Confirmed: Obamacare plan would JAIL people who don't buy insurance.
- Thread starter dclary
- Start date
- Status
You can also go to jail for not paying taxes (money also collected to run federally administered programs).
And would is different than could, btw.
And would is different than could, btw.
The jail sentence would be for not paying the fine for not buying insurance, not for not buying insurance. Isn't that pretty the standard penalty for not paying a fine?
I'm not sure I regard a single entry on a political blog as confirmation that Obama is the Anti-Christ. 
It's on the internet, isn't it? Well, there you are. Stand at the foot of Mt Ararat and wait for the stone tablets.
Somehow, this thread is creating the flurry of panic that I think was expected. Perhaps someone should find another link referring to death panels?
You can NOT go to jail for not paying your taxes. It is against the law (and jailable) to not FILE your taxes, but you cannot be jailed for not paying them.
And no, there is nowhere in America (nor most of the civilized world, Clint) where the "standard penalty" for not paying a fine is jail time.
In 1833 the United States reduced the practice of imprisonment for debts at the federal level. Most states followed suit. It is still possible, however, to be incarcerated for debt, but only in those circumstances in which the court finds that the debtor actually possesses the money or means available to pay the debt, however, in the case of child support, if you are unable to pay the amount set by child support enforcement you will be incarcerated even though you may not have the actual means to pay it through no fault of your own. The constitutions of the U.S. states of Tennessee and Oklahoma forbid civil imprisonment for debts.
Don't be lemmings, nor slaves. Freedom is this: The opportunity to make choices. When those choices have been taken away from you -- you are a slave.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,698
- Reaction score
- 1,539
- Location
- The City Different
- Website
- www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
I'd be fine with not requiring people to buy insurance (with or without subsidies) if they promise never, ever to get sick and always to pay all their medical bills. How much you got in your account, Deek? In the past couple of days, for example, I've burned through about $75,000 for a previously healthy kid who was in a car wreck. It will be much, much more than that before we're through. Fact -- no one with those kinds of bills can pay them. So we all do, indirectly. In our current non-system, I'm being taxed to do that. I just want that taxation to be upfront, not hidden.
Interesting predicament, this. To me, it makes the single payer plan that much more attractive.
At one point, there was an escape clause (in the House bill, as I recall) for religious reasons, particularly for the Amish who basically have a fully segregated economy. The criticism of how it was written is that there was no penalty for abusing it.
At one point, there was an escape clause (in the House bill, as I recall) for religious reasons, particularly for the Amish who basically have a fully segregated economy. The criticism of how it was written is that there was no penalty for abusing it.
Last edited:
It seems to me that I have heard many times of people being sent to jail for not paying fines.
In any case, I am quite amused at how things that were originally Republican proposals, like mandatory insurance, have suddenly a horrendous threat to freedom now that the Democrats have put in the bill. John McCain had mandatory insurance as part of his plan. The plan Mitt Romney signed in Massachusetts has a mandatory insurance provision. He used his line-item veto power to kill the provision to require employers to provide insurance, but he left mandatory insurance for individuals in the bill.
For all the whining and moaning the Republicans are doing, what Obama has proposed and the Democrats have been working on is very similar to what Romney supported and signed when he was governor of Massachusetts.
Paul
Banned
Not the first time I've heard you offer anti Obama wisdom. I truly truly wonder what world you have lived in for the period 2000 -2008. Have you been living in the same world as everyone else?
Forgerraboutitt.
The EVil One has been banished. Let him rest.
I don't understand why they're coming up with all this insane sounding BS. It's almost like they want people to argue over nothing and have it fail from the outset, because none of it makes any sense whatsoever.
Look at any industrialized nation's healthcare besides the USA.
Copy.
End of story. Not hard.
Look at any industrialized nation's healthcare besides the USA.
Copy.
End of story. Not hard.
Ideally, you would do that. The problem is that we are so heavily invested in the current system, which basically ties health insurance to employment, that it is a complicated and difficult entwinement to separate, despite its ridiculously unjust structure and cost. And there are interests being enriched by this system are very powerful.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,577
- Reaction score
- 740
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 4,110
- Location
- East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
- Website
- www.jlevitt.com
This is a medical ethics question -- sort of like triage.
You have a teenager who will die without a ventilator, but recover fully with one.
You have a person on a ventilator who is going to die no matter what.
There's only one ventilator. What does the doctor choose to do? Should there be guidelines?
But I did hear that Obama himself would be personally making that decision in all such cases.
My account's bone dry too, CG. But I've got health insurance. My company provides it for me.
I picked a job that offered said benefits.
The way it's always been. The way it should always be.
I've lived in America, Realityville. I'm very sorry that I can't believe in, or live within the walls of Obama's Pollyannaland. It's not in my nature.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 2,739
- Reaction score
- 848
There you have it folks. Mandatory health insurance == slavery. Thanks for clearing that up.
Out of curiosity, how is it that mandatory auto insurance isn't also slavery? The cases seem pretty similar to me.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 4,110
- Location
- East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
- Website
- www.jlevitt.com
And if you had been foolish enough to choose a company that went bankrupt ten years after you joined up, i assume you'd be fine with that too.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 6,072
- Reaction score
- 4,324
Hmmm, from the article, I don't see what's wrong with this kind of planning in the event of a catastrophic medical disaster.
I also don't see what this has to do with proposed health care plans.
This kind of selective snippeting, by both sides, only serves to diminish, and tarnish, each sides arguments. And sow suspicion and distrust.
Also, please not these plans are based on plans drawn up TWO YEARS AGO, during another administration. It basically reflects hard choices forced upon a government and the medical field in a time of grave danger.
These attempts to twist and distort things really is at the heart of the acrimony over this issue, I believe.
Last edited:
- Status