Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

User avatar
YZGI
Posts: 11518
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:24 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by YZGI »

The SC upheld Obamacare, as a tax on individuals who have no health care. As much as I'd like for all Americans to have health insurance or have more opportunity for health care. It seems to me that the ones who can least afford it are the ones who will be taxed (penalized) for not having it because they may not be able to afford it. I hate the fact that as it is now, the more money you have or the ones with the best jobs here are the ones with the better opportunities for health care but to tax (penalize) the ones who may already not be able to afford it seems stupid. Then if you own a small business that employs 50 or more employees you must provide health care for your employees. Not only may it be the straw that broke the camels back for many of these businesses, how many 49 employee businesses will there now be?



Supreme Court upholds Obamacare individual mandate as a tax | The Ticket - Yahoo! News





After reading for a few hours yesterday this is the way I have understood it to be. I may be wrong on a few points, people are still trying to figure out everything.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Ahso! »

I'll need to refresh my memory but I'm pretty sure there are exceptions for low income people, ie. not subject to the penalty or will be picked up by Medicaid.

I don't care for this but it's only the beginning for what will eventually become a single payer system.

Funny about Roberts though, his position is evidence for me that he's been more a part of the political 'process' than the other conservative justices. This law is a giveaway to the insurance and medical industries in many respects, and Roberts, due to the fact that he was part of the Regan administration which exposed him to political lobbying from private interests, appears tainted. He's a corporate hack! Isn't that something? Roberts is the the mirror image of Sotomayer on the liberal side.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Snooz »

I read that this is being left up to the states for final decision and there's really no way to enforce the tax anyway.
User avatar
YZGI
Posts: 11518
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:24 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by YZGI »

SnoozeAgain;1397969 wrote: I read that this is being left up to the states for final decision and there's really no way to enforce the tax anyway.


From what I've read, if a State refuses to participate the Feds can't withhold fed funds that exist now but can withhold future fed funds from the States that don't participate. Although before this is enacted I'm sure it will change many times in most aspects.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Accountable »

User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6627
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by AnneBoleyn »

I'm relieved. I didn't want my President to suffer a humiliation. I've had enough of the right wing. Hateful. I've reached my limit. Until the rethuglicans can get themselves under control, anything they want I want the opposite.

eta: I'm tickled pink DoJ refused dealing with Congress over Holder. Phuck them.
User avatar
Wandrin
Posts: 1697
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:10 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Wandrin »

I must admit that I was a little surprised by some of the over-the-top rhetoric after the decision was announced. From the horror of broccoli and the imaginary "death panels" to calls for armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court). I'm not sure how every little thing that happens leads to laments about the death of democracy or massive conspiracies, but that seems to be politics today. Oh, and we should buy gold! hee hee hee
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6627
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Wandrin;1397993 wrote: I must admit that I was a little surprised by some of the over-the-top rhetoric after the decision was announced. From the horror of broccoli and the imaginary "death panels" to calls for armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court). I'm not sure how every little thing that happens leads to laments about the death of democracy or massive conspiracies, but that seems to be politics today. Oh, and we should buy gold! hee hee hee


Who is asking for "armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court)." I know that piglet palin called it the end of freedom. What a pain she is.
User avatar
Wandrin
Posts: 1697
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:10 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Wandrin »

AnneBoleyn;1397995 wrote: Who is asking for "armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court)." I know that piglet palin called it the end of freedom. What a pain she is.


It was a Tea Party guy, I think from Mississippi. I'll see if I can find it.

The chairman of the Miss Tea Party said:

When a gang of criminals subvert legitimate government offices and seize all power to themselves without the real consent of the governed their every act and edict is of itself illegal and is outside the bounds of the Rule of Law. In such cases submission is treason. Treason against the Constitution and the valid legitimate government of the nation to which we have pledged our allegiance for years. To resist by all means that are right in the eyes of God is not rebellion or insurrection, it is patriotic resistance to invasion.


And the a former Michigan GOP spokesman sent out an email entitled "Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified".

“There are times government has to do things to get what it wants and holds a gun to your head. I’m saying at some point, we have to ask the question when do we turn that gun around and say no and resist.”


http://thinkprogress.org/

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/17151
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Snooz »

Wandrin;1397993 wrote: I must admit that I was a little surprised by some of the over-the-top rhetoric after the decision was announced. From the horror of broccoli and the imaginary "death panels" to calls for armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court). I'm not sure how every little thing that happens leads to laments about the death of democracy or massive conspiracies, but that seems to be politics today. Oh, and we should buy gold! hee hee hee


Gold and ammo. I used to belong to a forum where that was the prevailing thought on the fall of democracy in the US.

ETA: mandatory replacement of incandescent bulbs also pissed them off. A LOT.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6627
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Phucking fools.

eta: pardon my french

thank you Wandrin. Invasion? Who is invading? Are the British coming? Please say yes.
User avatar
Wandrin
Posts: 1697
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:10 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Wandrin »

AnneBoleyn;1397998 wrote: Phucking fools.

eta: pardon my french

thank you Wandrin. Invasion? Who is invading? Are the British coming? Please say yes.


I presume the "invaders" are the imaginary voices in their heads.

On a positive note, several months back Rush Limbaugh said that if the Affordable Care Act was not struck down he was going to move to Costa Rica. I don't believe it, but one can hope...

Just in case you need a good laugh, BuzzFeed compiled a list of tweeters who said that they are moving to Canada to escape the socialist healthcare system here.

People Who Say They're Moving To Canada Because Of ObamaCare
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Snooz »

Van Summers @VanSummers

#SCOTUS holds up free healthcare for everyone?! Screw this commie country, I'm moving to #Canada #whoswithme




Surely this is satire.
User avatar
Wandrin
Posts: 1697
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:10 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Wandrin »

SnoozeAgain;1398003 wrote: Surely this is satire.


I think a whole lot of people flunked 6th grade Civics class.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 11910
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by LarsMac »

Wandrin;1398002 wrote: I presume the "invaders" are the imaginary voices in their heads.

On a positive note, several months back Rush Limbaugh said that if the Affordable Care Act was not struck down he was going to move to Costa Rica. I don't believe it, but one can hope...

Just in case you need a good laugh, BuzzFeed compiled a list of tweeters who said that they are moving to Canada to escape the socialist healthcare system here.

People Who Say They're Moving To Canada Because Of ObamaCare


I am fairly certain that Canada doesn't want them.

They already have a socialist healthcare system, and seem to like it.
"In recognizing the humanity of our fellow beings, we pay ourselves the highest tribute."
- Thurgood Marshall
User avatar
Wandrin
Posts: 1697
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:10 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Wandrin »

I wonder how many people have become disappointed by politics in Canada and threatened to move to the US? I get a chuckle just thinking about it. I doubt that there are many.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Accountable »

AnneBoleyn;1397991 wrote: I'm relieved. I didn't want my President to suffer a humiliation. I've had enough of the right wing. Hateful. I've reached my limit. Until the rethuglicans can get themselves under control, anything they want I want the opposite.

eta: I'm tickled pink DoJ refused dealing with Congress over Holder. Phuck them.~~~~~

flopstock;1397777 wrote: I always quote folks if they write something stupid that they may think better of at a later date....
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Accountable »

Wandrin;1397993 wrote: I must admit that I was a little surprised by some of the over-the-top rhetoric after the decision was announced. From the horror of broccoli and the imaginary "death panels" to calls for armed insurrection to overthrow the "criminal conspiracy" in Washington (presumably meaning the president, congress, and the Supreme Court). I'm not sure how every little thing that happens leads to laments about the death of democracy or massive conspiracies, but that seems to be politics today. Oh, and we should buy gold! hee hee hee
SCHULTZ: Hi folks, this is Ed Schultz. You know, I'm convinced that everyone ought to own some gold today. Why? Well, because the dollar is traveling down the same road the German mark did in the early 1900s when it took a wheelbarrel full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Financial experts everywhere say our financial system is broken and the bailouts necessary to fix our economy are undermining the dollar.

So call my friends at ITM Trading and get some gold today, 1-888-OWN-GOLD, that's 1-888-OWN-GOLD. Since the dollar hit its peak in July of 2001, it lost over 41 percent to its most recent low while gold went up over 278 percent. I'm afraid the trillions needed in stimulus today to battle deflation are going to turn into runaway inflation, so don't wait. Call my friends at ITM Trading and get some gold today. Ask for their free information packet about owning gold. I got some historic $20 gold coins from ITM and you should too. 1-888-OWN-GOLD. That's 1-888-OWN-GOLD.


Read more: Ed Schultz Skeptical of GM's Volt on Radio Show, But Swoons in Commercial | NewsBusters.org
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by yaaarrrgg »

I find it humorous that the Tea Party/GOP has acted so flabbergasted that the law passed. Was it a surprise to them?

For as much lip service as they give the Constitution, they should have read it. They seem to believe that the federal gov't doesn't have the authority to tax people, much less spend the tax money on something like general welfare and defense. I suspect they know the Constitution about as well as their own Bibles. :)

That, and the fact that republicans came up with the idea 15 years ago as a giveaway to big pharma and insurance companies, should have been a clue that it was going to go pass.

The other thing that looks like a slow moving train wreck is Romney himself. Mitt himself should be patting himself on the back and taking credit for the health care plan. Though he's decided to run against himself. I'm not sure how he thinks he can win that game.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Ahso! »

yaaarrrgg;1398011 wrote: I find it humorous that the Tea Party/GOP has acted so flabbergasted that the law passed. Was it a surprise to them?

For as much lip service as they give the Constitution, they should have read it. They seem to believe that the federal gov't doesn't have the authority to tax people, much less spend the tax money on something like general welfare and defense. I suspect they know the Constitution about as well as their own Bibles. :)

That, and the fact that republicans came up with the idea 15 years ago as a giveaway to big pharma and insurance companies, should have been a clue that it was going to go pass.

The other thing that looks like a slow moving train wreck is Romney himself. Mitt himself should be patting himself on the back and taking credit for the health care plan. Though he's decided to run against himself. I'm not sure how he thinks he can win that game.Assuming more people actually listen to what's said than appear to that'd be correct. I'm amazed at the level of surdity on both sides.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Accountable »

yaaarrrgg;1398011 wrote: I find it humorous that the Tea Party/GOP has acted so flabbergasted that the law passed. Was it a surprise to them?

For as much lip service as they give the Constitution, they should have read it. They seem to believe that the federal gov't doesn't have the authority to tax people, much less spend the tax money on something like general welfare and defense. I suspect they know the Constitution about as well as their own Bibles.
It seems that you are guilty of the same thing.

Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified. Ratified 2/3/1913.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Until this decision was handed down, Congress did not have the authority to directly tax individuals, except by taxing their income. The taxes Justice Roberts invented then declared permissible are not income taxes.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by gmc »

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


OK you could argue that the definition and use of welfare has changed in meaning since the constitution was written, but then so has that of defence. So the problem is not the notion of changing constitution as attitudes have changed - I don't think you can argue the constitution is some sacred edict that can't be amended as society changes.

My point being is it not the case that constitutional is what you decide it is today not what someone thought it was three hundred years ago?

As an aside when first adopted, the Bill of Rights applied to white men and excluded most Americans. Free blacks were excluded from The Bill of Rights because they were not citizens. Also excluded were all women, Native Americans, immigrants and white men who did not own land. Changing attitudes means most in america today would consider that wrong.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6627
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Accountable does not deserve a response from me. Thank you.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by yaaarrrgg »

also, the people who wrote the constitution had little understanding of the germ theory of disease. They thought if they sliced their arms and drained "bad blood," it made them healthy. Now we understand that germs have killed more people than Al Qaeda terrorists ever will. Medicine and even more basically, sanitation, falls under defense. Though it is a non-human threat, it's still a major threat to the nation.

The modern political attitude on disease is much like requiring people to buy employee sponsored "terrorist insurance," which they lose if their house is blown up an they are unable to work.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Accountable;1398017 wrote: It seems that you are guilty of the same thing.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Until this decision was handed down, Congress did not have the authority to directly tax individuals, except by taxing their income. The taxes Justice Roberts invented then declared permissible are not income taxes.


Eh, I thought it listed a bunch of tax methods (impost, excise, etc). Income tax was a fairly recent invention. But if you want, it can be thought of as an income tax (eg: you get tax credits if you have insurance, just like any other tax break).

I honestly don't understand your position, and neither did the Supreme Court, which was stacked with conservative justices. :)
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by Accountable »

yaaarrrgg;1398028 wrote: I honestly don't understand your position, and neither did the Supreme Court, which was stacked with conservative justices. :)
That's a pretty bold & inaccurate statement. Doesn't matter now, though. Justice Roberts has opened the floodgates. Any federal tax is okay, meaning constitutional. Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan can go through without a hitch now. Sales taxes, VAT, whatever. It's all good.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Accountable;1398050 wrote: That's a pretty bold & inaccurate statement. Doesn't matter now, though. Justice Roberts has opened the floodgates. Any federal tax is okay, meaning constitutional. Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan can go through without a hitch now. Sales taxes, VAT, whatever. It's all good.


There's no such thing as a different "types" of tax. All tax is tax on income (where do you think the money comes from?). A sales tax, for instance, could be translated into an higher income tax, combined with tax credits to "reward" saving a larger percentage of income. Tax is tax, it split up into different methods of collection in order to make the number look smaller (like 9 + 9 + 9 = 27% + state tax). The only thing the constitution requires is that we (voters) have a say in how the money is spent.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by gmc »

Accountable;1398050 wrote: That's a pretty bold & inaccurate statement. Doesn't matter now, though. Justice Roberts has opened the floodgates. Any federal tax is okay, meaning constitutional. Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan can go through without a hitch now. Sales taxes, VAT, whatever. It's all good.


How is it a federal tax if the money does not go to them but tp insurance companies - or am I missing something?
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Supreme Court upholds Obamacare

Post by yaaarrrgg »

gmc;1398059 wrote: How is it a federal tax if the money does not go to them but tp insurance companies - or am I missing something?


I think it's fair to call it a tax.

One, they've subtracted the amount from income. If the money is sent directly to them, they would just turn around and send it back to insurance companies or health care providers. So by removing themselves from the loop, they've actually made it a bit more efficient (less postage/handling).

Also, I think the government is paying the insurance and health care in some cases.

Return to “Health Care”