Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » BREAKING: Supreme Court Upholds Individual Mandate As A Tax

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: BREAKING: Supreme Court Upholds Individual Mandate As A Tax
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BREAKING: Supreme Court Upholds Individual Mandate As A Tax | The Supreme Court has upheld the individual mandate in Obamacare, paving the way for full implementation of the law in the states and ensuring that millions of uninsured Americans haves access to affordable coverage. The court upheld the provision as a tax. The Medicaid expansion is limited, but not invalidated, the court found. In short: “the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government’s power to terminate states’ Medicaid funds is narrowly read.” Roberts joined Sotomayor


[Were Up]

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the precedent is breathtaking.

i haven't read the decision yet, but it sounds very much like the way the govt has taken land from one person under imminent domain and given it to another person. Of course cash did change hnds, but that's irrelevant.

i find it ironic as hell that Romney is the one who implemented this first and will now campaign on repealing it a the only solution.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama: Mandate is Not a Tax (September 2009)

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/obama-mandate-is-not-a-tax/

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
4 Reasons Why Republicans Won’t Be Able To Repeal Obamacare
By Igor Volsky on Jun 28, 2012 at 4:30 pm

Responding to Thursday’s Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, Congressional Republicans have scheduled a vote in the House to repeal the law and Mitt Romney pledged to undo the measure if he’s elected president in November. But unless the GOP wins a super majority in the Senate — a scenario no one thinks is plausible — it can do little more than weaken Obamacare’s regulations and defund some of its provisions. Here is why:

1) Romney has no authority to issue waivers. Romney has promised to expand a provision of the Affordable Care Act that allows states to opt out of certain sections of the law to permit states to ignore it entirely. But the executive branch and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) likely don’t have the authority to grant such broad waivers. According to the law, HHS (together with the IRS) have waiver authority, but only if the states meet very specific requirements. Neither have blanket waiver authority, which would have to come from Congress. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) — the author of the waiver provision — has challenged Romney’s claims, saying, “Anybody who tries to move outside the standards of the bill — which is the coverage and costs and the like — well I’ll certainly fight that. But I think lots of other people will too.”

2) Congress can’t repeal the full law through reconciliation. Without the necessary 60 votes in the Senate for full repeal, Republicans are pledging to use a budget reconciliation bill to undo the ACA. But this process would only apply to the budget-related elements of the law and would thus leave many portions — including the mandate — intact. As health care expert Robert Laszewski put it, “Romney could end up creating a chaotic environment driven by enormous uncertainty over just which parts of the new health care law would be implemented–for consumers, health care providers, and insurers.”

3) Republicans have nothing to replace it with. David Frum explains that since the expansion of coverage provisions go into effect in 2014, Romney would have just one year to both repeal and replace the law. Republicans haven’t even coalesced around a single plan — and many in the party believe that the federal government should leave health care alone and want to leave the entire reform process to the states. Thus, “if replacement does not happen in the first 100 days, it won’t happen at all—that is, it won’t happen as a single measure, but rather will take the form of dozens of small incremental changes adopted episodically over the next 20 years.”

4) Americans support Obamacare’s provisions. While Americans may not like “Obamacare” — and the political process of passing it — they do support its major provisions and are likely to resist any effort by Republicans to take away their benefits. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that while 56 percent of Americans oppose the law as a whole, 61 percent of respondents favored allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26, 72 percent wish to maintain the requirement that companies with more than 50 workers provide health insurance for their employees, and 82 percent of respondents favored banning insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. As more benefits roll out in 2014, it will be increasingly difficult for Republicans to argue for their repeal.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

VIDEO: Obama says mandate is NOT a tax. You see what the problem is?

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video?id=8620606

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
 -

VIDEO: Obama says mandate is NOT a tax. You see what the problem is?

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video?id=8620606

See...we all see what the problem is. Your an idiot.

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess I should call ABC news and tell them they are providing false data.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
the precedent is breathtaking.

The understatement contained in those words is chilling.....

