This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare ... AS A TAX
In 2009, Obama said that his healthcare reform bill is not a tax:
The Supreme Court just upheld Obamacare ... as a TAX:
A divided Supreme Court largely upheld the Obama administration's health-care law, saying the law's penalty for those who ignore a mandate to carry health insurance counted as a tax and was justified by Congress's constitutional taxing power.
»
- advertisements -
Yes, you were represented. If you don't like the results, work to change them.
Oh, believe me I've been working at it with what little resources I have at my disposal. But it seems to me that the Federal Government and it's printing press outdoes me.
However, the day for IT'S DEBT, not mine, will come due! I live for that day.
I have no debts. I don't not owe anyone anything, until today thanks to Obama, Congress, and the SCOTUS now twisting the the Commerce Clause into meaning that you owe someone something just for being alive.
goodrich4bk - I hereby nickname you "Son of Sisyphus".
George, can you just tell me how I can get those Free SNAP cards? ..and the Free cell Phones?...and the Free houses?...and the Free doctors....just point me in the right direction....
thnx
I can tell you how to get SNAP.
You have less than $2,000 in assets.
You drive a vehicle worth no more than $3,000
You have a pitiful exsistence
You have no money in a bank account
The question begs - do you want to live or exist?
Those conditions are better than 90% of the worlds population , and those people have to work instead of being fat leeches of of the hard labor of taxpayers.
Which 90% is that? African males generally don't work. Most Chinese have more money than descibed and so do half of Indians and Brazilians and almost all Europeans.
Where do you get your information that African males do not work? I have been to Africa several times and you are woefully misinformed.
The Government sees us as a... thingamajig.
I kind of resent being subjected to any article that would assume Obama would know a dam thing about the constitution. Harvard Conlaw professor = shit for brains.
He is a constitutional law graduate because he hates it! He knows it very well and I assume he passed a few tests up there.
Harvard Conlaw professor = shit for brains.
Obywan was never a Professor.
Obamacare constitutionality for dummies (including GW):
1) Obamacare was upheld as a tax within congress's authority to tax.
Yea, just like social security "FICA contributions" were upheld as a tax.
2) Constitution says federal taxes must be excise or direct.
2a) Excise tax is a tax on a financial transaction, like buying something. It must be uniform. Same tax rate across the board.
Obamacare is not an excise tax.
2b) Direct tax is a "head tax". A tax on every person. Direct tax must be evenly apportioned across the board, everybody pays the same amount.
Obamacare is an unconstitutional application of a direct tax. It is not evenly apportioned across the board.
SCOTUS did not address this. They ruled it's a tax, without addressing the unapportioned aspect of it, which would render it unconstitutional.
COG,
I gave you an up arrow, but have found the flaw in your argument: you believe the constitution is still relevant. Or more realistically, your assumption is that the government still has to obey Constitutional law. Doesn't appear to be the case anymore.
Of course it's not relevant anymore. This whole SCOTUS thing is theatrics for the sheep.
Constitution died 80 years ago. Nothing but theater ever since, maintaining the illusion it still exists.
Thanks C-O-G!
It's a miracle that Harvard has any applicants after sending us BHO, Summers, Warren et al.....
Thank You! I have been trying to explain that this is not an excise tax and people are just not getting it. I am not an attorney, but my understanding is that an excise tax has to be imposed on the purchase of a particular product or activity (such as gambling) - not on the decision to NOT engage in an actitivty. Roberts in his opinion stated that the tax was not unduly punitive because if you paid it you still had "choices" in regard to individual behavior. Businesses who keep private insurance will not pay this tax, but those who decide not to buy insurance pay the tax. Thus, Roberts himself said it is not an excise tax. This is why many have said that they upheld Obamacare under the 16th amendment. Unfortunately, if so, you are wrong and Obamacare is constitutional because the 16th amendment allows congress to levy taxes without apportioning among the states.
Unfortunately, if so, you are wrong and Obamacare is constitutional because the 16th amendment allows congress to levy taxes without apportioning among the states.
Then shut the fuck up and pay it.
