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

What's that flushing sound?

Oh it's the global economy still collapsing.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Most right wing people do not have any idea what socialism even is. Any government program is somehow socialist to them. But it is because most are brainwashed by Limbaugh, Savage, Jones, Beck and others.

Pick up a book and read right wingers, or at least do a google search for the basic definition. Especially if you think that a free market somehow equals capitalism.

Well I'm screwed. I'm in healthcare and unable to get a job for 2 years even though I've been in for 16 years. How in the heck do I buy insurance without $. Not to mention the IRS will be putting me in jail and take our home, because we can't pay the penalty tax.
Now I know what the FEMA camps are for.
GOD please, help us.

reply to post by Char-Lee


I wasn't very clear in what I was trying to say, sorry.

I am absolutely against the individual mandate. There are items in this law that will help the current situation with health care and health insurance. I did not mean to imply that the whole of the law was good with the only exception being the mandate.

Thanks for helping to clarify my position

You just lost your freedom of choice and not just for healthcare. For everything. The Czar has just been ratified as a legitimate czar and he's accepted the proclamation. In his short fifteen minute political bite this morning he continually used the pronoun "I" instead of "we," which is how he has always addressed this country. Mine, me, I. Never "we," "our," or "Your." He truly believes he is the king. So, the supremes said in a decision, This is okay, king, as long as you tax the peasants, whether they want it or not. In that decision you lost all hope of picking and chosing your course/path of life from this day forward.

Originally posted by kosmicjack

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

"When a court confronts an unconstitutional statue its endeavor must be to to conserve, not destroy the legislation," Roberts wrote.

That's pretty damn messed up right there. He's saying if the Constitution and some piece of legislation were on a sinking boat the priority is to save the legislation and let the Constitution drown.

Yeah, that doesn't even make any damn sense...

ETA: The Romney camp is giving the rally cry that the only way to stop this is to unseat Obama. Obama might have won the battle but he may well be in danger of losing the war. This may just fire up enough people to give Romney the win.

edit on 6/28/2012 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)

won't it be difficult for romney to argue against it seeing as how it was modeled from his plan? what the hell is the REAL difference between the two anyway. not a damn thing.

Legislation requiring Catholics to violate their conscience is a direct violation of the First Amendment.

The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion

en.wikipedia.org...

So for all you rejoicing I wish you knew how sad I feel. Someday you probably will.

Text of First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Basically, we have the government saying;

PAY A FINE

or

PAY TO GET INSURANCE

Either way, we PAY.

Under government dictate.

Under government decree.

I am now rather cranky.

Originally posted by fixer1967
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

Well enjoy it while you can. They will come after you sooner or later even if they have to make a speical law just for you.
But look on the bight side they may name the new law after you.

They Can't come after me because I'm not breaking any laws. In the U.S. you don't have to pay taxes if you don't make over a certain amount of money per year.

reply to post by RealSpoke


Actually it is you that doesn't know what socialism is:

a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Socialism

Originally posted by BearTruth

Originally posted by Ben81
I have a few questions :

What does that mean .. is there something new with the today decision ?

will it mean everyone will have a new tax to pay for the Obama Health Plan ?
except the military and federal employees

As I understand it, if you purchase the insurance required by the bill, or have insurance from employment or Medicaid/Medicare, you will not be subject to the 1% tax. However, if you refuse/decline to maintain health insurance, you will be levied with the tax on your income. BT

In other words those who cannot afford the insurance like my family are the ones who will now be punished for being poor in the first place.

All Obama has to do is nationalise the insurance companies

Yeah, like he's going to do that. God you right-wingers are so delusional!

Unless we have another depression that won't happen.

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
reply to post by underduck

 

After this, I seriously plan on looking at other options.

I would love to renounce if I can find a foreign nation that suits my needs and is friendly to the idea of personal freedoms including private property rights and gun ownership.

Maybe Iceland...

Originally posted by CB328

All Obama has to do is nationalise the insurance companies

Yeah, like he's going to do that. God you right-wingers are so delusional!

Unless we have another depression that won't happen.

Really, Like overload the system?
Cloward and Piven anyone?

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by BearTruth

Originally posted by Ben81
I have a few questions :

What does that mean .. is there something new with the today decision ?

will it mean everyone will have a new tax to pay for the Obama Health Plan ?
except the military and federal employees

As I understand it, if you purchase the insurance required by the bill, or have insurance from employment or Medicaid/Medicare, you will not be subject to the 1% tax. However, if you refuse/decline to maintain health insurance, you will be levied with the tax on your income. BT

In other words those who cannot afford the insurance like my family are the ones who will now be punished for being poor in the first place.

Same here. They'll put us in jail and take our home because we can't pay the penalty either.

If the individual mandate is operational and failure to comply is considered a tax evasion act..

then tell me, on a 5th graders level... just how thousands of Corporations that filed for waiver and 10s of thousands of individuals exempted from the required medical coverage are allowed to technically evade this 'TAX,,, and released from the ACA (affordible care act) $$ extortion

elsewise... as is the case... this 'Mandate' placed on the Corporations and Individuals is definitely not a general TAX... but rather a special FEE that applies to only 90+% of the nation...all the illegals with the soon to be Work-Visas
and many of the big Corporations (? perhaps big campaign contributers?) are on the waiver list and exempt from prosecution of not paying the 'tax'


this smacks of the communist politboro and being either on the 'inside' of the party or outside the party system in some financial gulag...

this stinks, fire them all SCOTUS & POTUS

reply to post by sickofitall2012


Actually under the current law there is no civil or criminal penalty, but they can garnish your wages/bank accounts using the tax code laws.

reply to post by beezzer


It is a win for Cloward and Piven overwhelm the system more people using healthcare than paying in.


The Scotus is a joke.