Jail Time for Those without Health Care Insurance?

[hedgehog]

:scared


During an exclusive interview with ABC News? Jake Tapper today, President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to ?free ride? the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance.

?What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don't, you're subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it's affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there's a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are -- are burdened by because of the fact that people don't have health insurance, you know, there's nothing wrong with a penalty.?

Under the House bill those who can afford to buy insurance and don?t? pay a fine. If the refuse to pay that fine there?s a threat ? as with a lot of tax fines ? of jail time. The Senate removed that provision in the Senate Finance Committee.

Mr. Obama said penalties have to be high enough for people to not game the system, but it?s also important to not be ?so punitive? that people who are having a hard time find themselves suddenly worse off, thus why hardship exemptions have been built in the legislation.

?I think the general broad principle is simply that people who are paying for their health insurance aren't subsidizing folks who simply choose not to until they get sick and then suddenly they expect free health insurance. That's -- that's basic concept of responsibility that I think most Americans abide by,? Mr. Obama said, ?penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance.?

The President said that he didn?t think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the ?biggest question? the House and Senate are facing right now.

 

[RAYMOND]

what a jokekurby

 

[Chadman]

What's a joke is that this is nothing different than any other form of taxes or fines in our country. You guys don't consider anything to be a joke, unless it is something you disagree with.

If someone doesn't carry insurance, refuses to pay a fine, what would you do? What if you were in a car accident, and your car was badly damaged, and needed repair? Would you think it ok that the other person didn't have insurance, didn't pay a fine, and went off scott-free? Wouldn't you want them to pay, somehow? Of course you would. (Keep in mind, you now pay for all people who don't have health insurance, and get treatment, one way or another).

Sometimes, you guys are completely ridiculous. Stop and think for once, would'ja?

 

[hedgehog]

What's a joke is that this is nothing different than any other form of taxes or fines in our country. You guys don't consider anything to be a joke, unless it is something you disagree with.

If someone doesn't carry insurance, refuses to pay a fine, what would you do? What if you were in a car accident, and your car was badly damaged, and needed repair? Would you think it ok that the other person didn't have insurance, didn't pay a fine, and went off scott-free? Wouldn't you want them to pay, somehow? Of course you would. (Keep in mind, you now pay for all people who don't have health insurance, and get treatment, one way or another).

Sometimes, you guys are completely ridiculous. Stop and think for once, would'ja?

I understand the fact you must carry liability insurance on your vehicle, isnt it your right to not have health insurance if its too expensive at your job? Personally, I will not go without it no matter the cost for my family, luckily my job offers health insurance. If my job did not offer it, I would just buy it on my own, its not a chance I am willing to take. Right now all the losers that dont have insurance can go to any hospital and get the treatment that is necessary, they just dont pay when they get the bill. I agree there should be reform as my insurance costs about 500 per month for my family out of my pocket, it should be tort reform and tax incentives to businesses instead of socialized medicine.

 

[Chadman]

Let me ask you this, simply, hedge. What EXACTLY would tort reform do for you personally. Be specific. Don't just say - save me money. I know it's the ONLY real talking point you have, and it's already a part of 2/3 of the states in our country. So... go ahead...

If you are fired from your job, and lose your insurance, or your company decides it can no longer afford to give you insurance, what are you going to do?

I understand you understand that people are forced to carry liability insurance on their vehicle. Congratulations. Why shouldn't people be required to carry health insurance, when the costs of people not carrying it are passed along to those that do, whether they carry it or not. And there's no regulation on passing those costs on to you and me? And the cost is increasing 5-10% every year, with no end in sight? And you don't argue about auto insurance?!? I haven't EVER had a car accident that resulted in a payment by myself or my insurance company. EVER. But I've paid in thousands of dollars every year. I know you understand an monitor your auto insurance, because you have to pay for it. And I'm guessing you bitch about it every chance you get. But as long as your employer bites the bullet on your healthy insurance, that's ok, because you don't realize it might effect you some day.

You guys just make no sense, in so many ways. I realize, the right wing only cares about things if they are affected by them. Thus, the arguing about this. But they are happy to benefit from those same things.

And democrats and liberals are the ones out for themselves, looking for handouts? Whatever...

 

[hedgehog]

Let me ask you this, simply, hedge. What EXACTLY would tort reform do for you personally. Be specific. Don't just say - save me money. I know it's the ONLY real talking point you have, and it's already a part of 2/3 of the states in our country. So... go ahead...

If you are fired from your job, and lose your insurance, or your company decides it can no longer afford to give you insurance, what are you going to do?

I understand you understand that people are forced to carry liability insurance on their vehicle. Congratulations. Why shouldn't people be required to carry health insurance, when the costs of people not carrying it are passed along to those that do, whether they carry it or not. And there's no regulation on passing those costs on to you and me? And the cost is increasing 5-10% every year, with no end in sight? And you don't argue about auto insurance?!? I haven't EVER had a car accident that resulted in a payment by myself or my insurance company. EVER. But I've paid in thousands of dollars every year. I know you understand an monitor your auto insurance, because you have to pay for it. And I'm guessing you bitch about it every chance you get. But as long as your employer bites the bullet on your healthy insurance, that's ok, because you don't realize it might effect you some day.