No. Understanding where you are wrong it important because there will be no constitutional white knight riding to your rescue. There are other alternatives to this decision. My personal favorite is repeal of the 16th amendment and institution of a flat tax. If this decision has made you a "cranky-old-geezer" then learn your options and work for them. Republicans have another alternative (outside of repealing the 16th amendment); it can simply repeal the tax, which has many liberals in a tizzy because they realize this decision isn't a total win.
My personal favorite is repeal of the 16th amendment and institution of a flat tax.
Not gonna happen.
Republicans have another alternative (outside of repealing the 16th amendment); it can simply repeal the tax
Not gonna happen.
If this decision has made you a "cranky-old-geezer" then learn your options and work for them.
If living in the real world, accepting that things aren't going to change for the better, makes me a cranky-old-geezer, ok, I guess that's what I am.
Because things aren't going to change for the better. This enormous new tax windfall isn't going to be repealed. It'll just go higher, like every other tax goes higher.
How does SCOTUS change a written Bills wording.
Big difference between ruling on the actual Bill as written, and then have SCOTUS re-interpret it.
Mandate, is not the same as TAX.
I thought the court was to only read the Bill,and make a judgement as written.
Not make something Unconstitutional, Constitutional by actual changing of said Bill.
This is INSANITY. They should not be allowed to change anything to ensure passage or defeat.
It seems everyone is missing the more significant impact of this ruling - wake up people - SCOTUS just gave legal precedence for the US government to issue ANY mandates they want against us individually or any organizations or companies and force us through mandates - all they have to do is add a tax to it.
Let that thought sink in for a sec - think about it - whatever mandates they can think up in DC(and whoever pulls DC's strings), they slap a tax on it, and it becomes so, just like that. Now, if you do not follow the mandate, then there are 'taxes' levied... win-win - force everyone to be what you want them to be, buy what they buy, who they are, every facet of your life (and companies) all with mandates
If they mandate coverage and don't allow pre existing circumstances to be considered, Hell it would be cheaper to pay the penalty and buy the insurance after the fact. Why buy flood insurance yearly if you can wait until after you are flooded out?
Yours is the superior intellect. This is the only sensible interpretation of this disaterous ruling.
Looks like Revelation 13:17.
Omnes peius, omnes in tempore.
Every evil, to all over time?
Sounds about right.
Another BS ruling. Another handout for the corporations and expansion of gooberment. Great idea during a "great recession" libtards.
Since no one can be refused coverage now, including for pre-existing conditions, it's time for everyone to cancel their health insurance. Frankly, you'd be stupid not to do so. The penalty for not having insurance is so much less than the cost of insurance. Just imagine if car insurance worked the same way. You get in an accident and only then you buy insurance.
Another fine example of our central planners ignoring the unintended (and obvious) consequences of their actions.
Drbill,
That is what happened to Romneycare. Young, healthy adults would sign up for coverage only when they needed treatment, I.e. knee surgery and would drop the insurance after the two month requirement.
That's what the free-rider tax is designed for - turds like you.
Are you going to continue to spend 7 g's a year to get the same thing you will for hundreds?
Top o' the page is a car ad.
The video runs an ad for Exxon-Mobil.
You don't think there is a connection to our 'problems' greater than word games?
ya gotta' b careful where you surf on the www. XOM? u bin in some nasty places duuude. - Ned
(Ahem.) There is obviously only ONE candidate for President that can fix this mess. I have been pointing this out for some time.
Fix it by himself? How?
Congress would not cooperate.
Nobody? Works for me!
I disagree. Inanimate carbon rod has a nice platform and all the personality of the other candidates.
Spaceman Spiff said:
Well, I'm not too sure. Just the other day I was listening to the One True Ideology radio talk show, and Continuous Magnetic Tape Loop was on there saying some pretty bad things about Inanimate Carbon Rod.
Won't this 'tax' just be passed onto the consumer at the retail level. This new national tax will increase business expense and then be passed onto the retail comsumer. This added tax will suppress business growth (unless you work in the healthcare field). Its not clear if net there will be any increase in health provided as people will be poorer in general from this and will be even less inclined to spend on healthcare. I'd expect in a few years for no one to pay any extra for any healthcare and the new (devolved) system will run on the 'taxes' only. USA should look like Canada or UK in a few years, which some may think is good, but if you have any special needs you will not get served.
