• 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]

A healthier nation is a stronger nation and a harder-working nation.

The ACA will help achieve this.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Don't feel sorry so fast.



Add to that $5 trillion in new debt, stagnant economy and over 1 million filing new jobless claims per month vs 169,000 new jobs an what do you get?

I can see you are unfamiliar with the health care bill. Folks making more than 133% of the Federal Poverty Level and you pay for insurance or pay the $600 a year tax. A single person making over $14,856 would have to pay for insurance (on $14,856, really?) or $600 tax. A married couple with no kids making over $20,122 a year would be required to pay for insurance for 2 or the tax for 2. A family of 4, 2 adults and 2 kids making over $30,656 a year would have to buy insurance for 4 or pay double the tax for the adults. I'm sure all of them will think this is a really good idea when they vote in November.

Folks at the low end of the scale will have to pay something towards their insurance, but it's subsidized on a sliding scale, with the subsidy phasing out as income rises. Would you prefer that they just get free health care?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Where were you guys during the court case? I'm sure if you'd presented your arguments to the court they'd side with you. I honestly wonder why SCOTUS never listens to all the critics. I'm not saying they're infallible - but I doubt the arguments you guys are making were radically different from those made in court. If the courts didn't listen to the team of high powered attorneys - why would they listen to you? Why did ROBERTS a supposed "Constitutionalist" side with Obama?

Hat, this ruling is a disaster for people like me because our quality of health care will deteriorate. In order to snatch something useful from this ruling I believe in stoking resentment in order to achieve political advantage. That's perfectly acceptable.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

I tried to warn folks not to get too far ahead of themselves and think they already know the outcome. What I hope is that they go back to work and craft something better. UHC would be best. A public option second best. But we'll just have to see how it plays out.

So this assault on our liberty wasn't staggering enough for you.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

That's your subjective opinion to which you are entitled. I don't agree with you about the motivating effect of this decision. No one can deny that $500 billion is being transferred from Medicare to Obamacare. The de facto impact is to transfer health care from white seniors to non-whites. This is the basis for deep resentment. Resentment is the basis for political action.

Political speech often hurts the feelings of others. This is regrettable, but is a necessary predicate for political organization and action. African America has shown the way in which resentment can be used for political purposes. In doing so the precedent was established.

race-baiting this issue & discussion, is a horrible tactic that will surely hurt your cause.

if the GOPers in the House & Senate replicated your strategy, the Democrats would soon rule this country.
 
Re: Entire Healthcare Law Upheld

I love that far-right talking point on this is "See, it is a tax, it is a tax. He's raising taxes." They're all embracing a weak parsing of words to make a meaningless point.


Hey Tea Party and Very-Conservatives:

Explain this --


If conservatism is about personal responsibility, then why should people NOT purchase health care if they can afford it? Why should people of means be allowed to just show up at the emergency room and get free health care?

Do you want to pay the bill for a young married couple who would rather spend money on a nice new BMW than buy the minimum health coverage -- but they wrap that nice new BMW around a tree while touring Napa Valley. They were young and healthy and invincible, so why should they worry about health coverage? It's they're "right" to no be covered. Damn Obama and his socialism, now they have to be responsible citizens and postpone napa until they can really afford it. Damn Mitt Romney and the Heritage foundation for inventing and testing the individual mandate at the state level.

With the GOP it seems that personal responsibility only applies to the unemployed people who got laid off their job--those bums need to get a job. But people with money can get a free ride in the emergency room.

I await an explanation.

You say 'tax' I say tomato and not being burden on society when you drink and eat your way into the emergency room.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Was today's decision a defeat for Conservatives? Not necessarily, and here's why. What would definitely have been ruled Constitutional would have been to put EVERYBODY in the US under Medicare, thus giving us a system just like Canada's. Medicare is already settled law, and the only thing that would have to be done is merely changing the age from 65 to 0. Obamacare may be upon us, but it could have been a lot worse, had the Democrats pushed for a change in Medicare and won.

Conservatives should not see todays ruling as either a victory or as a defeat. It's more like a tie in a football game, which is tantamount to having to kiss your sister. Liberals should see it the same way, since if they got what they wanted, Canada's system would be America's system too. And yes, today's ruling is an ugly looking sister too. :mrgreen:

Consider for a moment what was really done. "Private" medical insurance now must provide whatever benefits (minimum AND maximum) that the gov't dictates, in ALL states. Also gov't may limit the maximum premium AND "overhead" costs that "private" insurance companies may charge. If the gov't requires "private" insurance companies to provide $7K average annual benefits per insured, yet restricts their premiums to $7K max annually, they close their doors, as profit is then impossible. About 90% of medical insurance is now provided as an employer paid benefit, that will drop to about 70% under ObamaCare INITIALLY, but fall very fast as ALL premiums will soon rise to the gov't impossed maximum limit, causing more and more employers to drop that benefit in favor of the MUCH less expensive fine. This is VERY good for the gov't, since what was once a tax free employer benefit will then be paid using taxable employee salary money, creating a HUGE windfall in FIT and FICA tax revenues. Hmm...
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

And Roberts helped them.

