Five ways to protect yourself from Obamacare.


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Five ways to protect yourself from Obamacare.

It’s coming and you asked for it. And no one can yet guess how many problems it will cause.

Share

6 comments

  • JGL

    I beleive that the American people have been lead down this road regardless of what is in their own personal best interest or desires as it

    relates to their healthcare.

    I point out the following:

    1. The massive open framework of the law itself, I assume prepared long ago by a two party government ultimately attempting to “control” the

    people. Anyone who controls who, how, when and where you have access to healthcare owns you.

    2. The exemption of the people who wrote and passed the law. The Congress, Senate and the president are exempt from the law, essentially

    creating an elite class of American. An offence to the Constitution which creates all sorts of opportunity to abuse power.

    3. I find Chief Justice Roberts rewriting of a healthcare bill which was written, defended and re defended by all concerned as a penalty and

    mandate to purchase a product and not a tax reinterpreting and essentially rewriting the bill as a tax suspicious to say the least. How is it that

    the supreme appelet court becomes a legislator and re writes a law?

    Comments?

  • I’ve already done #1 and #3. I’m considering that the 2013 tax return may be the last one I file. As a self-employed person, I have a lot more control over how much I send to government (quarterlies) than someone who isn’t. I’ll still pay taxes, I just won’t deal with the whole ‘do you have mandatory health insurance’ question. I’m sure I’m not the only person contemplating this bit of civil disobedience.

  • jwing

    Under the rubric of reducing health care costs, the government can justify controlling practically any behavior as all behavior impacts one’s health, life expectancy and the overall public health. There is talk of issuing licenses for smokers which would limit the number of cigarettes allowed per day/year. Of course, a person who till chooses to smoke will be charged a confiscatory fee due to the fact that the smoker’s future health care needs will negatively impact the commune….er, I meant..the public good. See how it works???
    What I want to know is how can Obamacare purists justify legal marijuana smoking without also addressing the negative externalities from said pot smoking just as they do for cigarettes. It’s lunacy.

  • wade

    this thing and intentions have been forming since 1964 and has now been recognized and adopted by our current legislature, or has it? you see, it is To this very day a cluster of no direction beyond Money, in the cost to corporations and to the very individuals who Think it sounds great. this beast makes revenue any way it proceeds. either the corporate world adjusts to the provisions or the individual resists, with an attached Fine. see, more money! this is the Biggest legislated Stinker i have seen since some of the Crap back in 1975.

  • Justice Roberts really, really screwed us.

  • John M. Egan

    The question of how the government can force you to buy something remains unanswered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *