Albert Di Salvo
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2009
- Messages
- 5,544
- Reaction score
- 685
- Location
- Undisclosed
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
makes me suspicious that he started with his result and worked backwards. Krauthammer has an interesting piece on this.
Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time. Obamacare is an economic timebomb, we need a bi-partisan dialogue in this country to refine healthcare but a bill full of nonsense, grandstanding, and a simple wish list isn't going to do it, there are some things we need to stop doing and a few things we should start doing, but until we get some things normalized the situation will devolve.But if you bring them all under the umbrella of obamacare...and kill medicaid it would save us all money...
Im playing devils advocate...the right wants to make this out to be the end of the country as we know it...and the left wants to make it out to be the savior of the country and I beliee the truth is right smack in the middle...ITS NOW THE LAW OF THE LAND lets all try to work it out to make it the best it can be...crying whining threatening isnt going to change a thing
I think the supporters of this decision missed a very important point I made. Let's say the religious right wins the next election and uses the decision for political gain, they say "okay, fine, you win on the abortion debate it's legal" "thanks to your new backdoor though we now can tax an abortion at 1000%, go ahead, take it to SCOTUS, but remember thanks to your new champion John Roberts we can tax for anything". Or, since the BOR was subjugated to tax powers, if say..........the poll tax were to be re-instituted, the civil rights act < BOR < Taxation. People don't realize what was done here.
I think the supporters of this decision missed a very important point I made. Let's say the religious right wins the next election and uses the decision for political gain, they say "okay, fine, you win on the abortion debate it's legal" "thanks to your new backdoor though we now can tax an abortion at 1000%, go ahead, take it to SCOTUS, but remember thanks to your new champion John Roberts we can tax for anything". Or, since the BOR was subjugated to tax powers, if say..........the poll tax were to be re-instituted, the civil rights act < BOR < Taxation. People don't realize what was done here.
Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time. Obamacare is an economic timebomb,
we need a bi-partisan dialogue in this country to refine healthcare
What liberals want more than anything else at this point on the subject of Obamacare is peace and acquiesence. Isn't that true?
Wait though, sin taxes fall under different catagories and exist because of an activity. With this decision the court basically says that you can be taxed without even a legal standing or compelling reason. Now all the government has to do is pass a "because we feel like it" tax, and if they have no other legal standing they can coerce you into compliance with the threat of tax bankruptcy. What happened here is not as simple as a sin tax.they could have done that anyway. sin taxes have long been established.
But Obama didn't just raise taxes on the Middle-class. Such a claim is absurd.
That's the problem, the tax power was interpreted so openly that nothing else need be used. So something can be completely outside of the scope of government powers but taxable as an event, even punitavely so, I don't get where the power to tax can be extended to powers not granted and would love to know what the hell Roberts was smoking this week.Well here is what I understand from one of the 100 things about the bill I read yesterday. They ruled that Congress had the right to tax, but that when the tax goes into affect in 2014 another case can be raised about whether the tax itself is constitutional now that tax has been put into affect. So, that could be an agrument against your hypothetical situation (and a way to get it ruled unconstitional) and simply because Congress can tax, does not make the tax itself constitutional. Granted, I do not really understand much of it myself. I will try and look for the article.
He doesn't see it that way. There are others who don't either. But the courts did. So, what makes this an issue for you and others? It doesn't change anything, other than tax will be repeated by republicans ad nausium.
Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time.
Wait though, sin taxes fall under different catagories and exist because of an activity. With this decision the court basically says that you can be taxed without even a legal standing or compelling reason. Now all the government has to do is pass a "because we feel like it" tax, and if they have no other legal standing they can coerce you into compliance with the threat of tax bankruptcy. What happened here is not as simple as a sin tax.
Dunno, how high is the added risk. If you add more unhealthy people than healthy the cost increases for those who previously qualified. What you are asking is basically asking "Why is the sky?".What happens when you increase the size of a risk pool?
Nope. I'm rather enjoying watching you flail around and have a temper tantrum. :lol:
Those that create and or promote false memes do not serve his fellow man, they are working against his best interests.What liberals want more than anything else at this point on the subject of Obamacare is peace and acquiesence. Isn't that true?
The meme on the right is that a fraud has been committed and resulted in an illegitimate act. That belief ensures that the furor will not die.
Since Obamacare will be in effect there will be an APPARENT direct line of causation between the increase in costs that would have occurred in any event and the decline of health care quality which results from rationing. And yes there will be clear healthcare rationing. Some groups like white seniors are clear losers.
Government has always been able to raise, lower, create, and eliminate taxes because they feel like it. Your recourse for that is to elect someone else, not to try to claim the tax is illegitimate or unconstitutional.
I didn't make that claim. He did just raise taxes on everyone that can't or won't afford health insurance, middle-class or not.
Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please...
Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please, even beyond the bounds of the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause (they explained that the individual mandate is not covered by either), so long as the only punishment for not doing what they ask us to do is a "tax". This is reach is much further than anything they've ever done. They've just said that the commerce clause & necessary & proper clause are completely irrelevant. That they can pass any law they want, so long as the punishment is only a tax.
Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please, even beyond the bounds of the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause (they explained that the individual mandate is not covered by either), so long as the only punishment for not doing what they ask us to do is a "tax".
This is reach is much further than anything they've ever done. They've just said that the commerce clause & necessary & proper clause are completely irrelevant. That they can pass any law they want, so long as the punishment is only a tax.
Those that create and or promote false memes do not serve his fellow man, they are working against his best interests.
No, they still can't pass laws violating the Constitution. So for example, they couldn't tax me for not buying a Bible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?