And that totally blows me away. I never could have seen this in a million years.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Folks at the low end of the scale will have to pay something towards their insurance, but it's subsidized on a sliding scale, with the subsidy phasing out as income rises. Would you prefer that they just get free health care?

I'm realizing were arguing with people 'educated' by Glenn Beck.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Folks at the low end of the scale will have to pay something towards their insurance, but it's subsidized on a sliding scale, with the subsidy phasing out as income rises. Would you prefer that they just get free health care?

As though the prosperity of the poor has ever risen by receiving welfare. We have the same percentage of poor now as we did then, and you think by continuing that thinking, it will change.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

So this assault on our liberty wasn't staggering enough for you.

its no more staggering than the Militia Act of 1792, which required Americans to buy something in order to provide for our nation's greater-good.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

I think the Civil War turned out correctly.
Sure.





It's your responsibility to prove the truth of the matter you assert to be true.
FactCheck.org : ‘RomneyCare’ Facts and Falsehoods






All is fair in love and war.
So is hypocrisy, and this isn't about love.








Actually, my views are so eclectic that you probably haven't encountered someone like me who draws from both left and right.
Picking the worst from multiple sources isn't what I call eclectic.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

And that totally blows me away. I never could have seen this in a million years.

The Dubya's legacy is intact.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Actually Medicare for all would have been much, much better, and I hope we are heading into that direction.

It would have been better to leave my health care alone. Then I wouldn't be so resentful. The military budget could have been cut in order to provide health care coverage for the uninsured. It wasn't necessary to harm me and people similarly situated in order to expand health care coverage.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Actually Medicare for all would have been much, much better, and I hope we are heading into that direction.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on that. Does healthcare need reform? Yes. Is the expansion of government the answer? No.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

And I must say, it is amazing that John Roberts, who was GWB's nominee and the Chief Justice, is the one who made the deciding vote. Fun times we live in. :)

I don't like how the court is full of super conservatives and liberals... I think the court can be easily corrupted.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Consider for a moment what was really done. "Private" medical insurance now must provide whatever benefits (minimum AND maximum) that the gov't dictates, in ALL states. Also congress may limit the maximum premium AND "overhead" costs that "private" insurance companies may charge. If the gov't requires "private" insurance companies to provide $7K average annual benefits per insured, yet restricts their premiums to $7K max annually, they close their doors, as profit is then impossible. About 90% of medical insurance is now provided as an employer paid benefit, that will drop to about 70% under ObamaCare INITIALLY, but fall very fast as ALL premiums will soon rise to the gov't impossed maximum limit, causing more and more employers to drop that benefit in favor of the MUCH less expensive fine. This is VERY good for the gov't, as what was a tax free employer benefit is now paid by after tax employee money, creating a HUGE windfall in FIT and FICA tax revenues. Hmm...

My premiums were rising a lot before health care reform. Who do I blame for that? Just like we shouldn't have bought into all the hype before the ruling, we shouldn't buy into the hype about and doomsayers about what will happen now. When will we ever elarn?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

And that totally blows me away. I never could have seen this in a million years.

Maybe you should substitute Roberts for Bush now.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

It would have been better to leave my health care alone. Then I wouldn't be so resentful. The military budget could have been cut in order to provide health care coverage for the uninsured. It wasn't necessary to harm me and people similarly situated in order to expand health care coverage.
Your HC will cost you less, if you want to pay more.....you can...if you want.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Again, you are making it a race issue, it doesn't fly, it doesn't motivate your side and makes you look really bad. But please....don't stop, that helps my side.

You are entitled to your opinion. To the extent your side organizes for solidarity against my side the divisions in this country will be exacerbated.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Anyone know what the case number for this is?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

The Dubya's legacy is intact.

I was bashing W when bashing W wasn't cool, but I always praised him for his choice of judges. I don't believe Bush could have imagined this scenario. Not with the credentials Roberts had at the time Bush appointed him. I still give Bush a A+ on judges, despite today's ruling.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Your HC will cost you less, if you want to pay more.....you can...if you want.

I can't predict the future, but our increase this year was the least we've had in the last decade.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

You are entitled to your opinion. To the extent your side organizes for solidarity against my side the divisions in this country will be exacerbated.

We're not going to have another civil war. It's 2012, not the 1860s. Good luck getting Cons/Libs to actually go at it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom