But I wish someone could explain to me why we should both punish people for not having insurance or for having what the government considers to be too good of insurance.
Levying fines against individuals who choose not to carry health insurance was a Republican addition to the Affordable Care Act,
based on the logic that once private insurance companies were no longer allowed to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, there would be no incentive for people to acquire health insurance until they were sick enough to need it. The entire concept of insurance is reliant on having many healthy people paying into the system to cover the needs of a few very sick people. Also, people without insurance still receive exorbitantly expensive life-saving medical care at tax payer expense, so the individual mandate was proposed to ensure everyone has at least some minimal level of contribution to the system.
The so-called "Cadillac Tax" on uncommonly generous healthcare plans, characterized by minimal or nonexistent co-pays and usually made affordable through heavy employer subsidies, was another Republican proposal for the Affordable Care Act. Previously backed by George W. Bush, John McCain, and most recently by Mitt Romney,
conservatives often claim that people who have access to health care that is too affordable
overburden the system and drive up costs by demanding professional medical treatment for every hangnail, every bump, every bruise. Despite a total lack of empirical evidence to support this claim, it is often circulated by right-wing media as a reason to detest union-negotiated health benefits, and a reason why a single-payer healthcare would destroy the United States.
Now, who wants to bet me that brettmcd's question was purely rhetorical, and the answers have no measurable impact on his belief that Democrats are at fault for everything he dislikes about the law?