ACA upheld

[riddler 0]

Quote

So since when has the president ever had the authority to create a tax????

ACA was not mandated by the President. It was passed into law by Congress, despite being called ObamaCare. Congress has every right to decide taxes. It is disputed as a "tax" - that is the description given to the act by the same people that named it ObamaCare.

The right-wing label machine is working overtime on this one.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[billvon 2,469]

>Sometimes, you post the most irrational things, Mike.

His posts are not intended to be factual statements. Just read them and replace the text with "Obama sucks" and it will make more sense.

[deltron80 0]

Reasonable laws that protect consumers are OUTRAGEOUS! OMG KENYA MOOSLUMS OMG

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Sometimes, you post the most irrational things, Mike.

His posts are not intended to be factual statements.

Actually, it was ridiculing the knee-jerk "birther" comment.

Quote

Just read them and replace the text with "Obama sucks" and it will make more sense.

Sorta like replacing anything you write about conservatives with "Bush sucks"?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[normiss 641]

I agree.

I just don't feel this is one of them.

Hopefully, I'm wrong.

I already spend $6000 a year just for coverage.
Then add deductible and out of pocket expenses.

Now can we also 'fix' dental and eye care?

[rhaig 0]

Quote

It's truly amazing that so many "natural born citizens" have such a tenuous grasp of basic civics.

I've often said (though I don't think here) that if you really want to understand how our government works, don't ask someone who was born here, ask a naturalized citizen. Sad yes.

I had a TA in college for one of my government classes who was about to become a US citizen. It was genuinely interesting to listen to her discuss it with other students. (and she managed to keep opinion out of the classroom, though there were plenty of politics discussions over beer)

--
Rob

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

>After the election of a President that failed to provide a legitimate birth certificate, and
>was recently discovered by an undercover agent that he was indeed, not born in the
>US, but born in Kenya . . .

. . . and was part of the WTC coverup! WTC building 7 didn't just fall down on its own, you know.

And don't forget Roswell!

There was nano-thermite in Roswell?

--
Rob

[billvon 2,469]

>There was nano-thermite in Roswell?

Can you prove their wasn't? Why is the US refusing to allow nano-thermite testing in Roswell? Why are they so afraid of the truth?

[wmw999 2,167]

I wonder how many people who said that the Supreme Court ruling settled the 2000 election think that the Supreme Court ruling settled the ACA?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[quade 3]

Quote

I wonder how many people who said that the Supreme Court ruling settled the 2000 election think that the Supreme Court ruling settled the ACA?

Whether a person liked it or not, it did, in fact "settle" it.

The difference is, Gore said, ok, it's over.
I don't think we're going to hear that from the GOP "leadership."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

So since when has the president ever had the authority to create a tax????

ACA was not mandated by the President. It was passed into law by Congress, despite being called ObamaCare. Congress has every right to decide taxes. It is disputed as a "tax" - that is the description given to the act by the same people that named it ObamaCare.

The right-wing label machine is working overtime on this one.

Penalty for freeloaders or tax for freeloaders?

A rose by any other name.

Freeloaders like Ms. Brown, the original plaintiff in this stupid lawsuit, deserve all the taxes/penalties that are imposed on them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>After the election of a President that failed to provide a legitimate birth certificate, and
>was recently discovered by an undercover agent that he was indeed, not born in the
>US, but born in Kenya . . .

. . . and was part of the WTC coverup! WTC building 7 didn't just fall down on its own, you know.

And don't forget Roswell!

There was nano-thermite in Roswell?

Damn, those aliens are smart!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[normiss 641]

Debtor prison for the poor!

[muff528 3]

Quote

.....

So it is and isn't a tax at the same time.

Why don't we just call it an "indulgence" and start referring to Obama as "Papa"?

[beowulf 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNCyEC9r_mk&feature=colike

This the best explanation of why the Supreme Court was wrong.

[headoverheels 292]

Quote

I already spend $6000 a year just for coverage.
Then add deductible and out of pocket expenses.

Does your employer pay most of it then? My employer and I together pay over $26k for my medical insurance (including coverage for my spouse), not counting the out of pocket, co-pay, and non-covered items.

[lawrocket 3]

SO the government requiring a person to purchase a product from a private corporation is a tax.

Boy, are we going to see a bunch of new tax laws passed. A corporation has $5 million to spend to pass a law that will bring $1 billion per year in revenues by requiring people to purchase their product.

This does not bode well, does it?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

I agree.

I just don't feel this is one of them.

Hopefully, I'm wrong.

I already spend $6000 a year just for coverage.
Then add deductible and out of pocket expenses.

Now can we also 'fix' dental and eye care?

Dental and eye care are two of the only portions of our health care economy that are actually working.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[normiss 641]

Nice to see you still have a sense of humor.

[quade 3]

Quote

SO the government requiring a person to purchase a product from a private corporation is a tax.

Boy, are we going to see a bunch of new tax laws passed. A corporation has $5 million to spend to pass a law that will bring $1 billion per year in revenues by requiring people to purchase their product.

This does not bode well, does it?

This is beneath you. You know that's not what was said.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

SO the government requiring a person to purchase a product from a private corporation is a tax.

Boy, are we going to see a bunch of new tax laws passed. A corporation has $5 million to spend to pass a law that will bring $1 billion per year in revenues by requiring people to purchase their product.

This does not bode well, does it?

This is beneath you. You know that's not what was said.

no, what was said is that if someone doesn't purchase a class of product from one of the providers of that product (all large corporations) then they will not receive a certain tax credit and will have to pay the tax. (At least that's the way I understand the functional aspects of the individual mandate -- if I am incorrect, please educate me)

--
Rob

[lawrocket 3]

Well, I haven't read the opinion. But it appears that the ACA was upheld on the basis of Congressional power to tax.

Truth - Congress mandates that people purchase a product/service from a private company.

It was found permissible under the power to tax.

So, what's next?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,469]

>Boy, are we going to see a bunch of new tax laws passed. A corporation has $5
>million to spend to pass a law that will bring $1 billion per year in revenues by
>requiring people to purchase their product.

Yep. And nowadays all people are required, under pain of imprisonment, to hold mortgages, have children and get married. (Although not necessarily in that order.) If only we had listened to people like you years ago . . .

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Well, I haven't read the opinion. But it appears that the ACA was upheld on the basis of Congressional power to tax.

Truth - Congress mandates that people purchase a product/service from a private company.

It was found permissible under the power to tax.

So, what's next?

For one thing, items that are currently tax credits such as energy efficient house upgrades, electric vehicles, etc. could now be "penalties" for not having them.

Do you have health insurance? If no your tax rate increases 1%.

Do you own a car?
If yes, is it electric?
If no your tax rate rises x%.
(Assuming here that people who don't own cars at all would not be penalized for not owning an electric car.)

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Well, I guess you can blame Bush for this one, eh?