• AA5B
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    The bit about a tax penalty for absence of coverage is a bit much, does the government really need to kick someone when they’re down?

    This was struck down in court years ago.

    The “stick” was to encourage people to get coverage ahead of time or face the penalty. If they decided not to, the extra tax could help cover unpaid ER visits where they must be treated whether or not they can pay.

    The “carrot” At the same time was reduced price insurance based on your income and expanded Medicaid coverage for people who couldn’t afford anything. This was paid for by the federal government but Medicaid is administered by the state: several Repugnancan states refused the money because their politicians were so set against providing free medical care

    After the tax “stick” was struck down, coverage dropped without that penalty, and states where they refused the money left millions of lesser paid people without coverage . So yeah, we needed it

    • Komodo Rodeo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’ll be damned, it was almost addressed by legislation in a similar way as car insurance then, if I’m understanding the broad strokes (penalty for non possession)? That being the case, was the penalty via taxes not routed in much the same way as simply paying taxes overall, except only as a means to cover some of the cost for those least able to afford it?

      People are generally pissed about paying sales taxes which achieve much the same outcome minus the carrot-stick approach and penalties, how much more or less pissed were Americans about getting ‘nudged’ in the right direction with income tax penalties by comparison?

      • AA5B
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m not sure about the routing

        It’s hard to tell how pissed off people were about the tax penalty trying to nudge them in the right direction.

        • Clearly some people think they never need medical care, or that they can make that decision in the short term to save some much needed money. Statistics show they are very wrong, but everyone thinks they’re above average.
        • Clearly some people were vocal about complaining
        • but also very clearly a lot of it was partisanship, politicians stoking outrage to manipulate voters

        I honestly don’t know how common it really was for people to be upset vs how common it was political shenanigans. As always, those shenanigans misrepresent and confuse the truth, so were those complainers even aware of what they’re complaining?

        • Komodo Rodeo
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s hard to tell how pissed off people were about the tax penalty trying to nudge them in the right direction.

          • but also very clearly a lot of it was partisanship, politicians stoking outrage to manipulate voters

          Ah, par for the course then. There’s a lot of that going around on a pretty regular basis unfortunately.