You gotta be worried that it will be though, right? It's the direction the majority of the world is moving towards. Even America. No one will repeal Obamacare and if the dems get both houses plus president again they will take another step towards UHC.

Says hi

To those who don't pay taxes, it sure is.

Fo' sho' they could take it down. I'm interested to see how it plays out. I feel like the king yutz Scalia will have something petty and disingenuous to say about it.

So what happens to the entire program if the individual mandate gets voted down?

We are seriously in a dark time wrt to the SCOTUS if they kill Obamacare.

It ****ing dies of course. How many times in this and other threads have we explained to you that that is why the mandate is so crucial? 100 at least. And you and your ilk always blandly reply with "That's fine but ah just don't like the govt tellin' me what to buy". You can't get all the good stuff w/o knowing you have most of the pool, healthy and sick. This is why the republicans were all for the mandate from 1993 or so until 2008.

Just think of it as a new tax that you get a tax break on for having health insurance. No one is making you buy anything. You don't go to jail if you don't have health insurance. And you still get all the lifesaving care you want.

So you believe that the mandate is constitutional?

One specific issue is that its inefficient. This has been mentioned before but there are lots of medical conditions that are significantly cheaper to treat early (or to just prevent) with early or regular small costs (like regular doctor visits, or simple prescriptions).

In the other thread I used Strep Throat as an example. If my doctor visit is free (because I've effectively paid for 'unlimited' visits through my health insurance) I'm likely to go to the doctor earlier than if I have to pay for it. As a consequence I stop being contagious earlier and reduce my chance of serious side effects. My quality of life is better, my friends/family/co-worker's quality of life is better, and I reduce my chance of a big bill down the road.

Now, its possible your plan is still cheaper than a more comprehensive plan but its not a given (I'd love to see research either way). And your plan definitely leads to lower quality of life for lots of people - including people that you think act totally responsibly with respect to their health.

Yes, under the commerce clause. Also from a pure practival common sense POV (which the court can and does cite all the time) I don't see that constitutionality cares about the technicality of "buy this or you will be taxed" vs. "buy this and get a tax break" which we know happens all the time. You guys keep saying people are forced to buy health insurance as if it's "buy this or you go to jail" (which I honestly wonder if many of you forget that it's not most of the time).

Yes, for all of the reasons he listed.

You're effectively claiming that the Government is forcing me to have children by giving tax breaks to parents. It's ridiculous.

Or forcing me to buy a house to get the mortgage interest deduction. I don't think it's constitutional that I can't deduct the rent I pay.

oh so now it's a tax cut

Those who are adamantly opposed to govt healthcare: are kids whose parents can't afford healthcare just ****ed under your ideal plan? Just wondering.

What about the children?

are the kids whose parents aren't lucky enough to live in the US just ****ed under your ideal plan? Just wondering.

I definitely think we should tax the entire world and provide UHC to every living human.

I don't think you're being serious, but that would be the ultimate goal as best I can tell. It would be wonderful to live in a world with a functional health care system that works for everyone. But that's decades away from happening.

I ran this through my "pvn translation app" and it gave the result of:

"oops, i cant answer that, quick, lets deflect and handwave the point"

Ive not yet programmed the RNG into it that decides whether module "pvn deflect and handwave" gives you a picture of a pear, some vague reference to how things are worse in other countries so who cares or it just posts a random smiley, but i think the app is decent enough to release as a beta and would help people when interacting with pvnbot.

Yeah. I mean its a nice idea but its hard enough to convince Americans that letting the poor get adequate healthcare is hard enough, its going to be politically impossible to push for worldwide UHC coverage under the current paradigm even if the sums added up like they do for UHC in America.

the US inexorably is moving toward the idea (if its not there already) that health care is a requirement for our society as a whole. Even if Obamacare is repealed, it's gonna happen. 3 years, 5 years, 10 years from now.

ITT people trying to hold back the tide with a couple buckets and cinder blocks.

Since pretty much the founding of the republic

Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance -- in 1798

ADAMSOCARE

lol @ phill

constantly complains about everyone else's low quality posting, has never made a high quality post in his entire history here

Not to mention the post above could just as easily be turned around against you. The point of the post wasn't to answer the question, it was to show how dishonest the question was. and the fact that you missed that was completely unsurprising. The fact that government heathcare proponents can point to a slightly different group of "people I care about" doesn't show they're A) morally superior (but they CARE about KIDS) or B) that what they support is actually going to lead to a net benefit.

But keep tarding up threads complaining about how tarded they are, phill, you're fighting the good fight.

So you see no diference from: Taxing sailors who are employed in commerce, using the tax money to run federal hospitals for those who paid the tax

and

Telling everyone that they must contract with third party health insurance companies or pay a hefty fine.