You guys just make no sense, in so many ways. I realize, the right wing only cares about things if they are affected by them. Thus, the arguing about this. But they are happy to benefit from those same things.

And democrats and liberals are the ones out for themselves, looking for handouts? Whatever...

First thing tort reform, limit the amount you can sue a doctor for, thats it, insurance is so high because of the attorneys in this country.

Second, If I lose my job I would go on my wife's insurance and family would too.

Its not that I dont want reform to make insurance more affordable to the lower class I just dont want socialized medicine like Canada and England. Of course I hate my insurance company State Farm fwiw, when I get my bill for my vehicle insurance I pay every 6 months and my insurance I pay on my house every 6 months, it costs me about 4K per year just to live in my home and drive 2 vehicles, yeah and I have had 2 claims in the 11 years I have paid insurance, both because I backed into someone at Sams club once and my mother in law once, don't ask...kurby

Chad, I do look out for myself, because if I dont who will? I vote how it affects me no other reason. All I want is lower taxes, less government and more freedom to make choices on my own, I dont want the government to make any choices for me at all.

I am out...:sadwave:

 

[Mags]

Let me ask you this, simply, hedge. What EXACTLY would tort reform do for you personally. Be specific. Don't just say - save me money. I know it's the ONLY real talking point you have, and it's already a part of 2/3 of the states in our country. So... go ahead...

If you are fired from your job, and lose your insurance, or your company decides it can no longer afford to give you insurance, what are you going to do?

I understand you understand that people are forced to carry liability insurance on their vehicle. Congratulations. Why shouldn't people be required to carry health insurance, when the costs of people not carrying it are passed along to those that do, whether they carry it or not. And there's no regulation on passing those costs on to you and me? And the cost is increasing 5-10% every year, with no end in sight? And you don't argue about auto insurance?!? I haven't EVER had a car accident that resulted in a payment by myself or my insurance company. EVER. But I've paid in thousands of dollars every year. I know you understand an monitor your auto insurance, because you have to pay for it. And I'm guessing you bitch about it every chance you get. But as long as your employer bites the bullet on your healthy insurance, that's ok, because you don't realize it might effect you some day.

You guys just make no sense, in so many ways. I realize, the right wing only cares about things if they are affected by them. Thus, the arguing about this. But they are happy to benefit from those same things.

And democrats and liberals are the ones out for themselves, looking for handouts? Whatever...

It's actually nice to read your posts, Mr. Chadman. You are one of the few folks on the political board, that is left leaning, and doesn't fill up his posts with slams at Republican's (for the most part), nor with vulgarity. You do seem to be an educated fellow on the issues.

I can tell you, I come from the insurance industry side - and I wholeheartedly agree that everyone should carry health insurance. I don't, however, feel everyone should have the same plan - for example, some folks view health insurance as any other type of insurance - a method to spread risk and avoid financial ruin. They prefer a very high deductible plan ($5K), and prefer to pay for routine expenses out of pocket.

Unfortunately, too many of the public look at insurance as a way to pay for day to day, routine expenses. Just like oil changes, tire rotations, etc are not covered by auto insurance, neither should dr. visits, mammo's, routine physicals be covered by health insurance. Those are all routine expenses that everyone incurs and should be paid out of pocket and budgeted for. Today, folks pay premiums for those benefits - and get 80% back of what they pay for those services in claims. They'd be much better self funding for those, and having lower premiums.

That being said - I do have a serious question for you. The biggest flaw I see in all the proposals out there is the financing mechanism. "O" is trying to sell this as being a country responsibility and everyone should buy into this, and everyone should have skin in the game. Ok, so far I agree.

But the financing mechanisms that are in place so far only take money from the insurers, high income earners, or rich tax plans.

If this idea is SO important, it seems to me the simpliest way to pay for this, the most fair way, is via a National Sales Tax that affects EVERYBODY. That way:

1. Everyone is paying something for this benefit (I'm assuming low incomes would still get subsidies to buy the insurance - but at least they'd be paying towards the costs via the sales taxes)

2. The higher incomes would still pay much of the overall costs, due to higher spending patterns.

The overall tax wouldn't necessarily need to be much - maybe 1-2% at most.

This seems so simple - and I'd bet more people would support the various proposals with such a fair and easy to implement/quantify financing stream.

What am I missing? Is it just a matter of political fallout that "O" is afraid of, by adding a sales tax? I know he'd be afraid to lose votes, as this would upset more people than just targeting the high income earners or the Cadillac health plans, but this just seems to be such a fair and simple way to do it?

Again, it is just election fears on the Dems part - or is this just an unworkable idea?

I've been wondering about this for quite a while. I must be missing something.....