Page 55 of 122 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765105 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #541
    Professor
    Billy the Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,449

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    What the news is saying:

    Post Politics: Breaking Politics News, Political Analysis & More - The Washington Post

    "Supreme Courtís health-care ruling could deal dramatic blow to Obama presidency

    U.S. Political News, Opinion and Analysis - HuffPost Politics

    "Supreme Court Health Care Decision: Does Worst-Case Scenario Have Bright Side For Obamacare?

    Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com

    "Obama lawyer asks Supreme Court to save healthcare law

    See all the "know-it-alls" are as confused as those in the hinterlands.

  2. #542
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Obama care as it was writtin is corporate socialism. A person to literally be born indebted to private, for profit corporations that they must labor weeks out of every year as government mandated servants of that company. If the person does not, the person is stripped off all citizens' rights - including the right to vote, own a firearm etc, all personal property can be seized and the person jailed.

    Walt Whitman on Waldon pond would have been a tax evading criminal. You are born obligated to work weeks a year solely to give it to corporate America - those corporations that most buy politicans to get on the approved list. Given $10 million to politicians and they'll give that insurance company $10 billion out of our paychecks. That's the real reality. Doing it as an actuarial, if a person has $100,000 heart surgery cost, the insurance company gets $10,000 - that we paid - for doing nothing but adding another level of paperwork and getting that paperwork wrong 20% of the time. That $10,000 taken from us by the government under every possible threat was not for healthcare. It was paperwork hassles and being on hold begging the insurance company to honor the policy before you die for lack of surgery.

    Insurance companies provide exactly zero medical services. They only add another layer of paperwork and delay, skimming off healthcare money. This is not whether the government can require people to pay for healthcare. It is about whether the government can require people to give money to corporations selected by the government for the corporation's profit of no benefit to the citizen whatsoever - those corporations selected upon which most bribes and pays off those within government.

    This would be no different than if Congress under Bush passed a law that everyone has to send $1000 to Dick Cheney's Haliburton corporation, claiming national defense is to everyone's benefit and since military equipment is moved about the USA it is a matter of national commerce. The money insurance companies will skim off of every single healthcare dollar every American spends is not for ANY medical service at all. Insurance companies don't provide as much as an aspirin.
    Last edited by joko104; 03-29-12 at 11:23 AM.

  3. #543
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    See what I mean?
    Oh, you meant that some people have actually read and understood the constitution and federalist papers? Yeah, some of us have. Obviously some, like yourself, have not.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  4. #544
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    Cpwill's statement, even if you disagree with it, at least sought to put forward a legitimate definition and line in regards to what judicial activism is in his opinion and gave a fair explanation of it. Essentially his view seems to be that "Judicial Activism" is a process in which judges put forth an affirmative argument that the consitution infers or states something that it doesn't clearly indicate and uses that affirmative argument as the basis for its ruling.
    The problem with that definition is that everyone who disagrees with a decision thinks that the court put forth an affirmative argument that the constitution infers or states something that it doesn't. Thus, to me, that definition is meaningless. It's the same thing as saying that you disagree with the decision. To me, judicial activism implies a motive, i.e. the court deliberately misconstrued the Constitution in order to substitute its political or philosophical judgment for that of the legislature.
    "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. #545
    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 Arbo View Post
    If it is upheld, it WOULD be activism of some sort.
    By definition it can't be activism if the Court simply let's a piece of legislation stand. Activism means that the Court substituted its judgment for the judgment of our elected representatives.
    "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

  6. #546
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    By definition it can't be activism if the Court simply let's a piece of legislation stand. Activism means that the Court substituted its judgment for the judgment of our elected representatives.
    If they uphold something because their 'party' supports it, over what the constitution says about the issue, it is activism. It may be activism via inactivity, but it is activism the same.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  7. #547
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    "Judicial Activism" simply means the court is legislating rather than adjudicating.

    For example, if the Court came back with "we decided a better way than Obama Care to address healthcare is..." or rewrote the bill to their own designs - and then order it be done.

  8. #548
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Oh, you meant that some people have actually read and understood the constitution and federalist papers? Yeah, some of us have. Obviously some, like yourself, have not.
    I don't think so. I think it is not being able to accept that you lost the argument in court. Both sides look at the law. it is that simple. Don't like it, make a better argument.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #549
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    "Judicial Activism" simply means the court is legislating rather than adjudicating.

    For example, if the Court came back with "we decided a better way than Obama Care to address healthcare is..." or rewrote the bill to their own designs - and then order it be done.
    I think some people are confused about the term. It is most commonly defined along the lines of " a "philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions.""
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  10. #550
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    "Judicial Activism" simply means the court is legislating rather than adjudicating.

    For example, if the Court came back with "we decided a better way than Obama Care to address healthcare is..." or rewrote the bill to their own designs - and then order it be done.
    yes, they would have to re-write it and not rule on a legal issue.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Posting Permissions

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