My statement about the middle class was based on anecdotal experience. In this day and age, for one to be in the “middle class” (at least as I would define it), one would have to have at least a mid-level professional or trades job. These jobs almost uniformly offer health insurance (ESPECIALLY if they are a Union Trades job). The last job that I had that didn’t provide health insurance was in 1985. Since 1985, I have never met a single person in the states that I have lived in that considered him/herself “middle class” that did not either have health insurance, or was covered by his/her spouse. That’s 25 years of anecdotal experience.

Perhaps things are different in your neck of the woods??

Please show me proof of this statement :
The reality is, the middle class are almost 100% insured through their employers.

?????? This is not now, nor has ever been close to being true in my, my extended family, or my friends experience.

Obviously, I am living in an alternate reality.

We’ll see if I am correct in my prediction. It would sure be an excellent strategy for the Constitutionality debate.

As for the Republican response. They may actually try to claim it’s a tax on the middle class and the poor. That strategy may work, or it may backfire. Either way, it’s just not the truth. The reality is, the middle class are almost 100% insured through their employers. Very few simply choose not not to be covered. As for the poor, the bill is chock full of assistance for people who are poor (or even not poor, but struggling) but don’t qualify for Medicaid (specifically subsidies for state programs designed for low-income families to help pay for coverage in the first place (and in the case of Medicare, actually waive premiums)).

There are just not a whole lot of people who are going to end up paying this tax.

More to the point rather…I truly hope you are correct that the Dem’s choose to jump on the not-a-requirement-just-a-tax-for-the-under-or-uninsured bandwagon. That would be like Christmas for the republicans!! I can already see the campaign ads on how Obama and the dems rasied taxes not only on the middle class.. but on the poor as well. I don’t, of course, know the ins and outs of the tax code, but I believe it is a $700.00 penality per individual that would either 1.) be automatically deducted from any fedeeral refund you were entitled to or 2.) be tacked on to the amount one might already owe in federal taxes. Either way, the general public who have chosen to not have coverage or can’t afford coverage will see this as a huge tax increase, because, of course, you aren’t entitled to to the low income insurance subsidy(tax credit) unless you are actuall paying for coverage.

They are kinda between a rock and hard place on this one… and I am sure we can expect more upcoming spin from both sides.

You were quoting my COMMENT! Not my Post!

Jack. I SINCRELY apologize. My comment needed punctuation!!!!

I said (in my comment) “Secondly, and more importantly, the POINT of the post was that the story by the right-wing pundits of Medtronic announcing “Permanent Layoffs” is completely false.”

I was making a parenthetical comment referring to what the right-wing pundits were saying. It would be clearer with some parentheses:

Secondly, and more importantly, the POINT of the post was that the story by the right-wing pundits (of Medtronic announcing “Permanent Layoffs)” is completely false.