Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I used to be HIGHLY skeptical of the HCR. Then this happened. And now I support it 100% [View all]Taverner
(55,476 posts)11. As a mandate, like car insurance, the government only needed proof that you had health insurance
Now that it is a tax, that means that even if it is not collected now, the IRS will ensure the money is collected.
The IRS being the IRS, I don't expect them to live with a middle man for too long. Soon this will be another deduction like SS and FICA. And now that this establishes health care as a right - an insurance company has no choice but to pay for life-saving care.
We're better off now than we were before.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
59 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I used to be HIGHLY skeptical of the HCR. Then this happened. And now I support it 100% [View all]
Taverner
Jun 2012
OP
It prohibits CERTAIN methods of enforcement. But if it is a tax, then IRS has enforcement authority
nanabugg
Jun 2012
#22
The argument that judicial nullification would have paved the way for single payer was laughable
bluestateguy
Jun 2012
#5
I am mostly in agreement with your analysis, but have a slight twist to offer
slackmaster
Jun 2012
#7
As a mandate, like car insurance, the government only needed proof that you had health insurance
Taverner
Jun 2012
#11
The mandate didn't become a tax. It is being compared to a tax, but it isn't a tax.
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#12
No it did not. You are mistaken. It was compared to a tax to justify it, but it isn't being
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#16
You just don't get it, even if those who don't have insurance pay the tax, they don't get healthcare
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#24
Nowadays, so much is privatized especially in the military and now with charter
JDPriestly
Jun 2012
#54
I am completely failing to see why "they will ensure all Americans are covered"
phantom power
Jun 2012
#17
i see. and where are large corporations taxed? or is it all on the backs of individuals?
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#23
so corporations *have to* buy plans for their employees? or they can just give them a voucher
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#27
thanks for the link. i forsee a lot of corps dropping their health care policies. Seems like
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#59
This is not correct, the tax doesn't get you a health insurance plan, it just doesn't, it's a
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#26
so you pay the tax but still get no insurance? so how about people with no income (e.g. homeless)
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#28
i just read that some states were saying they wouldn't expand medicaid, & it seems the SC said
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#36
As well as many working poor who still won't be able to afford insurance, but will be penalized by a
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#35
give me an income figure. "well above the poverty level" tells me nothing, and in fact, i don't
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#51
yeah, this is the part i'm not seeing how it works -- but i'm feeling like this will eat up their
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#42
It seems as though you keep suggesting that the tax will provide insurance, it won't.
Lionessa
Jun 2012
#38
so how about if you have no job & no income, then say 4 years later get a job. do they come
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#39
'spelled out' = not really. there are lots of permutations. as for medicaid, it's already been cut
HiPointDem
Jun 2012
#49
just to be clear, it was ALWAYS a tax, collected by the irs, paid to the u.s. treasury.
unblock
Jun 2012
#31
right. the only thing that "changed" was the argument. the law itself didn't change.
unblock
Jun 2012
#50
YUP ... they avoided calling it a Tax because lots of bluedogs would have balked.
JoePhilly
Jun 2012
#57