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.

 

Obama: Martin Luther King Jr. would have liked Obamacare

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96

President Obama signaled in an exclusive interview with radio hosts Tom Joyner and Sybil Wilkes that Martin Luther King Jr. would have liked his health care plan for Americans.



Martin will be turning in his grave knowing he is been used for ideas that are totally unrelated to his cause.

I wonder how long before he says "I could of been Martin"


Joke of a president




posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by n00bUK
 





Martin was a real leader.

Obama just plays one on tv.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by BritofTexas
 






You do know that claim is not accurate?

We had income tax for 34 years...1861-1895..then no income tax for the following 18 years until 1913. During that interim and preceeding it going back to the founding, we had all assortment of taxes for Land, Slaves etc. And the "state" siezing" land for taxes was very, very widespread and commonplace because of the high rate of Land taxation.
Plus we had really, really high tarriffs that supplemented the absense of income taxes for the 18 years we went without...in fact the 1913 bill was a swap between tariff reform and income tax.
edit on 27-8-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by butcherguy
 


WWJD?...What Would Jesus Do?....You can claim that anyone that risked trying to answer that question is decietful?

Again it seems petty, but have at it..

You mean the Jesus that is referenced in a book? The book that has the Jesus chapters that were written generations after he died?
I don't know what he would do either.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Did we have Medicaid?
Did we Social Security?
Did we have bills that were really taxes on EVERY American?
Did half our paychecks go to these things?
Did we allow Government out of control spending?


You know damn well we didn't.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by butcherguy
 


WWJD?...What Would Jesus Do?....You can claim that anyone that risked trying to answer that question is decietful?

Again it seems petty, but have at it..

You mean the Jesus that is referenced in a book? The book that has the Jesus chapters that were written generations after he died?
I don't know what he would do either.


Oh...I agree..But there are large swaths of the country that have bumber stickers asking precisely that...and I don't hold it against them either.

Silly OP...Just my 2 cents.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by n00bUK

Martin will be turning in his grave knowing he is been used for ideas that are totally unrelated to his cause.



"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5



We had income tax for 34 years...1861-1895..then no income tax for the following 18 years until 1913.

 


Apparently there was a 42 year period (1871 - 1913) with no 'income tax' ??

from Library of Congress website;

The origin of the income tax on individuals is generally cited as the passage of the 16th Amendment, passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913; however, its history actually goes back even further.

During the Civil War Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861 which included a tax on personal incomes to help pay war expenses. The tax was repealed ten years later.

However, in 1894 Congress enacted a flat rate Federal income tax, which was ruled unconstitutional the following year by the U.S. Supreme Court because it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state.

The 16th amendment, ratified in 1913, removed this objection by allowing the Federal government to tax the income of individuals without regard to the population of each State. For additional information on taxation in the United States, see the section on taxes on the web site of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
History of the US Income Tax



Related History of the US Tax System



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 



By applying the Great Seal of the United States to the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, Knox certified that the requisite number of states had provided Congress with the “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.”




Almost two decades before the amendment was ratified, the Supreme Court had struck down the 1894 law that instituted the first peacetime national income tax. In a decision that shocked most legal experts and social reformers, a slim majority of the court in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. ruled that taxing income violated the “direct tax clause.”



According to the Constitution, direct taxes needed to be apportioned among the states based on population -- meaning that a state’s population determined how much it owed in direct taxes. Reversing almost a century of legal precedent, the court ruled that because the 1894 tax wasn’t apportioned by population it was unconstitutional.


How the Income Tax Created the Modern Fiscal State

Sounds like the 16th amendment needs repealed.


Many conservatives applauded the decision. For them, an income tax was the first step toward class warfare and “creeping socialism.” In his concurrence in Pollock, Justice Stephen J. Field expressed the anxieties of many elites at the time. “The present assault on capital is but the beginning,” he warned. “It will be but the stepping-stone to others, larger and more sweeping, till our political contests will become a war of the poor against the rich; a war constantly growing in intensity and bitterness.”


Funny how conservatives today are vilified for 'their war on the poor'.

Guess the right and left 'must have switched sides'



Field’s remarks came amid tremendous labor strife. And his allusions to a war between the rich and poor fueled fears that an income tax would hurl American society down the slippery slope of socialist revolution. Yet progressive reformers turned to an income tax not to radically redistribute wealth but to pay for a modern industrial state in a fair and effective manner


The Welfare Industrial Complex, and the Military Industrial Complex et. al.

edit on 27-8-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Here is the thing:

If social security, and medicare 'fund themselves' there is absolutely no raison d'etre for the income tax.

As people are paying social security tax,medicare tax, and INCOME tax.

All smoke and mirrors.

Lies would be a more apropo term.
edit on 27-8-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well, things were a bit different back then. Simpler.

Now?

Big Government controlling every aspect.

I think MLK would have been disgusted that minorities, Americans in general are living the way they do. I think many Leaders from the past would echo it.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 



in fact the 1913 bill was a swap between tariff reform and income tax.


WRONG!!!!!!!!!!

1913 is when the Rothchild banking mafia, took over the government of the USA!!!!

Fast forward to today.............how is that fake banking working out for us?

Read "The Creature from Jekyll Island"!
edit on 27-8-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by neo96
 


Well, things were a bit different back then. Simpler.

Now?

Big Government controlling every aspect.

I think MLK would have been disgusted that minorities, Americans in general are living the way they do. I think many Leaders from the past would echo it.


Hell yeah they were could bought a tommy gun (machine gun) for about $20 bucks, and no one woulda give me crap about it.


The good old days.

$100 bucks in 1913 ?

Would have the value of $2360 2013 dollars.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Would MLK have liked Obamacare? Who knows. MLK did believe in GUARANTEED INCOME FOR ALL AMERICANS. Would he have believe in a socialize healthcare system that everyone of all wealth levels would be equal in quality of care?

I bet he would.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
MLK was a socialist and would've preferred a single-payer system.

That doesn't stop anyone from taking Obama's comment out of context though.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
MLK was a socialist and would've preferred a single-payer system.

That doesn't stop anyone from taking Obama's comment out of context though.


But DID he prefer a single payer system ?

I Can't find anything to say he even had any healthcare agenda at all.

And, how was Obama's 'comment' taken out of context ?



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I suppose you're right. I can't reasonably speculate on what a dead man I've never met would prefer or not prefer.

I do know that he was an advocate for socialism and, based upon that, I would imagine he would be opposed to the millions of people who go bankrupt or deeply into debt because their health insurance doesn't fully cover the costs. While his main concern was civil rights of minorities, he did have a few words regarding poverty in America. Poverty in America can, in some cases, be attributed to the high cost of health care. I believe Dr. King would be opposed to that.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


im down for getting rid of the police they are useless anyway, and soon they will just be part of the military.

I like the fire dept they do good work.

Roads?...... were were going we dont need roads.

Military I say bring them all back and keep enough to secure are boarders and escort our trading vessels and ships.

And I would really like our tax money to stop going towards drones and maybe those resources can be used more for space exploration and earth defense from random celestial events.

edit on 27-8-2013 by DocHolidaze because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Then MLK and Obama must be psychic because it is obvious no one knows what is in Obamacare. Furthermore the moment you think you know then it is delayed, changed, mistake, or a myth. This is the most expensive crap ever shoved down American citizen’s throat.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by BritofTexas
 






I'm fine doing away with the income tax, but then again we would have to go back to heavily taxing companies and consumption.

Also, do you really think things were better in 1913? Do you want the road system of 1913?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join