Non political implications of obamacare for individual amers

S

supplyshock

New member
May 10, 2011
196
10
0
Can someone please explain to me the non political implications of Obama care on being an individual s corp affiliate in this case. I.e. I am someone who does not currently buy health care and not part of a business but a very healthy individual. Will all this law mean that I will have to buy healthcare on my own? How much would this cost for a 24 yo non smoker in California in good physical shape and no preexisting illness. Are there any loop holes? What is the fine?

Please no politics here as there is already a thread with. Thanks.
 


I'm quoting from memory, could be wrong.

Yes, you will have to buy health insurance (big difference between "care" and "insurance", almost all Americans have health care).

Probably ~$250 a month, depending on a lot of factors.

Not sure about loopholes, it'll be enforced by the IRS (so they'll invade your privacy more).

I think the fine is 2.5% of income, capped at around $2k. Which in a lot of cases would be like a 30-1 spread for buying insurance or paying the fine.

As an aside, health insurance is good to have, and I'd lock in a policy now. I don't see costs dropping anytime soon, and it gives you peace of mind. I'm not opposed to this because I don't feel people should have insurance - I'm opposed for many reasons I won't get into here so I don't derail your thread. I will say I think the individual implications will go far beyond being forced to buy insurance.
 
You mean like this little gem that was hidden in "Tax Code"?

You will lose 1% of your income due to the IRS, if you don't join in!
 
If Romney doesn't become president and/or the law isn't overturned then starting 2014, almost everyone that isn't insured well have to buy health insurance or pay a fine/tax.

I think it's 1% of your income for the first 2 years of the law and then it goes up to 2.5% after.

The cost of individual health insurance plans varies by state. Currently they cost roughly between $1,500 to $2,500 a year for young and healthy individuals. But the price may change dramatically up or down by the time more Obamacare laws takes effect.

If you don't want health insurance then you compare the cost of buying individual insurance to 1% and then 2.5% of your income. If the insurance cost is greater then the tax then just don't buy it and pay the tax instead. Unless if the difference between the tax and buying insurance is miniscule like $100 or $200. Then it's probably smarter to just buy the insurance.

As for loopholes I guess you can always marry someone who job includes health insurance for their entire family before 2014.
 
As a self-employed person living in MA where this law has already been in place for several years (implemented by Romney, ironically), it's pretty much exactly what scottspfd82 said. I pay about $250/month and I get health insurance.

I'm not all that young (late 30s) and I do have a pre-existing condition, so for me it's a good deal. Might be nice to opt out of if you're sure you never want to see a doctor, but it's nice have some peace of mind in case you get really sick or hit by a bus.
 
So ignoring the libertarian argument financially this isn't much worse than a few grand a year? All good I guess.
 
Romney supports Obamacare, don't expert relief with a change in the White House. The actors matter less than the institutions.
 
So there are a lot of anarchists on this forum, they do not vote... while the left of america votes and running the country into debt ruin?


This will end well.
 
I do not think they outnumber just yet, meaning voters.
I do see your point, at some point it will be like greece.... when the us gets hit with another wave of unemployment, the gov will hire more.. just like greece did.....

Until 1/3 works for the gov, jacking up there pay benefits etc till the whole thing comes down.

Nov will tell us were it will go, there are enough voters to turn back this mess...

I am wondering if the Ron Paul supporters will stay home?
 
So what's the point of being an anarchist at all then?
Click to expand...

Moral principle.

I reject violence. Government, in even its most basic form, gives itself the right to initiate force over people and steal through taxation, both of which I consider immoral.

I can't reject violence and support the state - I'd be a hypocrite.

one person isn't going to make a difference.
Click to expand...
A difference in what? How Governments work? You can't fix Government with politics. One person spreading good ideas will have a much bigger impact than a million people voting for the next puppet in chief. Politics is pointless - You think we (the US) can vote or debate our way out of this shitty Government? We can't. Change has to come from the attitudes of the people, not playing politics.
 
scottspfd82 said:
Moral principle.

I reject violence. Government, in even its most basic form, gives itself the right to initiate force over people and steal through taxation, both of which I consider immoral.

I can't reject violence and support the state - I'd be a hypocrite.

A difference in what? How Governments work? You can't fix Government with politics. One person spreading good ideas will have a much bigger impact than a million people voting for the next puppet in chief. Politics is pointless - You think we (the US) can vote or debate our way out of this shitty Government? We can't. Change has to come from the attitudes of the people, not playing politics.
Click to expand...

I was sarcastically responding to ly2...
 
ThisWebThing said:
I am wondering if the Ron Paul supporters will stay home?
Click to expand...

Well I know I'm not. I'm showing up to write in Ron Paul. Futile? Probably, but I can't vote for the other two tool bags. It's hella fun to vote, then make fun of those who voted for the winner when they shit it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom