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.
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5
So, I am not forced to purchase something, even if i don't want to?
ROBERTS:
Although the breadth of Congress’s power to tax is greater than its power to regulate commerce, the taxing power does not give Congress the same degree of control over individual behavior (emphasis added). Once we recognize that Congress may regulate a particular decision under the Commerce Clause, the Federal Government can bring its full weight to bear. Congress may simply command individuals to do as it directs. An individual who disobeys may be subjected to criminal sanctions. Those sanctions can include not only fines and imprisonment, but all the attendant consequences of being branded a criminal: deprivation of otherwise protected civil rights, such as the right to bear arms or vote in elections; loss of employment opportunities; social stigma; and severe disabilities in other controversies, such as custody or immigration disputes.
By contrast, Congress’s authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury, no more. If a tax is properly paid, the Government has no power to compel or punish individuals subject to it. We do not make light of the severe burden that taxation—especially taxation motivated by a regulatory purpose—can impose. But imposition of a tax nonetheless leaves an individual with a lawful choice to do or not do a certain act, so long as he is willing to pay a tax levied on that choice.
The Affordable Care Act’s requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax. Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.
Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Indigo5
America is now a corporate dictatorship the sooner you learn that fact the better you understand how we have been sold by the Democrats as a bailout to insurance companies and big pharma.
I hope when reality coming your way you be prepare of what Obama care is all about and is not.edit on 2-7-2012 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5
Oh,, so I don't have to buy health insurance, if I already have it.
But when companies stop offering that, I will then have to purchase it....
Or, if I just want to be taxed, as per penalty, that is collected via the IRS.
So, not restrictive of rights, huh?
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5
You really have to stop relying on talking points.
Originally posted by macman
You basically stated it is only restrictive if you don't have insurance.
Originally posted by clearmind
a thought..so now that this new tax as been passed, how are insurance companies reacting to it..with all the talk going around..i havent really heard any real response from the private companies that are being forced to engage or open up there insurance policies to anybody.....that can pay for them.....my policy premiums will be going up along with deductables....
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by pwndnewb
Healthcare is not health insurance. They are two separate things.
Okay....Half right. They are certainly two different things...but not "seperate".
Boat insurance and neurosurgery are two seperate things.
Health Insurance pays for Healthcare...absent insurance, private or public, healthcare is neither paid for nor provided. They are the precise opposite of seperate.
I have to wonder where a post begining with that whopper of a mistruth is headed.
Originally posted by pwndnewb
Insurance is a totally different thing. It is all about risk.
Risk is premised on choice...it assumes that consumers have the option of insuring themselves, unfortunately for Millions of Americans who cannot afford insurance or have pre-existing conditions or are dropped by their insurers..."risk" is not an option, it is a luxury.
"Risk" is certainly relevant to insurers though. "Medical Loss Ratio"...which is what insurers brag about to Wall Street. The amount of what they collect that they actually pay out toward healthcare for the payees. Or put another way...they are rewarded with profits for denying claims and dropping patients from coverage who are bad "risks"..."bad risks" are people who actually need healthcare.
This is one of the most illogical arguments I see in this debate. We will ALL require medical help at some stage unless you die quick and young. Getting treatment when you are hit by a car is not a choice. Taking your child to the doctor when their life is at risk is not a chioce. Having that cancerous mole removed is not an option...unless you consider death (yourself or a loved one) a good and viable option to the expense.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by pwndnewb
The majority of the healthcare industry and ALL of the insurance industry is all about the almighty dollar.
Yes and unfortunately the viruses and genetic mutations that fuel cancer and other diseases do not understand or care about the almighty dollar. Only the "industry" that treats them. This is a unique disconnect. An absence of a critical variable in the supply and demand equation that underpins capitalism.
Gobbledegook....Of course viruses and genetic mutations, cancers and other diseases don't understand or care about money. Most of the healthcare industry is for profit, so they do care. In my opinion,you are looking at it wrong, healthcare as it relates to industry is a service not a product.
Thier is a fixed supply of disease and car accidents that do not respond to price. There is no consumer choice in getting cancer, but the insurance company can choose to pay for the treatment and the healthcare providers can choose the price of that treatment...the consumer's choice involves treatment or death.
Fixed supply...whatever. Of course they don't care about price, they are occurances. The provider of goods/services usually sets the price.
Originally posted by pwndnewb
something they may or may not use
healthcare is seldom refused or denied to a paying patient, however, quite often, both requested and medically necessary healthcare is denied by insurance beaurocrats.
absent insurance, private or public, healthcare is neither paid for nor provided
because the USSC is charged with upholding the Constitutionality of the law, not some PC viewpoint that hopefully won't elevate the blood pressure of toooo many voters.
Originally posted by butcherguy
The SCOTUS says it is a tax. That would seem to be the final word for now.
That is what made the individual mandate constitutional.
I see it as a penalty. So did Obama. Apparently Mitt Romney sees it that way too. A lot of people do.
I wonder why certain SCOTUS justices don't see it as a penalty?