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why The Individual Mandate Is Not A ‘Massive Tax Hike’ On The Middle Class
By Travis Waldron on Jun 28, 2012 at 12:30 pm

The Supreme Court ruled today that the Affordable Care Act, the comprehensive health care reform package signed by President Obama in 2010, is constitutional. The Court upheld the law’s most controversial provision, the individual mandate, ruling that it is constitutional under the government’s authority to levy and collect taxes.

Republicans have falsely claimed the mandate was the “biggest tax increase ever in American history,” so of course, conservatives immediately jumped on the idea that the individual mandate was a massive tax hike on the middle class, reviving an argument Republicans have made since the law passed more than two years ago:

WISCONSIN GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R) declared that it was a “massive tax increase.”

INDIANA SEN. DAN COATS (R) said “Right now we have something with a big tax and the American people who rejected that in 2010 are going to have a chance to break the tie in 2012.”

LOUISIANA GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (R) said “Ironically, the Supreme Court has decided to be far more honest about Obamacare than Obama was. They rightly have called it a tax. Today’s decision is a blow to our freedoms.”

IDAHO SEN. MIKE CRAPO (R) touted that the mandate was ruled a tax. “Now, we’re back into that argument,” he said.

The mandate can indeed be characterized as a tax, as the Court found. But it is not a massive tax hike on the middle class, much less the biggest tax hike in American history. The tax imposed by the individual mandate amounts to either $695 or 2.5 percent of household income for those who don’t have insurance and are not exempt based on income levels. By comparison, the payroll tax cut extension Republicans repeatedly blocked earlier this year would have added 3.1 percentage points to the tax and cost the average family $1,500 a year.

The mandate, meanwhile, would hit a small amount of Americans — somewhere between 2 and 5 percent — according to a study from the Urban Institute. The number could be even lower depending on the law’s success: in Massachusetts, the only state with an insurance mandate, less than 1 percent of the state’s residents paid the penalty in 2009.

The majority of the Affordable Care Act’s other taxes, such as a payroll tax increase and a tax on high-cost health plans, are aimed at upper-income Americans. In exchange, millions of jobs will be created as new people enter the health care system and millions of people will gain access to affordable, quality insurance that they otherwise would not have. And, as we detailed earlier today, the Court’s decision to uphold the entirety of the law will have significant benefits for the nation’s economy.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
the precedent is breathtaking.

The understatement contained in those words is chilling.....
well, i was responding to the initial reports-

it turns out that they DID in fact find the requirement to purchase insurance uncosntittuional, then Bush appointee and Activist Judge Cheif (no less)Roberts stepped in and called it a tax if you don't have it...which is a power granted under the Cosntitution.

now, go back to Citizens United and read up a little. roberts is the butthead that expanded that case to include campaign finance reform. he dumped spending limits when it was not even part of the original case... i beleive that as Cheif he was the only one of SCOTUS who could expand that case

we have a real problem SF, Roberts took this case adn made the decision that taxes can be levied therefore they can tax if you don't have insurance, but it is not requiremetn to have insurance.

you know what would be hilarious? if they could throw you in jail for not having insurance or maybe for not paying the tax levied for not having bought insurance. that WOULD be uncosstitutional.. of course while you are in jail? they are required to provide yo with health care.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the precedent of that is breathtaking too-

now? they can fine you for cussing, and say it's constitutional cuz the fine is just a tax....

BTW? it used to be that pot was taxed and possession was prosecuted under the tax laws... Timothy Leary took that to SCOTUS and they found it uncosntitutional... i'll have to find some free time to read up on that again ....

seems like it may apply here [Wink] of course Congress responded the next year by making pot illegal... still haven't figured out how they justify that... they used to know they had no right to do that, that's why they used tax laws to "control" it to begin with.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
reviewed Leary V United states, the gisst of the law was thta if Leary paid the tax on ther reeefers he and his kids brought into the US, they would have to admit they were in violation of Texas state law, so i don't see a precedent in that case that affects this case yet... i bet state lawmakers can manufacture them if they want to tho [Wink]

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OBAMA TO SOLDIERS: PAY UP

THREATENS TO VETO BILL UNLESS IT HIKES HEALTH CARE FEES FOR SERVICE MEMBERS

The Obama administration on Friday threatened to veto a defense appropriations bill in part because it does not include higher health care fees for members of the military.


http://freebeacon.com/obama-to-soldiers-pay-up/


Unless you are non military, and poor then you are all getting hosed on this agenda.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So should we unionize doctors now?

