1st Presidential Debate 9PM EST

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Light

How much is the penalty for no insurance?

Residents without MCC health insurance face monthly penalties. The penalties add up each month without health insurance, and must be paid at tax filing time. Short gaps in coverage (up to three months) are allowed without a tax penalty.

Penalties are based on ½ the cost of the lowest-priced Commonwealth Choice plan available to you. The penalties vary by age and income, based on percentages of the Federal Poverty Guidelines (FPG). People with incomes at or below 150% of the FPG do not have to pay a penalty if uninsured.

The 2012 tax year penalties are:

Income and Age 150.1-200% FPG 200.1-250% FPG 250.1-300% FPG Above 300% FPG
Age 18-26 Above 300% FPG
Age 27+
Tax penalty $19 per month
$228 per year $38 per month
$456 per year $58 per month
$696 per year $83 per month
$996 per year $105 per month
$1260 per year (See What are the penalties? from the Health Connector and Individual Mandate Penalties for Tax Year 2012 from the DOR.)

You can use the FPG income and household size categories below to see which penalty category would apply to you.

(For example, if your income is greater than the 150% FPG income amount and less than or equal to the 200% FPG income amount shown below for your household size, your tax penalty category would be "150.1-200% FPG.")

Health Insurance Tax Penalty Income Categories - Tax Year 2012
(based on Federal Poverty Guidelines effective January 2012)
Household size Annual Income (% of Federal Poverty Guidelines)
150% FPG 200% FPG 250% FPG 300% FPG
1 $16,764 $22,344 $27,936 $33,516
2 $22,704 $30,264 $37,836 $45,396
3 $28,644 $38,184 $47,736 $57,276
4 $34,584 $46,104 $57,636 $69,156
5 $40,524 $54,024 $67,536 $81,036
6 $46,464 $61,944 $77,436 $92,916
7 $52,404 $69,864 $87,336 $104,796
8 $58,344 $77,784 $97,236 $116,676
each extra person +$5,940 +$7,920 +$9,900 +$11,880
(See 2012 MassHealth Income Standards and Federal Poverty Guidelines)


If you owe a penalty, you will calculate the amount when you complete Schedule HC of your state income tax return.

To estimate your penalty, see Estimate Your 2011 Tax Penalty on the Commonwealth Connector web site.

People who cannot find affordable health insurance or who qualify for a religious or hardship exemption or waiver do not have to pay a penalty. See Do I have to buy health insurance? for more information.

what is the source? I was asking for the source. Post a link

BTW it seems there are exemptions

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Massachusetts Health Care Reform: Tips and Resources

Starting July 1st, 2007, all Massachusetts residents age 18 and over must have health insurance. Every year, you will need to show proof of health insurance on your state income tax return. If you do not have health insurance, you will face a stiff tax penalty.

http://www.mass.gov/ocabr/consumer/i...re-reform.html

thanks. Has Romney every responded to this issue?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

That depends on where you get your numbers. http://www.dividedstates.com/list-of...lar-companies/

According to this source, there are 14 companies that have either declared bankruptcy, lost millions of dollars or gone out of business.

You must have thought you had something really important to say or you would still be ignoring me.

The real issue with the green energy companies is that funds and stimulus money were appropriated and signed into law during the Bush presidency. Even though not actually financed until Obama became president, Bush got the ball rolling.

And it is the same issue, IMO, as the Patriot Act, under the Bush Administration, giving the next Administration a chance to take that ball and run with it.

I am extremely turned off with the Republican Party this year. I would never vote Democrat, but this stuff needs to stop. A CNN poll someone sent me, don't have the link - "Who are you likely to vote for?" - 35% Romney - 18% Obama - 47% Neither

Very ripe for a third party and I love the Constitution Party. What we are trying to do is get the third parties, because it's divided, enough votes so they will not have to pick up as many signatures as required in upcoming elections, be present on the ballots, and give Americans free choice besides the duopoly controlling our country. A large third party turnout, regardless if it is the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party. It would send a huge message to the controlling parties that they are in "jeopardy". Kind of like on Dancing with the Stars - "You are in jeopardy". I would love to see that happen for ALL Americans and will continue to work toward that end.

This is a highly subjective and debatable number, because it depends on the number you count in the "labor force."

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...rt-labor-force

If you count underemployed and people who aren't looking for work, you are looking at 14.7% unemployment.

To put it in perspective for you, Ron Paul stated in March of this year that the unemployment rate is probably "closer to 20 percent." --Source

If you go with Paul's rate and the current civilian labor force [source] of 154.6 million, you have 30.9 million unemployed. Are you with Paul on that number?

And a LOT of conservatives, including those that you like, agree that underemployed numbers should figure into the numbers. There has been a lot of belly aching from conservatives over the way the Obama administration spins the numbers to make it appear that there has been improvement.

The unemployment rate does have some specific limitations, in that, it isn’t always able to differentiate between full-time and part-time jobs, doesn't account for people who are underemployed, or working in jobs for which they are overqualified because they can't find a good job, or anyone discouraged from looking for a good job and not being able to find one.

My husband and son are making more money than they ever have, lots of building and growth going on here in Texas. IMO, it really boils down to what someone said - the Republican Governors are doing well for their states, in spite of Obama, and it’s an argument that isn’t going to go over well for Romney if he keeps hitting the economy and not recognizing this. He should be focusing on that success.

Well, for those that sit in front of Fox News, the fear mongering is working. They have played it well! Fear sells.

NDAA is problematic, that's for sure. I'm with you on this one.

Obama and Romney both say that they will not illegally detain citizens, but the wording is too vague to be sure.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Illustrating the point that really, a mandate isn't always a mandate isn't always a mandate. So you are fine with some mandates, and not with others. Apparently, you aren't fine with mandates that don't come with penalties for non-compliance? By the way, I would consider losing the privilege to drive a car a penalty. That is removing a freedom.

I agree that healthcare would be a unique mandate. However, if it is left up to the states to decide how it is handled, it can be customized and managed better, IMO.

Healthcare does need to be addressed. It can either be addressed by trying to come up with a huge plan that tries to suit everyone (federal level), motivating states to come up with smaller, customized plans to suit their constituency (state level), regulating insurance companies and the medical industry through caps and tort reform (my favorite), or leaving it all as is and letting millions of uninsured people slip through the cracks while those who do have insurance have increasingly higher bills and less coverage. (least favorite)

I can tell you from personal experience what it's like to go without insurance both because it's cost prohibitive for those who are self-employed and because of having a child with pre-existing conditions. We pay everything out of pocket, and cross our fingers that we have no big emergencies. For our family of 5 with Jeffrey's asthma, we would pay $650/month for the most basic of coverage, not including dental, and with huge deductibles ($10,000 for hospital visits) and copays (40-50%). It is a problem that needs to be addressed, and I would be disappointed with any candidate who didn't at least offer possible solutions. I can't agree that Romney's ideas are bad, because he hasn't really detailed them. He has alluded to the fact that his plan for Massachusetts worked, but he has also clarified that he would expect states to craft their own plans, unique and customized. It's hard to form an opinion if you don't really know what his plan is. He hasn't stated, as far as I know, that he would put in place a plan for the whole country "just like" the plan for Massachusetts. His idea is that states would, just like Massachusetts, craft a plan for their own constituents. Those are two entirely different balls of wax.

I would probably agree that I would tend to be against a mandate that forces a penalty for non-compliance. A person’s health doesn’t harm anyone save the individual person. Bad driving could harm others. Drunk driving being a prime example. So, again, as long as it’s a personal choice to drive or not, I’m fine with that. We paid cash for our new vehicle, but I still carry full coverage and especially uninsured motorist.


The problem with the healthcare system is the government involvement. All of this started under the Nixon Administration who designed the HMO’s and PPO’s. That began the managed care which produced lobbyists who gathered up the money the government passed out. In turn, it had the health insurance companies and the drug companies lining up making it all work less efficiently. The middle man cut, causing the patient to suffer the most.

All of these medical costs go up as a reaction to the government involvement. Yes, we do have reactions to our monetary policies, but we especially have high reactions when the government is involved. We have less competition in medicine and that hurts everyone. When third parties get involved, prices go up. Corporate and socialized medicine (state or federal) just doesn’t work well. We should always be allowed to opt out of any government program. I like the idea of a medical savings account as long as it is private.

We could also change anti-trust laws and have the patient negotiate with the doctor and get rid of the attorney. In Texas, we have tort reform that makes the loser pay the lawsuit. That cuts out a whole lot of medical malpractice. I am always for free market.

Romney is not as much of a free market conservative as he makes everyone believe. He has a record in MA to prove that.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

thanks. Has Romney every responded to this issue?

I don't believe he has only that he believes it's a penalty and not a tax according to his advisor, Eric Fehrnstrom. Which doesn't really makes sense as the website calls it a tax penalty. He's just a confusing person to me. I guess that means I think he lies like a rug. Not a dime's difference between the two candidates, IMO.

If I can't feel comfortable with someone when they are speaking, it's over for me. I never feel comfortable with him. Something about him really bothers me. He doesn't seem like a sincere person. At least I know where Obama stands and that doesn't mean I think he is sincere. I just know where he stands.

[MawMaw]

Just read that Mr Gore has blamed Mr Obama's poor
debate performance on the thin air of Colorado! LOL!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...mty_twitter_fn

[Praxeas]

lol

Someone else said he was not ready...

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Lacey

Just read that Mr Gore has blamed Mr Obama's poor
debate performance on the thin air of Colorado! LOL!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...mty_twitter_fn

I read that this morning. LOL! He is so off the wall and has been for a long time.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

lol

Someone else said he was not ready...

I tend to agree with someone who said he does better feeding off a crowd and in the controlled environment of this first debate, he didn't do so well.

[Dedicated Mind]

Obama now knows Romney's line of attack and will have answers in the next debate. I don't think this first debate was a game changer, most people have made up their minds. Obama will have to descend from his reserved dignification and sully his presence with mere mortals like romney in the next debate. can anybody see a smackdown coming?