Originally Posted by MP0WER
Just playing a little devil's advocate below....
Not my words, hence the quotation marks. Some of what you said can be debated, though. From what I've gathered, the intent is to get people that only decide to get insurance when they need it, to acquire it under mandate, subsequently decreasing premiums across the board. 0.9% increase if you make over 200k, but if you get a decrease in healthcare cost, it makes it seem logical. I'm sure there will be bugs and loopholes, but as of now it seems to be better than what we have at the moment. Very few people can afford to self insure, but I believe if you look into it closely enough, there's a way you can still do it without getting hit with a fee (i.e. invest in something you know will not decrease in worth, like a rare piece of art or history, and sell it when the time comes). I see it targeting hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies more than business owners.
Edit: investing in art or the likes was a dumb idea, the tax on an item like that would be way too high. But, you get what I'm saying.