decline insurance until you get sick - why would you do that? how would you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars by doing this?
Because you can? There's no enforcement mechanism for the tax, and insurance companies are required to take in people with pre-existing conditions now. So decline to buy insurance, ignore the tax (or pay it since $695 is still way less than a monthly premium), and pick it up when you get sick. So instead of spending $500+/mo on premiums, pay the tax, wait to get sick, and then buy a nice platinum plan to get you through the cancer or whatever. Am I going to do this? No, I have a nice insurance plan through work, but you better believe that there are thousands of people that get off on tax avoidance that will take full advantage of this now. The spike in premiums is going to be jaw dropping, watch.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
decline insurance until you get sick - why would you do that? how would you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars by doing this?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You can't get insurance when you're sick, they'd be stupid to give it to.you.
They don't have a choice. Obamacare forces insurers to insure people with pre-existing conditions. It's equivalent to letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car. Brilliant!AussieReaper wrote:
You can't get insurance when you're sick, they'd be stupid to give it to.you.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You're blaming them for having a pre-existing condition? You can be born with a pre-existing condition. How is that in any sense of the word, fair, to deny someone based on that?Jay wrote:
They don't have a choice. Obamacare forces insurers to insure people with pre-existing conditions. It's equivalent to letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car. Brilliant!AussieReaper wrote:
You can't get insurance when you're sick, they'd be stupid to give it to.you.
Way to completely bypass what I said and jump to your own talking points.AussieReaper wrote:
You're blaming them for having a pre-existing condition? You can be born with a pre-existing condition. How is that in any sense of the word, fair, to deny someone based on that?Jay wrote:
They don't have a choice. Obamacare forces insurers to insure people with pre-existing conditions. It's equivalent to letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car. Brilliant!AussieReaper wrote:
You can't get insurance when you're sick, they'd be stupid to give it to.you.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You said its the equiv of letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car.Jay wrote:
Way to completely bypass what I said and jump to your own talking points.AussieReaper wrote:
You're blaming them for having a pre-existing condition? You can be born with a pre-existing condition. How is that in any sense of the word, fair, to deny someone based on that?Jay wrote:
They don't have a choice. Obamacare forces insurers to insure people with pre-existing conditions. It's equivalent to letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car. Brilliant!
They didn't wreck anything. They shouldn't be denied coverage because the insurance company doesn't feel its profitable. You're holding a companies dollar signs higher than public health.
if you had any ability to think beyond talking points you would see that i said the program was set up for abuse. Read back a few posts. Theres nothing preventing healthy people waiting until they get sick to seek coverage.AussieReaper wrote:
You said its the equiv of letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car.Jay wrote:
Way to completely bypass what I said and jump to your own talking points.AussieReaper wrote:
You're blaming them for having a pre-existing condition? You can be born with a pre-existing condition. How is that in any sense of the word, fair, to deny someone based on that?
They didn't wreck anything. They shouldn't be denied coverage because the insurance company doesn't feel its profitable. You're holding a companies dollar signs higher than public health.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Don't they receive tax penalties as they have no coverage?Jay wrote:
if you had any ability to think beyond talking points you would see that i said the program was set up for abuse. Read back a few posts. Theres nothing preventing healthy people waiting until they get sick to seek coverage.AussieReaper wrote:
You said its the equiv of letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car.Jay wrote:
Way to completely bypass what I said and jump to your own talking points.
They didn't wreck anything. They shouldn't be denied coverage because the insurance company doesn't feel its profitable. You're holding a companies dollar signs higher than public health.
AussieReaper wrote:
Don't they receive tax penalties as they have no coverage?Jay wrote:
if you had any ability to think beyond talking points you would see that i said the program was set up for abuse. Read back a few posts. Theres nothing preventing healthy people waiting until they get sick to seek coverage.AussieReaper wrote:
You said its the equiv of letting people buy auto insurance right after they wreck their car.
They didn't wreck anything. They shouldn't be denied coverage because the insurance company doesn't feel its profitable. You're holding a companies dollar signs higher than public health.
