• 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-Part 2[W:1, 183, 386, 590]

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

yup. so, generally speaking, who do you think is going to understand your individual circumstances better in figuring out what you don't need? You? Or someone in a cubicle in Washington trying to make you fit into a box with 125,000,000 others with a one-size-fits-not-quite-anybody solution?

Or to put it another way, who do you think is better able to evaluate the cost/benefit of four or five treatment options for a specific cardiac condition: a panel of the most respected cardiologists in America ... Or Joe the Plumber?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

None of them "hate healthcare" they hate Obamacare.

Yeah, as I clarified earlier, I mean that they hate the healthcare reform.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Correction: they hate OBAMA.


I'm sure some do. Just like you hate Bush.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

What limit is there on the federal power of taxation after Chief Justice Roberts' opinion in Roberts v. America?

The federal government does not have the power to implement taxes that would violate the Constitution, or that are designed with the purpose of discouraging people from exercising their constitutional rights. So for example, the government can't tax me because I don't own a Bible (and they can't impose a specific tax if I *do* buy a Bible). They can't tax me for voting. They can't tax me for not contributing money to a certain political party. Etc, etc.

Furthermore, the main "limit on the federal power of taxation" is the election process. If you think that the government is taxing you too much or taxing you for the wrong things, then vote for someone else.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Or to put it another way, who do you think is better able to evaluate the cost/benefit of four or five treatment options for a specific cardiac condition: a panel of the most respected cardiologists in America ... Or Joe the Plumber?

:lamo you think 15 people in Washington DC will be deciding cases for 311 million people on an individual basis :lamo
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The federal government does not have the power to implement taxes that would violate the Constitution, or that are designed with the purpose of discouraging people from exercising their constitutional rights. So for example, the government can't tax me because I don't own a Bible (and they can't impose a specific tax if I *do* buy a Bible). They can't tax me for voting. They can't tax me for not contributing money to a certain political party. Etc, etc.

Furthermore, the main "limit on the federal power of taxation" is the election process. If you think that the government is taxing you too much or taxing you for the wrong things, then vote for someone else.
But if they can now legally tax you for NOT owning health insurance, why could they not tax you for not owning a bible?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

But if they can now legally tax you for NOT owning health insurance, why could they not tax you for not owning a bible?

Because that would violate the first amendment.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2[W:1]

Obamacare will go on forever. It won't end in ten years or twelve years. The cost overrun will go on year after year after year.

There is no cost overrun, at least not yet. The ACA's financial figures look slightly better today than they did when the CBO first scored it in 2010.

Democrats will have to have conservative cooperation. But conservatives don't believe Democrats act in good faith. That's a problem for the left isn't it?

You are the one trying to foment racial resentment, flat-out lying about policies, and telling me that "I need to convince conservatives" instead of actually refuting the substantive points I made (a basic acknowledgement that you know I'm right and simply don't care). So you aren't exactly in a good position to accuse anyone else of not acting in good faith.

With all due respect, and admiration for your tenacity, you are honestly mistaken. You base your opinion on the dissembling of others.

No I'm not. I base it on the CBO's latest report, from March 13, 2012:

"CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period."
CBO | CBO Releases Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act

Are you saying that the CBO didn't report earlier this year that Obamacare will cost $1.76 trillion?

This is because we're two years closer to implementation than we were when the bill was passed. Of course 2010-2019 isn't going to cost as much as 2012-2021. The main provisions don't take effect until 2014. This has been known from the beginning and is hardly some surprising new cost overrun. The CBO estimates that the ACA will produce a surplus every year until 2014, dip into a slight deficit in 2014-2015, and then produce a surplus again from 2016 onward.

Can you name an entitlement program that has ever come in under budget or at budget over a period of twenty years?

Medicare Part D seems to be staying within its budget so far...although that's more due to external factors (e.g. generic drugs, rate of new drug development, etc) than government policy. In fact, the CBO has historically overestimated the cost of health care spending:
New Research Finds Congressional Budget Office Has Underestimated Savings and Overestimated Costs from Health Policy Changes - The Commonwealth Fund

There are a lot of sick old folks who are going to overwhelm America during the next twenty years. The way to break Obamacare is to have it harm the economy and screw up people's lives. Those are the rules of the game.

At least you acknowledge your goals are to break Obamacare, harm the economy, and screw up people's lives, so that you can win the game you're playing. What was that about Democrats not negotiating in good faith again?

Do you think conservatives are going to believe you or me. It's only necessary to persuade conservatives in order to monkey wrench Obamacare over the years.

I'm just telling you the facts. You've already made up your mind and aren't interested in an exchange of ideas, or learning the reality...you've basically admitted that you just want to spread misinformation and lies (not to mention scapegoating racial minorities) for political gain. So I really don't see the point of continuing this conversation.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

:lamo you think 15 people in Washington DC will be deciding cases for 311 million people on an individual basis :lamo

Of course not. :roll:

If the panel studies the literature and determines that, e.g. when a patient presents with test results LIKE Joe's, then a stent is both cheaper and more effective than open heart surgery, then I suspect that their judgment is probably better than any decision that Joe the Plumber is likely to come up with.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

yup. so, generally speaking, who do you think is going to understand your individual circumstances better in figuring out what you don't need? You? Or someone in a cubicle in Washington trying to make you fit into a box with 125,000,000 others with a one-size-fits-not-quite-anybody solution?

It depends what exactly you mean by "what you need." You're probably a better judge of whether or not you need to get a certain symptom checked out by a doctor. But the guy in a cubicle in Washington is probably a better judge than you of which procedures are actually effective and which are just a waste of money. Why? Because he has access to aggregated data from all over the country that can compare costs and efficacy, whereas all you have is the opinion of one doctor (who may not be a disinterested party in your decision). Since most people are not medical experts, they will likely just go with whatever their doctor tells them to do in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

no. just the policies. Obama's favorabilities are much higher than the health insurance bill tax that bears his name.

And the individual provisions of the ACA (with the exception of the mandate) poll better than the law as a whole. So what's your point?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

But if they can now legally tax you for NOT owning health insurance, why could they not tax you for not owning a bible?

Because you have a constitutional right to not own a Bible. You don't have a constitutional right to not own health insurance.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Because that would violate the first amendment.
Ok, replace bible with Chevy Volt or any other non religious product or service.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Ok, replace bible with Chevy Volt or any other non religious product or service.

Yes, the government can and does tax you for not owning a Chevy Volt. They just call it a tax credit, and they give it to people who *do* buy hybrid and electric cars.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Ok, replace bible with Chevy Volt or any other non religious product or service.

Yes, then if we voted for representatives that would tax us for not owning a chevy volt, that would be legal.

Not that taxing inefficient cars would be stupid. It would actually be a very smart policy. But, regardless, it isn't possible to have a document that prevents us from doing stupid things. Any constitutional power could be used stupidly. The People have the power, through the Congress, to build so many post offices that they block out the sun. That is an unlimited, explicitly granted, power the Congress gets in the constitution. But the government doesn't do that because obviously they would be voted out.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The federal government does not have the power to implement taxes that would violate the Constitution, or that are designed with the purpose of discouraging people from exercising their constitutional rights. So for example, the government can't tax me because I don't own a Bible (and they can't impose a specific tax if I *do* buy a Bible). They can't tax me for voting. They can't tax me for not contributing money to a certain political party. Etc, etc.

Furthermore, the main "limit on the federal power of taxation" is the election process. If you think that the government is taxing you too much or taxing you for the wrong things, then vote for someone else.

What you're suggesting is that there is absolutely no limitation on federal power to accomplish whatever it wants except to the extent it imposes a burden on things like the right to free speech, assembly, and a few of the non-economic rights under the Bill of Rights.

It seems to me you believe in what some call post-modern liberalism as opposed to classical liberalism. There are now no limitations on the growth of federal power to bureaucratize all economic spheres in American life.

Voting is only one part of opposition. It is perfectly legitimate to sabotage the political agenda of one's opponents.

There is no limit on the vision of the American left. There is nothing the left cannot impose on people who are classical liberals.

America is now based on separate identity politics. The Democratic Party is primarily a party of non-whites and very well heeled and educated whites. The Republican Party is primarily the party of non-elite whites. Do you see how the attempt by one side to impose its will on the other side in the era of a shrinking/slow growing economic pie will have explosive consequences for American social cohesion? America is going to become a much more deeply divided country in which grievances are held by all groups.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Yes, the government can and does tax you for not owning a Chevy Volt. They just call it a tax credit, and they give it to people who *do* buy hybrid and electric cars.

The point being that the state can now tax you for not doing something they want you to do. Not sure why people would support that sort of thing.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

America is now based on separate identity politics. The Democratic Party is primarily a party of non-whites and very well heeled and educated whites. The Republican Party is primarily the party of non-elite whites. Do you see how the attempt by one side to impose its will on the other side in the era of a shrinking/slow growing economic pie will have explosive consequences for American social cohesion? America is going to become a much more deeply divided country in which grievances are held by all groups.

NON ELITE WHITES!?!?!?!?!?!?

Amazing.

So all these rich GOP office holders are just shot and a beer bowling alley types?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The point being that the state can now tax you for not doing something they want you to do. Not sure why people would support that sort of thing.

News flash: they always could (and did).

Why do you think our health care system is based on employer-provided coverage?

The reason is that employers have long been "mandated" to provide insurance — through the tax code. The employer health insurance deduction is far and away the biggest deduction we have. It costs over $150 billion/yr. In other words, if you have insurance through your employer then your health care has always been subsidized by the government.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

NON ELITE WHITES!?!?!?!?!?!?

Amazing.

So all these rich GOP office holders are just shot and a beer bowling alley types?

The Republican voters mostly are less educated whites. The Republican politicians are mostly elites. And obviously the platform is exclusively designed to serve the elites. It's bizarre.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

What you're suggesting is that there is absolutely no limitation on federal power to accomplish whatever it wants except to the extent it imposes a burden on things like the right to free speech, assembly, and a few of the non-economic rights under the Bill of Rights.

Correct.

It seems to me you believe in what some call post-modern liberalism as opposed to classical liberalism. There are now no limitations on the growth of federal power to bureaucratize all economic spheres in American life.

Yup.

Voting is only one part of opposition. It is perfectly legitimate to sabotage the political agenda of one's opponents.

So that's why you're purposely spreading lies and misinformation, and fomenting racism.

There is no limit on the vision of the American left. There is nothing the left cannot impose on people who are classical liberals.

With the exception of those constitutional limitations I mentioned, that's a fair assessment of my position, yes.

America is now based on separate identity politics. The Democratic Party is primarily a party of non-whites and very well heeled and educated whites. The Republican Party is primarily the party of non-elite whites.

The Republican Party is the party of bitter old white dudes, and their wives. The Democratic Party is the party of everyone else. :lol:
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

The point being that the state can now tax you for not doing something they want you to do. Not sure why people would support that sort of thing.

If we define any collected by the government as a TAX the way Roberts did - and that includes fines, penalties, fees, assessments and anything else that separates a citizen from his money, then we have been doing just that in many many ways for a long long time now.

If I do not buckle my seat belt in the car I can be fined..... hit with a penalty .... in Roberts think - I can be taxed for it.

People have supported such things for a long time now.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

...
Furthermore, the main "limit on the federal power of taxation" is the election process. If you think that the government is taxing you too much or taxing you for the wrong things, then vote for someone else.

I don't think that's true any more. About half of the people in the country are beneficiaries of federal largess paid for at the expense of a separate and distinct group of other people. The image of someone milking a cow comes to mind.

China is going to rock America's world. America won't be able to cope because of its internal divisions. Deeply divided peoples cannot cope with peer powers with social cohesion. Foreign powers are the only limitation on the power of the American left. Those powers have the ability to change ground level reality for America and American workers. This is the cold hard face of reality that will undermine the Blue Social Model by disempowering America. That is the only check on your side's power.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Yes, the government can and does tax you for not owning a Chevy Volt. They just call it a tax credit, and they give it to people who *do* buy hybrid and electric cars.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the hybrid credit is no longer available.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

I don't think that's true any more. About half of the people in the country are beneficiaries of federal largess paid for at the expense of a separate and distinct group of other people. The image of someone milking a cow comes to mind.

China is going to rock America's world. America won't be able to cope because of its internal divisions. Deeply divided peoples cannot cope with peer powers with social cohesion. Foreign powers are the only limitation on the power of the American left. Those powers have the ability to change ground level reality for America and American workers. This is the cold hard face of reality that will undermine the Blue Social Model by disempowering America. That is the only check on your side's power.

You could have been describing the late Thirties. What happened in 1941 to change all that?

If there is a good reason to unite, Americans will unite. If people push them to disunity, if people encourage dissolution, if extremists stir the waters of discontent and push for things like secession and the falling apart of America, then that sort of self fulfilling prophecy is on them.
 
Back
Top Bottom