Page 3 of 122 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The greatest city on Earth
    Last Seen
    08-04-12 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    31,089

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Are you seriously suggesting that bills does nothing more than force people--who couldn't afford health insurance prior--to start paying for health insurance, or pay a fine?

    If they couldn't afford it before, how in the hell are they going to afford it, now?
    um...with govt. help.

    maybe you shouldn't comment on ObamaCare, if you are unfamiliar with the details of ObamaCare.

  2. #22
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,475

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    um...with govt. help.

    maybe you shouldn't comment on ObamaCare, if you are unfamiliar with the details of ObamaCare.
    Which begs the question: what the hell's the real objective of Obamacare, to begin with?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #23
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Here is my prediction: The Supreme Court will uphold parts of Obamacare, while striking down other parts of the law, specifically the requirement that everybody obtain health insurance or face penalties. While it is true that states require you to purchase car insurance, this is done by the states, NOT by the Federal government, and I believe that this is where SCOTUS will draw the line.

    Discussion?

    Article is here.
    The thing with car insurance is that you buy it to protect yourself from other drivers, theft, vandalism, and acts of God (hail damage etc), and it also protects other drivers if you happen to be a negligent driver. With health insurance, you buy it so that you can afford health care if a catastrophic or chronic condition arises, and you don't have the resources to pay for prohibitively expensive medical care.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  4. #24
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    I'm hoping the mandate portion is identified as unconstitutional, because I believe it is in my opinion. There are sections of the bill that do make sense and that should be kept but the main issue for me is, no matter what happens - ObamaCare has to be scrapped financially and reworked.... the cost savings are not there. The costs are 1.2 trillion higher than expected which means politicians over promised as politicians often do, and now reality sets in. We'll go broke. If portions of it like the mandate are struck down, we'll STILL have to rework it because the bill basically cannot fund itself, so it'll have to be reworked anyway. It could go into a single payer system, it could be a system which allows competition across state lines, it could include a total restructuring of health care such that the "insurance" we use isn't used as a payment plan, but is actually used as insurance.

    There's a few ways it could go that would be BETTER... but I have faith in our political system to **** it up royally and choose a worse option than ObamaCare. After all... the more politicians **** our lives up, the more job security they have by taking the next 30 years to "fix" it.
    Stop spreading right wing propoganda. The truth is that the latest CBO analysis found the net cost would be $50 billion LESS than originally estimated. The "double the cost" rhetoric is a flat-out lie, as the new gross cost estimate covers a different time period than the original gross cost estimate.

    But I agree that Obamacare is just a good beginning -- focusing as it did more on expanded coverage than cost containment. Now we need to focus solely on the cost side of the equation.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  5. #25
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:03 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,569

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Which is irrelevant to whether it is or is not a tax.
    No. The legislative intent has a great deal to do with it. If they didn't intend it as a tax, then it's not a tax. This is according to the rules of statutory construction which courts follow.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #26
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Are you seriously suggesting that bills does nothing more than force people--who couldn't afford health insurance prior--to start paying for health insurance, or pay a fine?

    If they couldn't afford it before, how in the hell are they going to afford it, now?
    It's amazing how many people are DETERMINED that the law is evil ... without having a clue what's in it. Now maybe Nancy Pelosi's comment starts to make sense?

    What the bill does, primarily, is extend health insurance to 30 million Americans who don't have it. It doesn't force anyone who can't afford it to buy insurance. But it does attempt to force people who CAN afford it to buy insurance. The bill provides subsidies, on a sliding income scale, for those who can't afford to buy it on their own.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  7. #27
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,475

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Stop spreading right wing propoganda. The truth is that the latest CBO analysis found the net cost would be $50 billion LESS than originally estimated. The "double the cost" rhetoric is a flat-out lie, as the new gross cost estimate covers a different time period than the original gross cost estimate.

    But I agree that Obamacare is just a good beginning -- focusing as it did more on expanded coverage than cost containment. Now we need to focus solely on the cost side of the equation.
    Actually, you're wrong.

    But now that the near-costless years 2010 and 2011 have elapsed, the true 10-year price tag comes into focus. From 2013 through 2022, the CBO reports, the costs of Obamacare come to $1.76 trillion — almost twice the phony original number.

    High Court to hear Obamacare - chicagotribune.com
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #28
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,475

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It's amazing how many people are DETERMINED that the law is evil ... without having a clue what's in it. Now maybe Nancy Pelosi's comment starts to make sense?
    Well, gee whiz! Why don't you educate us...and be sure and cite the bill to support your claims. Thanks in advance.

    What the bill does, primarily, is extend health insurance to 30 million Americans who don't have it. It doesn't force anyone who can't afford it to buy insurance. But it does attempt to force people who CAN afford it to buy insurance. The bill provides subsidies, on a sliding income scale, for those who can't afford to buy it on their own.
    We had to create this monstrocity of a bill to do that?

    I thought that's what medicaid was for.
    Last edited by apdst; 03-26-12 at 01:16 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #29
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    No. The legislative intent has a great deal to do with it. If they didn't intend it as a tax, then it's not a tax. This is according to the rules of statutory construction which courts follow.
    The more important consideration will be whether it has the effect of a tax, intent notwithstanding. Legislative intent is generally only considered when the statutory language is ambiguous and the courts can't figure out what Congress meant to say. That's not the case here. In this case the language is clear but the Court needs to determine the effect of the provision, i.e. whether a tax penalty should be treated like a tax.

    I would argue that it should be treated like a tax because it could have been structured that way without changing its ultimate effect. In other words, instead of imposing a $900 (+ or -) penalty for not buying insurance, Congress could have imposed a $900 tax on EVERYONE -- with a $900 tax credit going to everyone who can show proof of insurance. And I think the "mandate" is consititutional for the very same reason. It's no more a mandate to buy insurance than the home interest deduction is a mandate to buy a home.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  10. #30
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,022

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    I think the individual mandate will be upheld.

    The Federal government has the power to tax, that's a given. Does it have the power to tax if you don't do something? I think SCOTUS will find that it does. If not, Obamacare is gutted.
    Yes the fed govt. has a right to tax. If the health care is a tax, then why doesn't the feds say with this tax, here is your health care policy (like medicare). Why give people a choice since we have to pay the tax.
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

Page 3 of 122 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •