Supreme Court Ruling on Health Care

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CMatt25 said:
Reading and listening to conservative talking points here and elsewhere, I’ve become troubled that too many Americans are being led to believe they are going to be paying the healthcare law tax or penalty. I’ve seen the tax or penalty described as the largest tax increase on the poor/middle class. I say tax or penalty only because I think Gov Romney or his camp were calling it a penalty the other day because of the similar plan implemented in Massachusetts under his leadership. Not sure what they are saying today. But which terminology we use isn’t exactly a big deal to me. “Tax” is not a bad word to me so I’m personally fine calling it a “tax” if for the sake of this discussion if that’s what Chief Justice Roberts would like us to call it.

Here’s the thing though. And I am fully aware trying to argue this on a conservative political subforum such as this one on CAF is fruitless.

But here goes.

If you’re poor enough to be blessed to have coverage under Medicaid, you’ll have coverage.

If you’re middle class and fortunate to have coverage through an employer or you choose to keep what coverage you already have, or you qualify for Medicare, you’ll have coverage. The latter of course assuming the Ryan budget plan never gets implemented and Medicare as we know it is not ended.

If you choose to participate in the exchanges, you’ll have coverage. And better yet for those who do choose one of 4 tiers of coverage through an exchange, subsides to help pay for their health care coverage will be available for those making between 133 to 400 percent of the poverty level, an income of $92,000 for a family of four. Naturally of course the poorer and older a person is, the greater the subsidy. That only makes sense and is fair.

And if you unfortunately live in a state as I do whose Tea Party Republican governor since the court ruling is going around saying his state won’t implement the exchanges, fortunately the federal government will put one in place for residents of those states. I personally thank God and President Obama and those who supported and voted for the healthcare law for that. But mostly I thank God for leading those govermnent leaders to do something about health care in this country.

The only person paying the tax ruled constitutional under the United States Constitution by the Supreme Court of the United States is the person who chooses to still after all of that, not to have health care coverage. It’s their choice.

Here’s a link that might help.

healthcare.gov/index.html

And here’s was my source for the subsidies.

cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57466008-503544/a-post-supreme-court-guide-to-the-health-care-law/

Peace everyone. God bless!
Click to expand...
The power to tax is the power to destroy. If you think taxes are so great, I’ll send you my tax bill. You pay it.

Me, I am personally ready to take up arms against this exploitative and abusive government.
 
CMatt, you can’t be blind to the fact that the whole thing is being financed by taxes, can you? It’s not just the tax for not having coverage.

As you said, people who make $92000 a year are getting subsidies! $92000!

You’re welcome.
 
CMatt25 said:
Reading and listening to conservative talking points here and elsewhere, I’ve become troubled that too many Americans are being led to believe they are going to be paying the healthcare law tax or penalty. I’ve seen the tax or penalty described as the largest tax increase on the poor and middle class. I say tax or penalty only because I think Gov Romney or his camp were calling it a penalty the other day because of the similar plan implemented in Massachusetts under his leadership. Not sure what they are saying today. But which terminology we use isn’t exactly a big deal to me. “Tax” is not a bad word to me so I’m personally fine calling it a “tax” if for the sake of this discussion that’s what Chief Justice Roberts would like us to call it.

Here’s the thing though. And I am fully aware trying to argue this on a conservative political forum such as this one at CAF is fruitless.

But here goes.

If you’re poor enough to be blessed to have coverage under Medicaid, you’ll have coverage.

If you’re middle class and fortunate to have coverage through an employer or you choose to keep what coverage you already have, or you qualify for Medicare, you’ll have coverage. The latter of course assuming the Ryan budget plan never gets implemented and Medicare as we know it is not ended.

If you choose to participate in the exchanges, you’ll have coverage. And better yet for those who do choose one of 4 tiers of coverage through an exchange, subsides to help pay for their health care coverage will be available for those making between 133 to 400 percent of the poverty level, an income of $92,000 for a family of four. Naturally of course the poorer and older a person is, the greater the subsidy. That only makes sense and is fair.

And if you unfortunately live in a state as I do whose Tea Party Republican governor since the court ruling is going around saying his state won’t implement the exchanges, fortunately the federal government will put one in place for residents of those states. I personally thank God and President Obama and those who supported and voted for the healthcare law for that. But mostly I thank God for leading those govermnent leaders to do something about health care in this country. If left to the states, not everyone can afford to move to one where a state exchange is offered.

The only person paying the tax ruled constitutional under the United States Constitution by the Supreme Court of the United States is the person who chooses to still after all of that, not to have health care coverage. It’s their choice.

