• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758, 1205]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

ttwtt78640 said:
Unlike the federal gov't (that now spends 40% more than it taxes), states must TAX to spend, as they must balance budgets (remember when the federl gov't last did that?). So a state, like Texas, must ACTUALLY take from the taxpayers to give to the poor, doubling the medicaid spending is not FREE to the state, they must double their spending too, to get those "free" matching federal funds. Get real!
Click to expand...

Yes but every $1 that Texas (or any other state) collects to pay for this Medicaid expansion, they'll actually be able to put $2 towards the program. That's a great deal and any governor/legislature would be stupid not to take it. I have no doubt that there are some who WILL be that stupid, at least in the short term. But I strongly suspect that 5 years from now, they'll all be on board. Even the Republican states will simply wait until no one is looking, then quietly enact it.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Boo Radley said:
With our tax dollars? :confused:
Click to expand...

No, once off welfare after 5 years which should be the maximum allowed.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

iguanaman said:
It ends with a decent job for everyone that wants one, and food and housing for all. The Constitution gives us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That's a problem to you?
Click to expand...
And you don't understand that simple phrase either do you?

Do you believe your neighbors must pay for your pursuits? I think you do.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Gimmesometruth said:
Who was already what?
Click to expand...

I'll post it again just for you.

"uninsured" does NOT mean can't get health care. The HRSA on-line finder has a low cost/no cost Federally funded Health clinics.

Federally-funded health centers care for you, even if you have no health insurance. You pay what you can afford, based on your income. Health centers provide

1. checkups when you're well
2. treatment when you're sick
3. complete care when you're pregnant
4. immunizations and checkups for your children
5. dental care and prescription drugs for your family
6. mental health and substance abuse care if you need it

Health centers are in most cities and many rural areas. Type in your address and click the 'Find Health Centers' button to find health centers near you.

HRSA - Find a Health Center - Search Page
Click to expand...
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

ARealConservative said:
I’ll hold out a while longer and just wait for social conservatives to use this new power in a way that liberals hate.
Click to expand...

What "new power"? Roberts' decision was very narrow, and simply reaffirmed the federal government's power to levy a tax. That power has existed under our Constitution since, umm, always.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

jpevans said:

This from one so insecure he has to follow along & use the same type & font as everyone else, when there are untold combinations of font, type & color just waiting to be used. :peace

I think this would suit a clownboy. :lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo
Click to expand...

Perhaps you might want to comment on topic to the thread and respond to the thread topic?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Liberals cheer over law that feeds corporations billions of dollars. :shock:
Weird twist of irony here.

In all seriousness, I disagree with decision of course, but it's not really surprising how they ruled.
What's more surprising is that Roberts ruled in favor, while Kennedy didn't.
I would expect the opposite.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

hazlnut said:
Yes, we all agree that the ACA needs to be better explained.

Before the election they should run a number of hour long programs on prime time networks. Showing how the ACA works and how people will benefit from it.

Allow fact-checkers to fairly comment on its accuracy as well as the inaccuracy of the fox news spin after the programs air.
Click to expand...

WRONG. You do that BEFORE you get in that back room to write, pass it and toss out waivers to your friends. That way the elected representatives can REPRESENT. We do not send these clowns to DC to write massive tomes that they can't even understand, pass them and THEN, years later tell us what the deal is. Every moron that voted for this mess should be defeated in the next election. Pelosi said it best, "we must pass the bill so we can see what is in it". Yes they did!
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

We're screwed.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

iguanaman said:
So that's a "yes", you support bailouts when people or corporations gamble and lose. We simply can't afford that sorry.
Healthcare coverage means just that... not some sort of pick and choose like a Chinese restaurant menu.
Click to expand...
You show again that you do not understand what it means to be a free adult. You do not understand private property rights. You do not understand entering into contracts. And you have the heart of a thug. You want someone else to pay for your stuff. Your words so very clearly reveal you.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Prof. Peabody said:
they already were!!!!!!! Uninsured were getting health care so why Obama Care????
Click to expand...

Which is EXACTLY why the affordable care act makes sense. Our emergency rooms can now go back to being emergency rooms and not free/low cost clinics....and we can provide more healthcare, to more people at a better cost.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

What if...? said:
Don't be surprised if it turns out Roberts decision sabotages Obamas re-election.

Or it was calculated to avoid apathetic democrats being galvanized by an overturn.

I smells a rat, I tells ya. Dont trust Roberts as far as I could poop him.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Roberts knew that overturning such an important bill would discredit the court beyond repair. He couldn't allow that. Conservatives are against legislating from the bench anyway aren't they?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Prof. Peabody said:
they already were!!!!!!! Uninsured were getting health care so why Obama Care????
Click to expand...
No, they are by and large not.

Most were depending on expensive ER services. We all are paying for that.

But you avoided the point, you presented govt care as a positive thing.....but you do not want it, at all, so why advocate for it?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Harry Guerrilla said:
Liberals cheer over law that feeds corporations billions of dollars. :shock:
Weird twist of irony here.

In all seriousness, I disagree with decision of course, but it's not really surprising how they ruled.
What's more surprising is that Roberts ruled in favor, while Kennedy didn't.
I would expect the opposite.
Click to expand...

It's not surprising, Roberts is a neocon plant; Kennedy is just a slightly left moderate.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Kandahar said:
What "new power"? Roberts' decision was very narrow, and simply reaffirmed the federal government's power to levy a tax. That power has existed under our Constitution since, umm, always.
Click to expand...

No, not always. Before Madison v Marbury established precedent, even Jefferson did not think the court had the power. Quite simply, if you read the federalist, or any of Madison's writings of the time, the SCOTUS was not to be a "co-equal" branch of government, but rather a referee between the Executive and the Judiciary.

That aside, what this decision does is to make a new right for the federal government to tax private transactional inactivity.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Kandahar said:
What "new power"? Roberts' decision was very narrow, and simply reaffirmed the federal government's power to levy a tax. That power has existed under our Constitution since, umm, always.
Click to expand...

Let’s not play dumb here. Nearly all constitutional scholars(and nearly 75% of Americans polled) found the individual mandate to be a new power. It is certainly a new use of power not previously used, and I think all you cheerleaders would be well served to wait and see how corporate ran government uses this new power in the future before waving the pom poms further.

I see it ending quite badly.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Misterveritis said:
You show again that you do not understand what it means to be a free adult. You do not understand private property rights. You do not understand entering into contracts. And you have the heart of a thug. You want someone else to pay for your stuff. Your words so very clearly reveal you.
Click to expand...

Again it comes down to the fear that somebody else will benefit from your money. That has been the American way for generations and you are just coming to that realization now? It is sort of funny.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

apdst said:
We're screwed.
Click to expand...

Hasn't the sky fallen already? I mean, it's been falling for years. :coffeepap
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Navy Pride said:
So your willing to pay for the poors medical..........What about a job, car to get to the job, food, a house to live in.............Where does it end for you socialists?
Click to expand...

What would Jesus do?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

hazlnut said:
Reading not easy... must try harder.
Click to expand...


Being a SA seems to come easy for you though. Thanks
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

danarhea said:
What would Jesus do?
Click to expand...

He wouldn't rob peter to pay paul.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Thunder said:
50,700,000 is only 1% of 320,000,000?

try 16%.
Click to expand...

It was a typo, and the population is more like 350mil
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652]

Kandahar said:
Yes but every $1 that Texas (or any other state) collects to pay for this Medicaid expansion, they'll actually be able to put $2 towards the program. That's a great deal and any governor/legislature would be stupid not to take it. I have no doubt that there are some who WILL be that stupid, at least in the short term. But I strongly suspect that 5 years from now, they'll all be on board. Even the Republican states will simply wait until no one is looking, then quietly enact it.
Click to expand...

Heh, that's like my wife coming home to tell me she saved 50% on her $2000 purchase. Of course we couldn't afford to spend anything to begin with and what she actually did is spend $2000 we couldn't afford to spend in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom