Roberts ruling makes Obamacare easier to repeal

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by pricejj

I refuse to purchase over-priced health insurance Req, does that make me a loser too?

Businesses exist to make money, not to adhere to Socialist manifesto's.

Actually, your unwillingness to get health care actually costs the tax payers more $, but I think you mentioned that you don't go into the doctor (maybe I dreamt that up) so you might get the get out of jail free card pass on that one buddy!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I guess this means pricejj is not exactly the "deficit hawk" he pretends to be...

Health care repeal would widen deficit by $109 billion, says CBO

Repealing the health care law passed in 2010 and upheld by the Supreme Court in June would increase the federal deficit by $109 billion over 10 years, a new Congressional Budget Office analysis estimates.

The CBO on Tuesday rated the health care repeal bill passed by the House earlier this month and found that "the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013-2022 period." The primary reason for the deficit increase, the report showed, was the repeal of several tax increases within the health care law. While the repeal bill would reduce direct federal spending by $890 billion over that period, it would also slash more than $1 trillion in new taxes.

The House repeal bill, which passed unanimously among Republicans and received support from a handful of Democrats, is not expected to become law under the current Congress.

In a separate analysis, the CBO also measured the impact of the June Supreme Court ruling that struck down parts of the health care law but left core provisions intact, and found that it would save $84 billion because of reduced Medicaid spending.
The CBO estimated in 2011 that the health care law would reduce the federal deficit by $210 billion over 10 years because of the law's revenue increases.

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Actually, your unwillingness to get health care actually costs the tax payers more $, but I think you mentioned that you don't go into the doctor (maybe I dreamt that up) so you might get the get out of jail free card pass on that one buddy!

I am more than willing to pay for all my health care costs with a mandatory 2.5% deducted out of income for an HSA, unfortunately, that's not on the table...

Rather than purchase insurance for $6000 per year (which would have been wasted money), I can save $6,000 per year (in my 401k) that can be used for health care if necessary...a MUCH smarter, and cost-effective solution.

Maybe you can list me as a dependent on your plan?

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

No, it makes you a burden to the taxpayers.

You would rather wait until you get sick or have an emergency, go into the nearest ER for treatment, and then allow the taxpayers to foot the bill for you and others like you.

"Personal responsibility" my ass!

We should go back to all those uninsured sob story Obamacare poster children Democrats campaigned with back in 2009 and make sure they all get redefined as the dirty freeloaders they really were.

[barryr]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

We should go back to all those uninsured sob story Obamacare poster children Democrats campaigned with back in 2009 and make sure they all get redefined as the dirty freeloaders they really were.

, true, what was it? "Obama is going to pay for my car, my house, get me a job." But those weren't free loaders, they were Obama backers, so they are entitled to every handout known to man. I think the democrats feel free to call the uninsured as "free loaders" since they figure a vast majority of them either don't vote or don't vote democrat at least.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

We should go back to all those uninsured sob story Obamacare poster children Democrats campaigned with back in 2009 and make sure they all get redefined as the dirty freeloaders they really were.

Rightards have a special gift for false equivalence, don't they?

Uninsured children and/or working poor = pricejj and his ilk, i.e., people who could afford insurance but who prefer to let the U.S. taxpayers foot the bill for their ER visits instead?

Sure thing, genius.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Rightards have a special gift for false equivalence, don't they?

Uninsured children and/or working poor = pricejj and his ilk, i.e., people who could afford insurance but who prefer to let the U.S. taxpayers foot the bill for their ER visits instead?

Sure thing, genius.

If you think you can afford $6000 health insurance, then by all means, send some cash this way. I have paid for everyone of my "ER visits", and I have money in my 401k to pay for more. I already told you I would be willing to place mandatory contributions into an HSA if that was available at a reasonable price.

What more do you and your ilk want? It is a simple solution to the "free-loader" problem that actually works. Unfortunately, your Obamacare tax/penalty will never decrease healthcare costs for anyone. It has been proven in Massachusetts.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by pricejj

If you think you can afford $6000 health insurance, then by all means, send some cash this way. I have paid for everyone of my "ER visits", and I have money in my 401k to pay for more. I already told you I would be willing to place mandatory contributions into an HSA if that was available at a reasonable price.

What more do you and your ilk want? It is a simple solution to the "free-loader" problem that actually works. Unfortunately, your Obamacare tax/penalty will never decrease healthcare costs for anyone. It has been proven in Massachusetts.

You may find this an interesting read.

http://www.governing.com/blogs/polit...in.html?page=1

Before the Massachusetts Legislature adjourns on July 31, chances are good that lawmakers will pass a bill to enact cost controls on health care in the state, according to a series of interviews in Boston's Beacon Hill. The measure -- which Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick is expected to sign -- would be the long-awaited follow-up to the health-care overhaul approved in 2006 by the Democratic-dominated Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Mitt Romney

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Rightards have a special gift for false equivalence, don't they?

Uninsured children and/or working poor = pricejj and his ilk, i.e., people who could afford insurance but who prefer to let the U.S. taxpayers foot the bill for their ER visits instead?

Sure thing, genius.

Pfffft. So your answer is to tax the "Working Poor" and then tell others how much you care.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Pfffft. So your answer is to tax the "Working Poor" and then tell others how much you care.

Now there's an analysis of the ACA that makes even Rush Limbaugh sound like he knows what he's talking about.

It's always amusing to watch you guys make up your own "facts" when the real ones get in the way of your narrative.