Jay wrote:
Because you can? There's no enforcement mechanism for the tax, and insurance companies are required to take in people with pre-existing conditions now. So decline to buy insurance, ignore the tax (or pay it since $695 is still way less than a monthly premium), and pick it up when you get sick. So instead of spending $500+/mo on premiums, pay the tax, wait to get sick, and then buy a nice platinum plan to get you through the cancer or whatever. Am I going to do this? No, I have a nice insurance plan through work, but you better believe that there are thousands of people that get off on tax avoidance that will take full advantage of this now. The spike in premiums is going to be jaw dropping, watch.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
decline insurance until you get sick - why would you do that? how would you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars by doing this?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
fwp
If Jay doesn't stand up for the white man, who else will?Jaekus wrote:
fwp
wannabe lawyers r go
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
there's no enforcement mechanism for tax at all....or wait there is.Jay wrote:
Because you can? There's no enforcement mechanism for the tax, and insurance companies are required to take in people with pre-existing conditions now. So decline to buy insurance, ignore the tax (or pay it since $695 is still way less than a monthly premium), and pick it up when you get sick. So instead of spending $500+/mo on premiums, pay the tax, wait to get sick, and then buy a nice platinum plan to get you through the cancer or whatever. Am I going to do this? No, I have a nice insurance plan through work, but you better believe that there are thousands of people that get off on tax avoidance that will take full advantage of this now. The spike in premiums is going to be jaw dropping, watch.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
decline insurance until you get sick - why would you do that? how would you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars by doing this?
You're bitching about people not paying a $695 tax? You know how many tax cheats are out there who owe far more money to the IRS? I bet at least a few people close to you owe more than that.
Can you point me to some type of summary or breakdown of the specific part of the bill that says you can break your leg with no insurance, then get insurance, then go to the doctor under your new insurance - without your out-of-pocket and/or deductible and/or your monthly payment going through the roof?
http://www.georgiainsuranceshop.com/new … obamacare/KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
there's no enforcement mechanism for tax at all....or wait there is.Jay wrote:
Because you can? There's no enforcement mechanism for the tax, and insurance companies are required to take in people with pre-existing conditions now. So decline to buy insurance, ignore the tax (or pay it since $695 is still way less than a monthly premium), and pick it up when you get sick. So instead of spending $500+/mo on premiums, pay the tax, wait to get sick, and then buy a nice platinum plan to get you through the cancer or whatever. Am I going to do this? No, I have a nice insurance plan through work, but you better believe that there are thousands of people that get off on tax avoidance that will take full advantage of this now. The spike in premiums is going to be jaw dropping, watch.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
decline insurance until you get sick - why would you do that? how would you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars by doing this?
You're bitching about people not paying a $695 tax? You know how many tax cheats are out there who owe far more money to the IRS? I bet at least a few people close to you owe more than that.
Can you point me to some type of summary or breakdown of the specific part of the bill that says you can break your leg with no insurance, then get insurance, then go to the doctor under your new insurance - without your out-of-pocket and/or deductible and/or your monthly payment going through the roof?
They can't raise your premium due to health status, it's based on age. Your premiums will not increase if you get sick. It's illegal for them to raise the rates.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
The way the system is set up now, there is zero incentive to carry health insurance until you actually get sick. Completely broken system.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I like the idea of HC reform but there's something wacky about being taxed for not buying anything.
But you can't be refused service by a hospital, so there's that...
Precisely. Quite sure the majority of the US want reform, just not a massive government expansion and/or takeover of the system in the process.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I like the idea of HC reform but there's something wacky about being taxed for not buying anything.
Suggest an alternative to the healthcare bill passed under Obama.Stingray24 wrote:
Precisely. Quite sure the majority of the US want reform, just not a massive government expansion and/or takeover of the system in the process.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I like the idea of HC reform but there's something wacky about being taxed for not buying anything.
Republicans win November elections, repeal Obamacare, "deem" new plan to have passed. I support this message.
Okay. But what are some changes you, Stingray24, would like to see implemented?
Nevermind
Nevermind
Last edited by Macbeth (2012-07-04 20:29:00)
A series of small reforms would be the best option, IMO. Possible areas: tort reform, making plans available from state to state, and a bunch more.Macbeth wrote:
Suggest an alternative to the healthcare bill passed under Obama.Stingray24 wrote:
Precisely. Quite sure the majority of the US want reform, just not a massive government expansion and/or takeover of the system in the process.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
I like the idea of HC reform but there's something wacky about being taxed for not buying anything.
its funny how people who complain about the size of government are usually the ones whose livelihoods depends on a large, bloated and expanded bureaucracy
Tu Stultus Es
without using google, please expand on "tort reform"RAIMIUS wrote:
A series of small reforms would be the best option, IMO. Possible areas: tort reform, making plans available from state to state, and a bunch more.Macbeth wrote:
Suggest an alternative to the healthcare bill passed under Obama.Stingray24 wrote:
Precisely. Quite sure the majority of the US want reform, just not a massive government expansion and/or takeover of the system in the process.
Tu Stultus Es