In Europe you can't get anything stronger than Aspirin without a prescription, which means you can't get any treatment for any real illness without seeing a doctor, imagine you have a serious(but not life threatening) illness and want to get it fixed and than are made to wait 4-8 weeks to see a specialist and 6-12 months for any medical procedure if you need it, this is reality in Europe, having money(unless we're talking obscene amounts) does not help much either, most rich people just travel to Switzerland to get treatment. Most people just give up waiting or die before they get help anyway, not to mention how congested the system is with all the 3rd world immigrants that seem to have nothing better to do that camp the Hospital hallways all the friggin time, and I think this was a major point of this Law to give unlimited(no questions asked) access to illegal aliens
Gee, that sounds like America - 4 to 8 weeks to see a specialist? Same thing I experience and I pay $7,000 year insurance (employer pays about the same) plus $40 deductible to do that plus another $40 if they prescribe something and a couple hundred if there are some tests. Of course, I am one of the better off.
How can anybody object to American health care? The whole idea was to turn health care over to private enterprise and that's what we got. It's the culmination of Reagan/Thatcher free-enterprise, anti-socialism. There's nothing the government can do that free enterprise can't do better. In effect, there's no need for government whatsoever. The fact that the CEO's rake in salaries in the 10's of millions just shows the incredible savings for the consumer and the efficiency of the whole concept--those CEOs merit their high salaries for the vast improvement that resulted. Now James Quinn would like to do the same thing in replacing Medicare with a private system. There can never be enough of privatisation. Sometimes it takes a crisis like the present depression to do what is right and impose such a system on an unwilling population.
.
Mine went from 5-10% inreases per year to 20-30% increases per year...even with higher deductibles to keep it "affordable healthcare".
My son got into an oyster bed on Memorial Day...one ER visit for a iodine foot soak to get rid of any nasty parasites (no stitches)...$1,800...my responsibility...$700 with insurance.
Being a responsible parent doesn't seem to pay anymore, unless you're a parasite parent.
By the way...wasn't passing ObamaCare supposed to "create jobs" and be budget neutral?
I ran into a "girl" from Miami (a girl meaning she was 26...lol) who was on her way to Pensacola because she couldn't find a job in Miami. A nurse. She was "kinda" lost trying to figure out the best way to get there with Tropical Storm Debby down here with all the road closures. We talked a little bit before I told her to follow me until I turned off on my road 20 miles away. I gave her my cell.
She voted for O'Barry and said "this ain't workin for me."
Burnt toast...on a host of levels.
Which one of your uniformed misstatements do you want to eat first.
A lot of the prescription only drugs in the US are OTC in Europe ,plus
a lot of not yet FDA approved ones as well.
If your problem is not life impairing,yes you will wait.
If you are 70 with terminal cancer you will not get a heart transplant,like in
in the USA,courtesy of Medicare.The medical system is fucked here in the US,there are
plenty of different er systems in Europe ,some very good ,some bad.
Learn from them,instead of jingoisticaly praising a broken system just because its
American.
Sure it varies you get better and worse but in general that's how it is. Once I tried to import(from the US i think) a creme against a foot fungal infection because I could not get anything that would do the job OTC and a specialist visit would be weeks away and cost up to 50€ for the doctor 50€ for medication so I though I work around the system and buy my creme Online, Wrong! My package got intercepted at the border and confiscated I got served with a few letters from some obscure government enforcement agencies and was threatened with prosecution if I didn't 'help them track down the sellers'(in a foreign country wtf?), but I was smart enough to not use my real name on the purchase so I could ignore them otherwise I'd be in trouble for buying 2 tubes of foot anti-fungi creme
I don't mean to undermine your argument, active cancer is an absolute contraindications for transplant due to immune suppressant drugs.
You lie ... you lie ... you lie ... I just can't watch him for more than a minute without hearing at least three lies ... You lie ... you lie ... you lie