It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Healthcare Ruling: Individual Mandate Ruled CONSTITUTIONAL, entire law upheld.

page: 21
74
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 



I have Insurance.

Your retort has nothing to do with me now being taxed more to provide for others.


If you have insurance...you aren't going to be paying any new taxes.

So no...you aren't being taxed more.




posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd

Originally posted by Mart0

Yes, Yes it is ok that a collective society collect the burden of the poor and helpless. That's what being in a progressive (I'm sure you'll associate that word with Liberals) and advancing society in the 21st century.


Uh, no.

It is not the obligation of the "haves" to take care of or subsidize the "have nots".
edit on 28-6-2012 by FreeFromTheHerd because: (no reason given)


Nah, just generosity and good will to your fellow man who may be down on his luck.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by macman
 



No matter what is said, as whole the Country was designed, it is Unconstitutional.


Maybe you didn't see the SCOTUS ruling...it is in fact Constitutional.


Maybe you need reading comprehension re-taught.
I will stand by my statement.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by artnut
 



I am curious, since you seem to support this ruling. If I hear you correctly, you are not really calling this a "tax". My inlaws don't have health insurance. My father-in-law is self-employed, and does very well for himself. He pays cash for all of his medical treatments, even surgery. He does not need health insurance. So, under this ruling, he will either have to get insurance, or he will pay a tax(penalty). How is this not affecting him and many others who don't have insurance in a financial way? He will pay more in taxes/penalties, and penalized for paying cash?


It's exactly people like your inlaws that cause our healthcare costs to go up.

Unless your father inlaw is a millionaire (I'm talking like Romney rich)....there will most likely come a day when he has a major medical issue...days or weeks in the hospital...expensive procedures or tests...and at that point he isn't going to have the cash to pay for it. Then the hospital has to eat the cost...and raise their prices on all their services to make up for the costs that they were forced to eat because of your father in law.


Now...if you say that will never happen because your father in-law is very wealthy and can pay for it all....then for you to say this is going to negatively affect him is dis-honest.


He may very well be a millionaire, I have never asked, and he does not share this information with me. But, as a citizen of this country, he has a right to pay cash for all of his procedures, and takes care of himself just fine without government intervention. I would venture to say that it is more the people that can't pay that drive up the cost of insurance, not him. He has yet to contribute to someone elses debt or cause them directly need to raise prices because he could not pay.

You still have not answered my question, though.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by macman
 



I have Insurance.

Your retort has nothing to do with me now being taxed more to provide for others.


If you have insurance...you aren't going to be paying any new taxes.

So no...you aren't being taxed more.


Ah, ok, sure sure. So, where do the funds come from, to provide Insurance for those that can't afford it and are too poor to be taxed?



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Only people who decide not to be responsible and buy health insurance will pay the tax...not every single person


OF COURSE we will all end up paying. There are A LOT of people in this country TOO POOR to afford it. We will end up supporting them.



Oh please.
In the situation where you couldn't afford the Government option. The premiums must be more expensive than 8% of your income. The average premium in the Government option is 1,200$. I'm no math major but my calculator tells me that for that to happen you would have to make less than 10,000$ a year. You make more than that on Minimum wage. The people you have to support will be the absolute dregs of society.

Stop spewing your absolute ignorance and fear monger filled rants because THE GUBBERMANT WUNTS MUH LIBERTIES. This is a huge victory for human rights. People like you are holding back the advancement of the human race.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd

Originally posted by Mart0

Yes, Yes it is ok that a collective society collect the burden of the poor and helpless. That's what being in a progressive (I'm sure you'll associate that word with Liberals) and advancing society in the 21st century.


Uh, no.

It is not the obligation of the "haves" to take care of or subsidize the "have nots".
edit on 28-6-2012 by FreeFromTheHerd because: (no reason given)


Nah, just generosity and good will to your fellow man who may be down on his luck.


That is up to the individual, not the Govt.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 



That is what I am afraid of. This could leave many Americans myself included with a tax penalty that we cannot afford. Then what?


Then, the IRS, (the federal reserve army) will garnish your wages, kick you and your family out of your home, and take everything that you own.............

Why do you think the SCOTUS called it a tax? This is just more tyranny disguised as the government cares about you and that they want to help........



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by MegaMind
 



If you are that rich what do you need insurance for? You are self insured ...


And the hospital will charge you more than it actually needs to make up for the money it loses to all the deadbeat poor and uninsured. Every time you self pay for medical services, you are already paying a hidden tax.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by macman
 



No matter what is said, as whole the Country was designed, it is Unconstitutional.


Maybe you didn't see the SCOTUS ruling...it is in fact Constitutional.


Which is hilarious coming from people on the left, since all week long the media and libs have been talking about taking on the illegitimacy of the supreme court, when they thought it was going to go against them. Spin, spin, spin away!

On another note, it is baffling to me why so many on ATS support larger, more intrusive government. I thought you all were against tyranny? Is it that you're only against tyranny that forces you to do stuff that goes against your ideological beliefs? It seems that you're fine with it as long as it's forcing an agenda you agree with.
edit on 28-6-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mart0


I'm sure that blurb goes down great at tea-party meetings but All I see it for is some entitled, fear speech because the wrong colour party (blue) is in power . I'm sure everything will be fine again when the Whitehouse is red, Right?


lol what a sad attempt at designating me as a republican.

You failed, much like you have throughout this thread.

This is about freedom. This is about rights. I have the right to earn and keep my property, whether it be my income, my home, etc etc.

There is no right for the government to take my property ( my income) and give it to someone else simply because they are unable, whether through laziness, or disability, to earn what they need to live.

The U.S. was not founded upon the principle of being a redistributive society, no matter how much you pathetically wish it were.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by lynn112
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I am a responsible member of society, I pay my own medical bills. However, if this law stands, you, along with every other American, will now have to help pay them.


Only if you are in my same insurance pool.

And I'm fine with that.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeesFar

Everyone already has the RIGHT to healthcare. It's a matter of whether or not they can AFFORD it. What is wrong with some of you? You have the RIGHT to own a 15,000 square foot mansion, but can you AFFORD it? You have a right to eat lobster and caviar 3 meals a day, but can you AFFORD it?

My husbands job *offers* health insurance, but for just him (not me), it's over $400 a month. We cannot AFFORD it. He's a Veteran (total of 12 years w/ combat experience); honorably discharged. You'd think he'd be qualified for VA benefits, wouldn't you? He's not! He makes exactly $20 a month too much for the County we live in for him to qualify for VA benefits.

Now that insurance is mandated, I can only guess what rates will go up to since insurance companies know they've got us all by the shorts. I guess we can now choose whether or not we eat more than beans and rice or whether or not we can keep me on my medications or whether or not we can afford air conditioning, the lack of which dramatically and negatively impacts my health.

A few 'someones' are missing the point, alright, but it's not those of us who know what is really happening.

Can you AFFORD of one the new GM electric cars that are such a bomb? I sure hope so, because you just might be MANDATED to buy one. And you'll have the "RIGHT" to do it, too. Buy it or pay the tax. This entire matter has just set a precedence for which apparently few can see the full potential ramifications.


I couldn't agree with you more.

In my case, my husband's employer cancelled ALL coverage for their employees effective 7/1/2012, due to the high cost of premiums. We are not able to replace his coverage at $400.00+ per month as it is. Now, we will have to whether we can afford it or not.

It will take a while for people to realize the pain of the cost of this law. When they do, the noise will be deafening. At least that is what I keep telling myself. BT



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mart0


Stop spewing your absolute ignorance and fear monger filled rants because THE GUBBERMANT WUNTS MUH LIBERTIES. This is a huge victory for human rights. People like you are holding back the advancement of the human race.


You must also be a follower of Eugenics.

Advancement does not mean restrictions, unless you are a Progressive and need to force the giant pill down the throats of others.

edit on 28-6-2012 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
As a veteran with 8 yrs honerable, I had always gotten VA hospital care, but the more I read and learn today about today's ruling, I'm like, if I wasn't a vet, I think I might dress up like my cat, and take myself to the
-vet-erinarian.
Listening to Alex Jones live now, on all this. He says this bill was written up by the big health insurance corporations. That sounds like foxes writing their recommendations for those well fed hens.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
The "be responsible" people are up in arms about a law that makes people "be responsible" for health care coverage if they can afford it.

The healthcare law is good for the people, huge insurance can deny people coverage for pre existing conditions.


Another win for the people from the supreme court, wow two decisions in a row.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by MegaMind
 



If you are that rich what do you need insurance for? You are self insured ...


And the hospital will charge you more than it actually needs to make up for the money it loses to all the deadbeat poor and uninsured. Every time you self pay for medical services, you are already paying a hidden tax.


Not true. I ALWAYS pay less when I self pay.

Actually the hospital cut my $10,000 bill in half because I was paying for it myself ...

I think they are over charging insurance companies ...

edit on 28-6-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anjin
I think most of us have known for a long time that we're not a true democracy but this morning the veil was lifted completely.



This is not aimed at you; this is for our so many citizens who were never correctly taught. It is not their (or your) fault; it is a gross failure of the public education system and the higher level institutions who hire those who will teach incorrect history.

The United States is not now, nor has it ever been, a "democracy." We are a Constitutional Republic. The word "democracy" does not appear in *any* of the Founding Documents, nor does it appear in any of the individual State Constitutions. The "Pledge of Allegiance" includes the word "Republic;" NOT 'democracy.'

Media and even Presidents and certainly schools have been teaching for years that we are a 'democracy' when we are NOT.

Here is some simple but good education on it contained on just one page:

An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic

It is vital that everyone learn the truth, learn to differentiate, and teach their children. Here is where we currently find ourselves:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years." ~ attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lords Woodhouselee but such attribution is unverified. Unverified or not, history proves it to be a correct assessment.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic911
Two comments or observations to make. I know it isn't exactly apples to apples here, but we have a law regarding insurance requirements for automobiles, boats, snowmobiles, jetskis, motorcycles, etc. There isn't a single vehicle on the road (exaggeration, I know) that isn't or shouldn't be registered and insured, including a licensed driver! Its funny that we are mandated to maintain car insurance but something as significant as health insurance is only recently an issue? Just sounds silly when I say it out loud.


Automobile insurance (or vehicle, more appropriately) isn't required to cover driver. It's required in order to cover the accident victim of a driver. Why does this argument continue to exist when it's clearly nonsensical?

/TOA



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
This is awsome for the US, and the right thing to do. I live in a country where i pay 36% tax. So does "everybody" else, and therefore everything whit in healthcare is provided for me by the state. No hospital bills what so ever.

I went to the US last autumn for studies, and without my travel insurance i would have to pay up to 10.000$ for one night in the hospital if they had to watch me. Thats just utterly madness.




top topics



 
74
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join