Here’s a link that might help.

healthcare.gov/index.html

And here’s a source about the exchanges and subsidies.

cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57466008-503544/a-post-supreme-court-guide-to-the-health-care-law/

Peace everyone. God bless!
Click to expand...
I don’t have anything to add. I just thought this was an excellent post.
 
CMatt25 said:
Reading and listening to conservative talking points here and elsewhere, I’ve become troubled that too many Americans are being led to believe they are going to be paying the healthcare law tax or penalty. I’ve seen the tax or penalty described as the largest tax increase on the poor and middle class. I say tax or penalty only because I think Gov Romney or his camp were calling it a penalty the other day because of the similar plan implemented in Massachusetts under his leadership. Not sure what they are saying today. But which terminology we use isn’t exactly a big deal to me. “Tax” is not a bad word to me so I’m personally fine calling it a “tax” if for the sake of this discussion that’s what Chief Justice Roberts would like us to call it.

Here’s the thing though. And I am fully aware trying to argue this on a conservative political forum such as this one at CAF is fruitless.

But here goes.

If you’re poor enough to be blessed to have coverage under Medicaid, you’ll have coverage.

If you’re middle class and fortunate to have coverage through an employer or you choose to keep what coverage you already have, or you qualify for Medicare, you’ll have coverage. The latter of course assuming the Ryan budget plan never gets implemented and Medicare as we know it is not ended.

If you choose to participate in the exchanges, you’ll have coverage. And better yet for those who do choose one of 4 tiers of coverage through an exchange, subsides to help pay for their health care coverage will be available for those making between 133 to 400 percent of the poverty level, an income of $92,000 for a family of four. Naturally of course the poorer and older a person is, the greater the subsidy. That only makes sense and is fair.

And if you unfortunately live in a state as I do whose Tea Party Republican governor since the court ruling is going around saying his state won’t implement the exchanges, fortunately the federal government will put one in place for residents of those states. I personally thank God and President Obama and those who supported and voted for the healthcare law for that. But mostly I thank God for leading those govermnent leaders to do something about health care in this country. If left to the states, not everyone can afford to move to one where a state exchange is offered.

The only person paying the tax ruled constitutional under the United States Constitution by the Supreme Court of the United States is the person who chooses to still after all of that, not to have health care coverage. It’s their choice.

Here’s a link that might help.

healthcare.gov/index.html

And here’s a source about the exchanges and subsidies.

cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57466008-503544/a-post-supreme-court-guide-to-the-health-care-law/

Peace everyone. God bless!
Click to expand...
Mickey_Finn said:
I don’t have anything to add. I just thought this was an excellent post.
Click to expand...
I’d like to second that, an excellent post, likely to fall on purposefully deaf ears.
 
Mickey_Finn said:
I don’t have anything to add. I just thought this was an excellent post.
Click to expand...
That was a great post…one fact your doctor may not agree and leave his practice…hey but that’s good news sice he’d be a drag on the system…Also the defecit will sour…but that’s okay since China loves to lend us money amd our children will have to pay on…but at least Obama will have his legacy…because it’s time.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
The power to tax is the power to destroy. If you think taxes are so great, I’ll send you my tax bill. You pay it.

Me, I am personally ready to take up arms against this exploitative and abusive government.
Click to expand...
Scott, thanks for the offer but if I paid your bill, then you wouldn’t be rendering unto Caesar what Caesar says is yours to pay Caesar.
 
CMatt25 said:
Scott, thanks for the offer but if I paid your bill, then you wouldn’t be rendering unto Caesar what Caesar says is yours to pay Caesar.
Click to expand...
Obama THINKS that he is a Caesar, I’ll give you that. It’s kind of delusional and creepy, actually, for such an ordinary man to think of himself as a cut above the rest of us. He’s only exceptional in his petulance and ill temperament. :rolleyes: Rob
 
PaulinVA said:
CMatt, you can’t be blind to the fact that the whole thing is being financed by taxes, can you? It’s not just the tax for not having coverage.

As you said, people who make $92000 a year are getting subsidies! $92000!

You’re welcome.
Click to expand...
Well my vision is not the best but no I’m not legally blind. Thanks to correction and having at one time to pay 5 digits out of pocket towards eye surgeries, one eye is good. But it was that or go blind. So I know something about this debate. And universal health care insurance coverage for all is something I am most passionate about. But regardless of my vision, what I was addressing was the spin going around in conservative circles about the healthcare tax for not having coverage. Anyway to address your point, I’d prefer taxes going towards health care for people than some of the things tax dollars are spent on. As I recall the $92,000 figure was up to that amount for a family of 4. I don’t know about you but I want that family including their 2 children to have good coverage. I’d certainly rather see that than tax dollars being used for instance to drop bombs on people. Anyway not sure why you said “you’re welcome”. 🤷 But for whatever reason it was, I guess you thought a “thank you” was warranted. So thank you.
 
