal level

He wrote in 2006, "Some of my libertarian friends balk at what looks like an individual mandate. But remember, someone has to pay for the health care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays for the taxpayers pay. A free ride on the government is not libertarian." - , p. 91, "Landmark, The Inside Story OF America's New Health-Care Law and What It Means For Us All", The Staff of the Washington Post, 2010

=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#

In a July 30, 2009 USA Today op-ed titled “Mr. President, what’s the rush?,” (http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090730/column30_st.art.htm) which is also available on MittRomneyCentral.com (http://mittromneycentral.com/op-eds/2009-op-eds/mr-president-whats-the-rush/), Romney urged Obama to “learn a thing or two about health care reform” from his Massachusetts plan that contained the same policy {the individual mandate}, and touted it as effective.

“First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance,” Romney wrote. “Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages ‘free riders’ to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others.”

The revelation could damage the GOP presidential frontrunner, who has been attacked by conservatives for enacting a similar law as “Obamacare,” but has defended himself by saying such an approach is acceptable on a state level, not a federal level.

But the July 30, 2009 op-ed ... makes no such distinction. In fact it implies that the Massachusetts plan is ideal as a federal approach. Romney wrote that “the lessons we learned in Massachusetts could help Washington find” a “better way.”

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/03/romney-urged-obama-embrace-individual-mandate_n_1318407.html

=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#

In the message board wars, I'm fond of telling these clowns "You don't know what Governor Etch-A-Sketch is going to do if elected since he radically changes his positions depending on which campaign he is running. I hope Romney is elected and jams RomneyCare down your throat"

=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#

I notice that your HuffingtonPost link mentions that "150 million people currently are covered by employer plans." On top of that are 10's of millions who have individual insurance. So the 6 million is a small part of that. And part of the reason for the increase from the earlier estimate of 4 million, according to the CBO, is that some states are not going along with the Medicaid expansion portion of the ACA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread