Gravitymaster

You keep beating this "Deniers" drum. Most that I have talked to and most who post here don't deny it's occuring. They simply disagree with the causes.

Any "reward" for one guy, just means the others have to pick up the slack (i.e., you are forcing your neighbors to subsidize your car purchase). So it's still a punishment for those that choose to not go after the reward. What business does the government have for offering a reward for doing something, anyway? It's not their business. However = I agree this is DRAMATICALLY upping the interference factor, it's a much more BLATANT implementation of the concepts. I'm very worried that both parties will be able to springboard off of this to force the public to act and think and live by their arbitrary social standards. Not only worried they might, there's no doubt about it they will. Once they finish handing out exemptions to political donors.

I think his argument is that you are taxed more when you do not purchase a home or a hybrid automobile. So in essence you are taxed for NOT doing something. I believe this is at the heart of John Roberts thinking.

Doesn't have to. Where is it written that the ONLY taxing body in the USA is the IRS? I pay lots of taxes to the Great State of Illinois and to my county, township, city, school district... without any participation by the IRS. More non-sequitur babble. Will the IRS come after you for not paying your taxes to the State of illinois? What other collection authority does the IRS have other than collecting taxes and assessing penalties for non-payment of taxes? That duck is quacking pretty loud!!

Agreed, he's probably the most qualified person to run for President in quite a long time.

So does the Democrat candidate. True... but the irony meter is off the scale that the only Republican in the country that does not believe it's a tax, also happens to be the presumptive Republican nominee. I think you are very wrong to believe he is the only Republican in the country that doesn't believe it's a tax.

So does the Democrat candidate.

Where does it say the IRS will come after you?

Heck, they would probably leave you alone if you lived in Massachusetts and didn't pay for your Romneycare.

What does that penalty go toward? Beer and popcorn, I expect. You think GSA will get the money?

Hope you paid it. Wouldn't want the IRS after you for a speeding ticket.

How many lies can you spot in 1:26? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJVMWjTQh_Y

You could ask Mr. Etch-a Sketch Mitt Romney. His Romneycare is almost indistinguishable from ACA. That lie got blown out of the water upthread - should rightly be called "Patrickcare". I'm sure it will continue to be called whatever Soros wants it to be called by his minions.

I hear you. I still question the motives for this legislation.

You could ask Mr. Etch-a Sketch Mitt Romney. His Romneycare is almost indistinguishable from ACA. More non-sequitor babble. Glad to see you have transitioned from "Bush Lied" to "Romney is Mr. Etch-A-Sketch". I supposed we will have to put up with that for a least a few more months, eh?

Then why not just have the gov't subsidize medical insurance for those who truely can't afford it? That's what they are going to do under this plan anyway. It what the gov't always does for people who can't manage to feed themselves, put a roof over their heads etc.

What"s puzzling about all of this is why the hospitals are unable to collect from these deadbeats. If I don't pay my bills, I will have a collection agency after me and eventually end up being sued and my wages garnished. If a deadbeat dad doesn't pay his child support, then the state can come in and revoke any professional licenses he may have and also his drivers license until it's paid. Why are hospitals having so much trouble collecting their money? Why is the government getting involved in assisting a private business in their accounts recievables? Doesn't Mary Brown have any assets?

I doubt Mary Brown is a real person. She is likely a "composite". Mary Brown was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. Very real, very freeloading, willing to stiff her doctors (and by extension, those of us responsible enough to have health insurance). www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ix=h9&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=cflSZJQ2NAXJqEebRS95rw&cp=20&gs_id=6&xhr=t&q=mary+brown+plaintiff&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=mar The poster child for why the ACA is needed Sorry, thought you would have gotten the humor. I'm sure you think it funny to stiff your doctor for medical care. I don't stiff my doctor because I have a Cadillac Healthcare Program. Now that we have this huge tax, you liberals will start expanding it and giving away waivers to anyone who contributes to your re-election campaigns, does you other favors. In addition, the majority of the people who stiff their doctors are poor. They will have their healthcare paid for by those of us who don't stiff our doctors. Left-wingers like you can't be honest even when the facts are staring you in the face.

I doubt Mary Brown is a real person. She is likely a "composite". Mary Brown was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. Very real, very freeloading, willing to stiff her doctors (and by extension, those of us responsible enough to have health insurance). www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ix=h9&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=cflSZJQ2NAXJqEebRS95rw&cp=20&gs_id=6&xhr=t&q=mary+brown+plaintiff&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=mar The poster child for why the ACA is needed Sorry, thought you would have gotten the humor.

I doubt Mary Brown is a real person. She is likely a "composite".

Well, I guess you can blame Bush for this one, eh?

Agreed. I would add that any "fix" that does not include tort reform to protect doctors and hospitals from lawsuits that pay insane amounts of money, should be DOA. Nearly any medical procedure carries with it a certain degree of risk. Barring gross negligence, a doctor or hospital should be able to provide care without having to worry about some scumbag attorney hiding in the weeds, ready to pounce.

Your quote does not demonstrate that. It's just additional evidence that Americans aren't living within their means and saving for emergencies. Americans spend too much buying depreciating crap and big houses and too little saving for emergencies. Where the median household income is $46,000 an emergency savings fund of $23,000 is reasonable. With that much in the bank $2000 of medical bills out of pocket and $2000 in lost wages over 2 weeks are not big deals. The average savings account balance is only $3800. $3800 - $4000 = $-200. Oops! +1. There are still too many people still buying houses that reall shouldn't be but they have been sold this dream their whole lives that homeownership represents some type of plateau. Often they afford them by not taking care of financial responsibilities such as proper health insurance, savings in the bank, and money for retirement. Then when they can no longer meet their obligations, they turn to the government (taxpayers)for a bailout. Health Insurance companies do one thing really well. They look at the individuals age and health and then evaluate what thier risk is. That persons premium is based on that risk factor. Obamacare removes this evaluation and is in essence a tax on health to all so that the few can be insured. If they want to cover those who don't provide for themselves, lets at least be honest and call it a tax. Lets not force everyone into a governmental system. And lets make no mistake about where Obamacare is leading us. Governments lie all the time when they are pushing an agenda.

Crappy analogy. I know you can do better. I've seen it.