Concerned and Mickey and to anyone else who thinks so, thanks for your kind words about my post.
 
RACJ said:
Anyone who thinks that 2700 pages of bureaucratic legalese written by people who have no connection to actually PROVIDING MEDICAL SERVICES is going to streamline the health system and make care more affordable has not thought it through. There will be layers upon layers of new bureaucracies, and 16,500 new IRS agents for enforcement. Each of the tens or hundreds of thousands of employees will be paid double what the dying private sector could have ever afforded. By the time that this monstrosity is fully implemented, ALL of us will need a pain pill to put us out of our misery, as the Compassionate Ruler (who won’t give his impoverished brother a nickel) had once prescribed. Rob :o
Click to expand...
It kind of reminds me of the Bush’s Sarbanes-Oxley 404 provision which mandated internal control tests and added significant costs on firms. It wasn’t counted as a tax but it might as well have been. We were hired to implement it but had a hard time figuring out how. It kept us employed at least. 🙂
 
seekerz said:
It is bearing false witness to call taxation theft. That has nothing to do with the wrongness of abortion, but nice try though.
Click to expand...
Seekerz, if nothing else I have to take my hat off to you for making an effort to explain that taxation is not theft. But when the tax argument is being lost, I think there has to be a back up plan even if it has nothing to do what you were addressing.
 
PTL said:
Obamacare uses the method of killing many lives by lying to them (saying “nothing can be done for your case” to the seniors)… they will be given only comfort treatment and die right away.
Click to expand...
Oh please not that again. This reminds me too much of all that hyperbole about “granny death panels” we were subjected to during those town halls. :rolleyes:
 
PaulinVA said:
Well, right now there are 47% of Americans who don’t pay taxes. These people (and others) will receive subsidies that reduce their premiums. There is no way the 53% will not pay more for them.

So, Medicaid users overuse Emergency Departments and don’t get care in the cheapest setting. Adding more people to the Medicaid roles will add more people that are inefficiently treated. That raises costs.

I believe that an industrialized society should provide for care for everyone (not single payer), but everyone needs to contribute to that care.
Click to expand...
I agree, Paul. That’s why I keep stressing that the efficient delivery of medical care, with leveled availability of services (such as abundant well-staffed clinic services in all major population centers) is essential to keeping costs down, which in turn is essential to keeping premiums down. That would also relieve strain on the expensive ER’s. The way I would prefer to have it handled is to have such clinics fairly proxiimate to hospitals, with shuttle service in between. There needs to be terrific intake at the ER, to bring those patients back to the local clinic during extended open hours, or to require them to return to the clinic the next day if it is not a medical emergency. Conversely, a truer emergency can be transported to the nearby ER.

The 53% who comprise taxpaying individuals are definitely not all wealthy. The truly wealthy are anywhere between 1% and 5%. One of my repeated questions on this site is how many of those 53% will become the 47% due to the ACA? (And I’m not even addressing the employer question, which Ridgerunner and others have; that also has a boomerang effect: when the employer closes shop, jobs are lost and so are incomes.)

All this does not touch the employer conscience concerns, etc. I’m just focusing on the economic aspects, which I always consider integral to social justice. There’s a myth that Catholic social justice only addresses the extremely impoverished. It doesn’t. It’s part of a wider justice which considers economic impacts and the right to earn a livelihood, which is not restricted to the dangerously poor. Given how labile the economy has recently been (last several years), I am anxious about further weakening & risk and people conserving even more (not hiring, etc.) due to perceived risk & anxiety.
 
I think the bishops miss an opportunity by not opposing the whole law. It vests enormous power in the hands of the secretary of HHS. They can see how much in the cavalier way she defines contraceptions and even abortifacients as normal medical care and requires religious institutions to go along. It is but one short step to defining abortions in general as medical care. She can through the board set up by the act, make similar decisions that will simply overrun every barrier set up by the Right to Life Movement.

What troubles me, however, is how comfortable so many bishops are with a european style state. This despite what has happened in France and other states. The Church has a very crabbed notion of limited government, and the principle of subsidarity, while useful, is not an adequate basis for political action within our constitutional system. It troubled me greatly to see the bishops attack Paul Ryan’s budget. How do we limit the actions of this very secular, very statist regime, which has demonstrated so little respect even for black churches?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top