Whats so wrong with Obama care?

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

As stated in the other thread:

Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail."

In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction.
Or mortgage,
Or high efficiency AC.
This healthcare tax is an additional tax.

I paid $hundreds more federal tax last year because I didn't buy energy efficient windows.

-(-1) = +1

Don't buy energy efficient stuff or don't buy health insurance... Exactly the same effect on the "Total tax" line (IRS 1040 line 61)

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

As stated in the other thread:

Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail."

In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction.
Or mortgage,
Or high efficiency AC.
This healthcare tax is an additional tax.

I paid $hundreds more federal tax last year because I didn't buy energy efficient windows.

-(-1) = +1

Don't buy energy efficient stuff or don't buy health insurance... Exactly the same effect on the "Total tax" line (IRS 1040 line 61)

There were no tax credits available last year for energy efficient windows so you lost nothing.

Do I get a tax credit for having my own health insurance under Obamas plan?

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

Quote

Quote

As stated in the other thread:

Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail."

In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction.
Or mortgage,
Or high efficiency AC.
This healthcare tax is an additional tax.

I paid $hundreds more federal tax last year because I didn't buy energy efficient windows.

-(-1) = +1

Don't buy energy efficient stuff or don't buy health insurance... Exactly the same effect on the "Total tax" line (IRS 1040 line 61)

There were no tax credits available last year for energy efficient windows so you lost nothing.

Do I get a tax credit for having my own health insurance under Obamas plan?

-(penalty) = benefit, so yes.

You can only make semantic arguments because that's all you have. The effect on the bottom line is the same.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

As stated in the other thread:

Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail."

In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction.
Or mortgage,
Or high efficiency AC.
This healthcare tax is an additional tax.

I paid $hundreds more federal tax last year because I didn't buy energy efficient windows.

-(-1) = +1

Don't buy energy efficient stuff or don't buy health insurance... Exactly the same effect on the "Total tax" line (IRS 1040 line 61)

There were no tax credits available last year for energy efficient windows so you lost nothing.

Do I get a tax credit for having my own health insurance under Obamas plan?

-(penalty) = benefit, so yes.

You can only make semantic arguments because that's all you have. The effect on the bottom line is the same.

Who's bottom line?
Not the taxpayer as if they spend $30k on an electric car, and the tax deduction is $3k, they're still out $27k more than someone who chose not to buy a car.

This is a DIRECT tax for NOT purchasing something. Not an incentive for purchasing something.

Economically for the taxpayer, it's a lose lose situation. They either pay for a product, or pay an additional tax if they don't. The only question will be which will end up being the least expensive route.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

Who's bottom line?

Form 1040, line 61.

Will go up if you don't buy health insurance.
Will go up if you don't buy a house with a mortgage.
Will go up if you don't buy this year's favored energy saving gizmo.

Whether you call it a credit for doing something or a penalty for not doing the same thing, the effect on line 61 is exactly the same.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Who's bottom line?

Form 1040, line 61.

Will go up if you don't buy health insurance.

Yup, it sure will.

Quote

Will go up if you don't buy a house with a mortgage.

No it won't. I'm not assessed an additional tax for not having a mortgage.

Quote

Will go up if you don't buy this year's favored energy saving gizmo.

No it won't. I'm not assessed an additional tax for not having whatever gizmo.

Quote

Whether you call it a credit for doing something or a penalty for not doing the same thing, the effect on line 61 is exactly the same.

Proven false, above.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

No, I just made an observation on the position that you are taking.

You can claim that, but that does not make it true.

Quote

On the bottom line, there is a negative tax consequence for not buying an energy efficient air conditioner, and there will be a negative tax consequence for not buying health insurance. The ONLY difference is the way the negative consequence is worded.

FAIL. One is OPTIONAL. I can decide if I WANT to buy a new air conditioner. I have the option to do nothing. The other is MANDATORY, I either do A or I have to do B.

One is a reward I can choose to take or not. The other is a penalty that I would HAVE to pay.

Simply put it is about MAKING you do something vs. giving you the option.

[billvon 3,080]

>FAIL. One is OPTIONAL. I can decide if I WANT to buy a new air conditioner. I have the
>option to do nothing.

Agreed. And if you do not, you will pay the higher power bills.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>FAIL. One is OPTIONAL. I can decide if I WANT to buy a new air conditioner. I have the
>option to do nothing.

Agreed. And if you do not, you will pay the higher power bills.

you will pay higher power bills AND write an extra check to the government? enforced by law?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

>FAIL. One is OPTIONAL. I can decide if I WANT to buy a new air conditioner. I have the
>option to do nothing.

Agreed. And if you do not, you will pay the higher power bills.

No, I have the option to open my windows in the summer and put on more clothes in the winter.

And that is a persons right to CHOOSE what to do. It is not like if I don't buy a new air conditioner the Govt will FINE me.

Discount to reward behavior vs penalty to reward behavior... That is the difference.

[billvon 3,080]

>you will pay higher power bills AND write an extra check to the government?

I strongly suspect no one will "write an extra check to the government" as a result of _either_ penalty.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Discount to reward behavior vs penalty to reward behavior... That is the difference.

except BOTH should not be the government's business

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,080]

>No, I have the option to open my windows in the summer and put on more clothes
>in the winter.

You sure can. You can buy an extra coat or two. Your choice. (Wouldn't it be stupid if someone said "I have no freedom because I am forced to buy extra coats instead of getting an efficient heater?")

>Discount to reward behavior vs penalty to reward behavior... That is the difference.

OK. I guess I don't see a difference there. Your tax liability changes in both cases. A discount for one person is a small tax on everyone else; a tax on one person is a discount for everyone else.