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
So should we unionize doctors now?

cash, stop amber-assing yourself. the doctors ARE unionuised, it's called the AMA and it IS the 4MOST POWERFUL labor UNION ever seen on the face of the earth.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Somehow I just cant categorize the AMA as a LABOR union.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Somehow I just cant categorize the AMA as a LABOR union.

WSJ CHIEF ECONOMIST: 75% OF OBAMACARE COSTS WILL FALL ON BACKS OF THOSE MAKING LESS THAN $120K A YEAR

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obamacare-costs- will-fall-on-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/


So like one poster on that story asked, what was Obama saying a while back about people making under $250,000? Biden said it too:

BIDEN: No one making less than $250,000 under Obama’s plan will see one penny of their tax raised. And 95% percent of the people making less than $150,000 will get a tax break. John wants to add new tax cuts for corporate America and the very wealthy while giving nothing to the middle class. We have a different value set. The middle class is the economic engine. They deserve the tax breaks, not the wealthy who are doing well.


So they say they are not raising taxes, but they are killing it on the back door taxes.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Somehow I just cant categorize the AMA as a LABOR union.

Ama Votes To Form A Union For Doctors
Muscle Against Managed Care
June 24, 1999|By Bruce Japsen, Tribune Staff Writer.




In a landmark vote that could fundamentally alter the direction of the nation's oldest medical group, the American Medical Association overwhelmingly decided Wednesday to form a national doctors' union.

The vote by AMA delegates is symbolic of the growing frustration with a managed health-care system that doctors say takes decisions out of the hands of medical professionals and into those of insurance companies.


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1999-06-24/news/9906240140_1_ama-national-doc tors-union-national-labor-organization

even if you don't want to call them a labor union (i dunno why) they have been a professioanl organsiation who, for decades, has controlled who can enter their ranks very tightly. they control the admission to american Medical Schools and they control who can practice medicine thru lobbying for strict regualtions on who can practice medicine and thru testing (medical boards)

Unions are Unions of people even the United States is a Union.. doctors perform labor, no matter how you slice it, labor is work and they work...

one could argue that the Bar Associations are also a Union.. if they had one big Bar assocoiation, they would be bigger and stronger, but they go state by state for the most part so they are not as powerful natioanwide they are bigger because they aren't too picky about who they allow to join... [Big Grin]

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't like the result, Glass, but after reading the Opinion...I can't say I disagree with Roberts.

Sad to say...but in his words:

"we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.

.....

The Framers created a Federal Government of limited powers, and assigned to this Court the duty of enforcing those limits. The Court does so today. But the Court does not express any opinion on the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act. Under the Constitution, that judgment is reserved to the people."


http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf

Probably the best opinion piece I've read this week put it this way:

"Congress may now tax you for not doing what it wants you to do. Somehow, that’s not a penalty so long as the IRS collects the money. It is a tax.

The Democrats who constructed this new power suffer from the “Good King” delusion. They see their ends – universal health care – as so good that it justifies giving themselves the power to retard liberty and direct individual behavior.

The problem, of course, is never with the “Good King,” rather the “Next King.” What sort of behavior will the Next King, the one we don’t know yet, compel us to do with this new power to direct our behavior against our will?


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/29/obamacare-ruling-destroys-perfectly-go od-teaching-tool-for-tax-professors/#ixzz1zbvqzHc9


So, yes Glass...we have a real problem...

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, yes Glass...we have a real problem...

the really screwball thing is that most all of these creepy laws start from good intent...

too many people are getting caught up in cult of personality.

tey could have done this correctly if they weren't always trying to make somebody look bad.

both aprties are guilty of that, why do i seem to be voting agsint somebody every election now?

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the really screwball thing is that most all of these creepy laws start from good intent...

"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of ther liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

-Justice Louis Bradeis
Olmstead v. United States
277 U.S. 479 (1928)

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lawyers Have Already Drafted 13,000 Pages of Regulations for New ObamaTax Law

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2013 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share