Just to be clear, the mandate is neither a tax nor a penalty, it’s a mandate. The punishment for not obeying the mandate is a penalty; taxes are not normally punishment.

I think Rick Santorum campaigned on the argument that Romney would be constrained in how he attacked the ACA. This looks like Rick’s chickens coming home to roost.

I’ve seen the argument (in the WSJ, among others) that the penalty is a tax because it raises revenue, as if penalties don’t raise revenue. Therefore police speed traps exist.

“…this isn’t one of them.”

dunno, David. I think that we need to get the HMO’s out of our healthcare system; not bring them further into it, while they make more money.

I’m not sure I agree with McClatchy here. I rather suspect that conditions will change significantly to make that set of penalty-payers a lot more than 1%. Employers might be dumping insurance policies in droves, for instance. Rates will go up, unless the law is eviscerated between now and 2014. Rates might go up anyway.

he mandate penalty will affect maybe 1% of the population, and the tax itself is relatively small.

The article you referenced stated

In fact, only 6 percent of Americans, about 18 million people, would have to “newly purchase” insurance under the law, the study found. And of this group, roughly 11 million would be eligible for subsidies to help buy their coverage from new insurance marketplaces, or “exchanges,” created by the law.

So 6% of Americans are going to have to pay more money out of their income for shall we say mediocre care. 6x more than you stated.. I agree that whether you call it a tax or not is irrelevant. The result will most likely be that those who need/use their insurance will values it and those who don’t (vast majority) won’t in a best case scenario. What the health insurance companies actually provide will make all the difference (think Sicko 2), but it will be too late for any political ramifications for the Obama campaign. Convenient no?

“…is irrelevant.”

Completely so.

Parsing that means nothing, when the fact is that just keeping the Dorgan amendment would probably have done more to help keep healthcare costs down, than anything in this mish-mash.

Did I mention that Obama caved, and had it killed?

Like I said, it’s not going to be 1%. The subsidies will be insufficient, employers will drop their coverages, rates will rise. Let’s address this.

Why anyone on the left is celebrating this ruling is beyond me? I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be defending this Corporatist piece of shit this election cycle. Plus, Roberts clever undercutting of the Commerce clause is going to come back to haunt the left BIG time up ahead. Add to that the ruling on Medicaid is another time bomb for the left. The law is a profoundly reactionary Corporatist piece of crap and the ruling just IMO makes things even worse. When this political bag of shit explodes and fails as it will the D’s will be trying to explain why it didn’t work and why it raised many people’s taxes as well. On top of all that millions will still not have or be able to afford decent coverage even with this law. It’s a mess, it would have been better had they over turned it in the short.

Thank you, seaglass; my thoughts exactly.

I think there’s a lot of reason to be concerned about the loss of Medicaid benefits for millions of low-income Americans in conservative-leaning states.

For the life of me, I can’t figure out why the Obamabots are all high-fiving and congratulating each other on this “win.” Just like Obama himself, they’re all focused on the appearance of a “win,” not the substance of what’s beneath it.

The whole set of restrictions on Federal power is going to come back to bite folks in the ass. I hope the first ass it aims for is Obama’s

–the CBO has estimated that the average premium for a single insurance policy in the non-group market would be roughly $5,800 in 2016. [I suspect this is too low.]
–a young, healthy individual targeted by the mandate on average consumes about $854 in health services each year.
–the penalty for not buying the insurance is $750.

Which is better, paying 854 + 750 or 5,800?

I should have included the 854 alone as an option, as the citizenry rebels and the law gets repealed.

I hear ya Mauimom. Again though, the bots are more interested in obama and his presidential fortunes than the larger picture. In fact for them, he is the big picture.

donbacon,
did the 854 and 750 come from the cbo as well?

Don’t forget to add into your calculations the subsidies. I suppose for the purposes of your thought-experiment you could set the average “young health individual” as earning a specific income, with a specific subsidy, though (like I said) the subsidies might be cut.

What anyone says now does not matter. The SJC said it is a “tax.” Bottom line, just as Taney found Scott “property.”

Romney, Brown and many of the law makers in Massachusetts where told by the citizens this is a tax. “It was a tax,” and they said no, it is a penalty. They are all corporate hacks and they are wrong….

BTW, Would someone ask Jon Walker, on my behalf why he censors all my comments, like this one I just tried to post concerning Canadian’s desire for legalized Marijuana? Why do my comments not post when they post everywhere else Mr. Walker?

Canadians enjoying greater freedom than Americans? Cheaper pharmaceuticals, medical marijuana, legal marijuana, taxed and a source of revenue like booze?

Good stuff… Mr. Walker please end censorship of my comments. I’m not your enemy!

It is already happening in Massachusetts. Employers keeps employee’s hours below minimum to avoid paying insurance for employee, under law. Employer dumps employee on state plan or exchange if making slave wages.

For example Mass Health would pay for fillings at one time. Not any more. Providers gouged the state. Never mind the effect rotting impacted teeth and bacteria can have on heart disease should bacteria enter the bloodstream via gum line and contribute to heart attack? People are going to get screwed as the corporations and state’s clamp down on everything in the name of profit/cost cutting measures. SO what happen the next time oil hits 147.50 a barrel? Its a joke!!!

Am I wrong, this goddamn bill is so confusing and Byzantine: doesn’t the IRS assess the penalty for non compliance? The conventional wisdom, if so, would be if the IRS is involved it will look and smell like a tax to most.

HMO’s??

They are tax exempt public charities in Massachusetts insurer/provider in one! They are part of the problem…..

Because if ACA was overturned Obama would have had zero major accomplishments for his presidency with four months before the election

If its a duck? It’s a fucking duck Especially when it quacks like fucking duck??????????

So much for common sense as we said in Mass. But the arrogant fuckers said we know better. Guess what they don’t and Roberts stepped on their collective fucken dicks. Hope it hurts like hell as it does for most “MEN” if your stepped on. But I don’t think these cowards are men. They are political opportunist with a corporate agenda totally inconstant with what Jefferson and Madison wanted for the republic!

Fuck them all……..

I’ll the the question before its asked!

Answer:
”
State based monopolies in commerce and trade which grind people into bone meal.”

Same here, James, about being blocked from posting on Jon’s threads…

I think if you’re going to ride over there, it has to be in the “Obama sucks less!” limousine. :o)

Thanks.. Didn’t know others where blocked. Undermines legitimacy, when censorship is exercised, without merit. Sad fact is I support most everything he says with regards to this retarded prohibition. I guess he misinterpreted the intent or sarcasm in my initial ride over there. Won’t waste my time anymore.