Be a good little subject
Or an enemy of the people:
It’s official. The Joint Tax Committee informs us that under the terms of the Pelosi health-care bill, “Americans who do not maintain acceptable health insurance coverage and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.”
November 11th, 2009 at 10:30 am
And for those five years they get free government provided healthcare.
I’m reminded of the odd implications of suspending a student for skipping school. Or as George Carlin said, “If he won’t come to school, we won’t let him.”
November 11th, 2009 at 10:58 am
It seems to me this is a pretty standard penalty for deliberate tax evasion. Unless you’re going to come out and say that all taxes are illegitimate, I’m not sure how you can say this one is particularly outrageous.
Which is not to say I agree with this idea (I don’t). But I’m forced to pay for all kinds of things I think are bad ideas, many of which were instituted by the GOP; so I don’t buy the “this is the worst thing to ever happen in human history” act.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:16 am
It’s a punishment for not having insurance disguised as a tax.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Yes, but we have punishments for everything from renting, to not having kids, to driving the wrong kind of car disguised as taxes.
Why pull this one in particular out for special disapproval?
November 11th, 2009 at 11:24 am
To paraphrase Heinlein, there is no greater tyranny than forcing someone to pay for something just because you think its good for them. Get fucked, Pelosi.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:37 am
SD, not really. What we have are benefits for people who own, have kids, and drive the right kind of car.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:51 am
So you’re saying if they changed it to a 2.5% across the board tax increase with a deduction for people who have insurance, you’d be okay with it because it’s now a “benefit” for people with insurance rather than a “punishment” for people without it?
November 11th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Well, benefit is a relative term but from a tax perspective it would be. I’m not saying i’m OK with it. Nor did say i was OK with the other stuff.
November 11th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Great.
Now we are criminalizing not buying health insurance.
Good thinking (for a totalitarian state or an internment camp).
November 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
They don’t have enough jail space for all the people who won’t get insurance.
November 11th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
I thought the Dems were pro-choice.
November 11th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Markie Marxist sez: “Well, you know, communism does require people to give up some personal freedom, but what’s five years in prison compared to having health insurance? Um . . . maybe that’s not such a good comparison. We may have to adjust the spin on that. I’ve got Pelosi’s number around here somewhere.”
November 11th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Seeing as there is no way out of this tax, it is not comparable to many other taxes.
A homeless, jobless man can not pay income tax, property tax, car tax, road tax, phone tax, water tax, electricity tax, sales tax, social security, Medicare, etc etc, and not get fined or thrown in jail.
But if he doesn’t pay for health insurance, we are going to arrest him, fine him, and put him in prison for 5 years?
November 11th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Anyone who thinks this is going to result in gulags and shoot-outs has no conception of the kind of insipid cunning bureaucrats have. They’re not going to send SWAT into your Montana compound, sparking a Gadsden-flagged popular uprising by right-thinking Americans. They’re going to refuse to renew your driver’s license, destroy your credit rating, and, if they’re feeling feisty, making the banks take money from your savings accounts. Do you want an NFA stamp? Nope. Security clearance? Nope.
You could always try and vote in new politicians, and that might work, but then again, if over half the population won’t be paying taxes anyway and are already dependent on the government then you may have trouble getting your majority.
Buying more than a pack of Gold Dots as anything other than a hedge against increased prices is a mistake. The cartridge box works as a platform if you’re trying to expel occupiers and have a powerful ally; using it against fellow Americans without significant outside help (from whom? China? Russia? India? Brazil?) doesn’t work.
Grassroots politics is the only thing that’ll work (and we can start by repealing the stupid Seventeenth Amendment, if I have any say…).
November 11th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Wolfwood, the reason it wouldn’t work is because…you’re doing it wrong. You’re thinking of skirmishing with Law Enforcement. That’s not the right tactic. Think simpler.
November 11th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
ATLien, please tell me you’re not talking assassination or other acts of terrorism.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
This is the one that will make me a CRIMINAL. I wont be part of this clusterf**k, and if they try to take this money out of my check, I will quit my job and go MAVERICK! This is one of many straws that mey break the camels back. When it gets to the point of actual”COMUNISM” being applied I will no longer participate in society. I WILL TAKE WHAT I NEED. Now like the administration I can quote MAO”POWER COMES FROM THE BARREL OF A GUN”
November 11th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
No, but neither are you writing blog posts comparing the child tax credit to the Reign of Terror. Again, why does this particular bit of bad policy deserve such special attention?
November 11th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Is congress voting on those now and I missed it?
November 11th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Oh sorry, I didn’t realize you had just started this blog and thus have only had time to ever discuss things happening right now.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
So, what’s older? This blog or the other things you mentioned?
November 12th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Well, the child tax credit was voted on by Congress as recently as this January. Were you blogging then?
November 12th, 2009 at 11:01 am
So they changed the amount? You’re ordinarily someone who makes me think. Now, you’re just acting like an ass because I won’t play your reindeer games.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Well yeah, because I’m annoyed that instead of trying to answer my question “Why are you pulling this particular measure out for special disapproval over all the similar measures in the tax code?” you’re giving me this run around “Well, I would but they’re not debating it now. Well, the last time they debated it was before I started blogging. etc.”
November 12th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Because 1) it’s current and 2) I choose what I blog about. See #21 fail to mention.
And, no, I don’t really approve of using the tax code to punish or benefit folks’ behavior.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I never said you were wrong. But why not try to expand the debate from this specific instance to the more general problem of social engineering in the tax code?
November 12th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
that’s fine but it quickly turned accusatory.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
And maybe I’m taking out some of my frustrations with the right on you, for which I apologize. All the Republican Party seems to care about is issues with partisan hooks that offer short term tactical advantages. To really start rebuilding the party, they need to start connecting the dots into a coherent overarching strategy.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
well, yeah. There is that. And you know I’m not a republican, right?
November 12th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Yes I know, which is why I read you. As I said, I’m sorry for taking it out on you.
November 12th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
until they start requiring cash up front or prof of insurance before the ambulance takes you to the hospital every one should have to have insurance that way I can stop paying for other peoples medical care
November 13th, 2009 at 12:22 am
Well, golly gee, if the thieving lying bastards in cogress can force you to buy health insurance, I wonder what else they will decide that you need to buy? Maybe cookies from he acorn salesman, or membership in the NSWP/democrat party?
November 14th, 2009 at 12:41 am
Shit! what’s the matter here? Are you nuts? If they get this why wouldn’t they pass a law that you must buy a new G(overnment)M(otors) automobile every two years or go to jail? Or fine you the price of a new Government Motors car if you don’t want a new car?
Come on! Play all the games you want with words, this is naked aggression against all Americans.