That's primarily where the "tax the rich" thing comes from. Very few people "hate the rich" and want to tax them out of spite; THEY want someone else to pay more of the taxes that they owe, and the rich are simply a good target. In their mind it's a way to get a "discount".

[normiss 860]

It appears a number of governors disagree with that.
At least after the three free years of funding anyway.
After that, states simply cannot afford the budget they have NOW!

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

You sure can. You can buy an extra coat or two. Your choice.

I already have extra coats. No additional cost.

Quote

OK. I guess I don't see a difference there. Your tax liability changes in both cases.

Simple... One you do not have to act and you do not get the discount. The other you HAVE to act or pay a penalty.

You walk into the car lot... I tell you that if you buy today I will give you a discount. VS, you decide to NOT buy a car and the govt decides to increase your taxes.

Quote

A discount for one person is a small tax on everyone else; a tax on one person is a discount for everyone else.

Only if things are adjusted. And just because at the bottom line it may be balanced, that does not make it "fair"

If I make you buy all my jump tickets, then yes the DZ still gets the ticket money, but that does not mean it was the right thing to do.... Even if you could more easily afford the extra cost.

Now, if you CHOOSE to pay the extra cost... good on you. But you don't have the right to decide that Bob should have to pay the extra cost.

[billvon 3,080]

>I already have extra coats. No additional cost.

Cool! So you are like someone who already has health insurance. No additional costs.

>You walk into the car lot... I tell you that if you buy today I will give you a discount.

Then you walk onto the second lot. I tell you that if you buy today there's no discount but all prices are going up tomorrow.

What's the difference?

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Then you walk onto the second lot. I tell you that if you buy today there's no discount but all prices are going up tomorrow.

What's the difference?

The difference is in my world, I have the right to not buy a car and not pay a fine for not buying a car. In your world I still have the 'right' to not buy a car, but I then have to pay a penalty for not buying a car.

[billvon 3,080]

>The difference is in my world, I have the right to not buy a car and not pay a fine for
>not buying a car.

You weren't talking about rights there. You were claiming that there is a difference between the terms "discount" and "penalty." If you don't really see a difference there, then we agree on that.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

>The difference is in my world, I have the right to not buy a car and not pay a fine for
>not buying a car.

You weren't talking about rights there. You were claiming that there is a difference between the terms "discount" and "penalty." If you don't really see a difference there, then we agree on that.

You don't see a difference?

Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give then to you for $20 a piece,

Option 2. You can buy a jump tickets for $25 each or pay me a $5 penalty.

Since there's no difference to you between a discount and a penalty, how many of Option 2 can I put you down for? I take Paypal.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give then to you for $20 a piece

Sweet, number pattern test!

I'll take 25 for free!

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[billvon 3,080]

>Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give then to you for $20 a piece
>Option 2. You can buy a jump tickets for $25 each or pay me a $5 penalty.

You're starting to conflate the two issues here.

Issue 1: Is there a difference between "discount" and "penalty" here? For this the options are:

Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give them to you for $20 a piece, a $5 discount per ticket.
Option 2. Jump tickets are $20 but if you buy less than 5, I'll give them to you for $25 a piece, a $5 penalty per ticket.

There is no difference (other than wording) between these two options.

Issue 2: SHOULD there be a penalty for not having healthcare (or a discount for having it?) This is a separate question - a perfectly valid one, but separate.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Issue 1: Is there a difference between "discount" and "penalty" here? For this the options are:

Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give them to you for $20 a piece, a $5 discount per ticket.
Option 2. Jump tickets are $20 but if you buy less than 5, I'll give them to you for $25 a piece, a $5 penalty per ticket.

There is no difference (other than wording) between these two options.

Agreed. Two functions f and g are equal if and only if they have the same domain, the same codomain, and f(x) = g(x) for every x in the domain shared by f and g. That seems applicable here with your jump ticket example, as well as the debate about whether the ACA's individual mandate is a penalty for those who don't buy health insurance or a health insurance tax for everyone coupled with a corresponding tax credit for those who purchase qualifying plans. They're identical functions.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rehmwa 2]

I think I'll just show up and jump, and then run away when you try to penalize me $5 extra

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Bolas 5]

Quote

>Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give then to you for $20 a piece
>Option 2. You can buy a jump tickets for $25 each or pay me a $5 penalty.

You're starting to conflate the two issues here.

Issue 1: Is there a difference between "discount" and "penalty" here? For this the options are:

Option 1. Jump tickets are $25 but if you buy 5, I'll give them to you for $20 a piece, a $5 discount per ticket.
Option 2. Jump tickets are $20 but if you buy less than 5, I'll give them to you for $25 a piece, a $5 penalty per ticket.

There is no difference (other than wording) between these two options.

Issue 2: SHOULD there be a penalty for not having healthcare (or a discount for having it?) This is a separate question - a perfectly valid one, but separate.

You misunderstood.

Option 2. You can buy a jump tickets for $25 each or pay me a $5 penalty.

You're getting nothing for your $5. It's a penalty for not buying a jump ticket. Obviously if you're poor and don't have $5 you won't be charged. The DZ justifies this as a way to offset the cost of jump tickets and to allow others who couldn't afford it to jump for free.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[billvon 3,080]

>You misunderstood. Option 2. You can buy a jump tickets for $25 each or pay me a $5 penalty.

I understood your example. It does not apply to the post you replied to (i.e. the difference between a penalty and a discount) since there is nothing about paying a third party in that discussion. It does not apply to the larger healthcare debate since I get no benefit from giving you $5.

Now, if your option 2 was re-written to "you can buy a jump ticket for $25 or pay you a $5 penalty, which pays for your jump tickets if you ever really need them and can't pay yourself" that might be more applicable.