Shoobee
Regular Member
This is called the fallacy of false generalization.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
SCOTUS Strikes Down HealthCare Law...
- Thread starter Beretta92FSLady
- Start date
This is called the fallacy of false generalization.
Shoobee
Regular Member
Hey I qualified for private medical insurance, and with high deductibles it only costs me $300 per month including dental.
I am not worried about me.
I am happy for the hospitals that staring in 2014 will start to get paid for giving emergency room care to the poor and uninsured.
georg jetson
Regular Member
You missed the point of my post. Go re-read and THEN comment.
Last edited:
Tawnos
Regular Member
Haven't bothered with the thread, I suppose it's full of the usual. That said, this is my previous commentary on this:
I dislike this ruling. Not because I think our healthcare system is good, or because I think that a public option is a bad idea, but because the implications of the ruling are terrible. Something I stated earlier to a comic a friend put up:
Another cut to the battered and abused body of federalism and separation of powers. It might be palatable if this were actually public healthcare, as the comic alleges. Instead, it's mandated private healthcare, without a public option.
The ruling effectively means the federal government may not only control what commerce you may engage in, but may dictate commerce that you must engage in. If you don't engage in it, you pay for it, thereby effectively causing you to engage in it. The laboratories of democracy are closed, we're now a centralized planning society.
What's troubling isn't the public healthcare aspect of this. I think public healthcare is a good thing, but I think it's being done wrong, and the way it was just approved has deeper implications. The effect of this ruling is that the government may, for example, demand you buy a bicycle. If you don't, you have to pay a certain amount to the bicycles for america fund. Same with a gun, a jar of vegemite, etc. No effective limit to the effect of the taxation power of congress has been set. In fact, that limit has been effectively blown out the door.
The comic spawning the above:
I dislike this ruling. Not because I think our healthcare system is good, or because I think that a public option is a bad idea, but because the implications of the ruling are terrible. Something I stated earlier to a comic a friend put up:
Another cut to the battered and abused body of federalism and separation of powers. It might be palatable if this were actually public healthcare, as the comic alleges. Instead, it's mandated private healthcare, without a public option.
The ruling effectively means the federal government may not only control what commerce you may engage in, but may dictate commerce that you must engage in. If you don't engage in it, you pay for it, thereby effectively causing you to engage in it. The laboratories of democracy are closed, we're now a centralized planning society.
What's troubling isn't the public healthcare aspect of this. I think public healthcare is a good thing, but I think it's being done wrong, and the way it was just approved has deeper implications. The effect of this ruling is that the government may, for example, demand you buy a bicycle. If you don't, you have to pay a certain amount to the bicycles for america fund. Same with a gun, a jar of vegemite, etc. No effective limit to the effect of the taxation power of congress has been set. In fact, that limit has been effectively blown out the door.
The comic spawning the above:
Ca Patriot
Regular Member
You should replace the word "public" and instead use the word "government".
Government schools ? Total failure in educating children and costs way too much money.
Government water system ? Arrowhead works great for me.
Government highways ? Toll roads are better maintained and cost alot less money.
Government parks ? I agree they have a place.
Government health care ? Stay out of my body and dont make me pay for yours.
Government schools ? Total failure in educating children and costs way too much money.
Government water system ? Arrowhead works great for me.
Government highways ? Toll roads are better maintained and cost alot less money.
Government parks ? I agree they have a place.
Government health care ? Stay out of my body and dont make me pay for yours.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Why bother moving to another Country, when we can just change this one into a Socialist Nation?
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
Damn I could not finish reading all the posts before seeing something truly stupid.
Bee if you don't care about the constitution then please take all yourself and all your little commie friends with you.
If one only reads the law they learn that this does not affect the average citizen. READ the case of RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD V ALTON RAILROAD CO.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/295/330/case.html
There it is. Plain as day for those who can read. BTW I study tax law. This 'tax' of which you speak is one hundred percent BULL$HIT.
It only applies to socialist and to know if you're a socialist that this COULD apply to please check your SSN. If you have one you are a socialist. If you're a citizen who does not have one then... This could NEVER apply.
Side note do to the ignorance and stupidity of the people in this country this ruling may bring us closer to a good old civil war. Good news will be that is will be between the gun hater (most socialists) and the pro freedom (gun lovers) so it should be over rather quickly unless the UN steps in then it'll be FUN!!!
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
I am glad to see that a few people are pointing out this logical part.
New law says you must only buy oil from presidentially (if it's not a word it should still make sense) owned oil companies.
Next law says you must buy a wooden house made from imported wood.
Next law says you must buy a 6v electric car from that is made in the US of A.
Next law says you must donate blood every 6 weeks.
So on and so forth or pay a fine/tax/penalty/be locked up/etc
Where would it end?
You know where so this would end, Glockster, this is a question for the socialists on the board.
Glockster thanks for being part of the logical truth.
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
What is not widely known about the Brushaber decision is the essence of the ruling. Contrary to widespread legal opinion which has persisted even until now, the Supreme Court ruled that taxation on income is an indirect tax, not a direct tax. The Supreme Court also ruled that the 16th Amendment did not change or repeal any part of the Constitution, nor did it authorize any direct tax without apportionment.
To learn what "income" is one must turn to section 22 of the 1939 IRC.
Last edited:
hjmoosejaw
Regular Member
Could you imagine if the other side won today? There would be so many overturned cars and burnt buildings, it would be ridiculous. You "takers" can only take for so long. If Dems want to pay for everybody else, why don't we just have a Dem Tax? All the Dems could just pay their own taxes to go for the people they want to take care of. You'd never see that happen, cause they need to spend everybody else's money as well. You know what? If the Constitution is just going out the window, what are you going to do if they take your freedom of speech? You won't be able to draw your stupid pictures insulting Jesus and all the other moronic B.S. you guys do. From now on, I don't care if I obey another law. I'm tired of the "takers" helping themselves to anything of mine they want. Screw you! Your President can rot in Hell for all I care. I have a very good job right now, fortunately. It would make you sick to know what I gross compared to what I bring home. If I didn't have one more child to get to adulthood, I would seriously consider quitting my job and living like a hermit. ( I may in two years ) I would rather live like that than give another penny to all the scum suckers. I'm all for helping people, but my family comes first. Civil war?,fine with me. You people that like to gloat, write whatever you want, I don't care. You are nothing to me and I couldn't care less what happens to you. I WISH the S#@t would hit the fan! Better than existing for you.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
You study Tax Law, huh. Interesting.
The Finding you cited--if it is a Finding-- speaks to requiring employers to offer free health insurance. ACA does not require employers to offer free health insurance.
Civil War II? A sweet dream for a Patriot. Wake up, and smell the testosterone.
BTW, try offering a link, or cite to the specific area you quoted. Some of us would like to establish some context to your purported Finding. Also, SCOTUS made a Finding, today, regarding the ACA, and that Finding would trump any previous Finding. Who gives a damn what some Court Found in 1939, when we have a current Finding anyhow, one that is applicable, and takes precedence. Some of you, always living in the past.
Last edited:
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
If the above is a logical outcome, and therefore a logical truth, I'm glad to not agree; and to be a Socialist.
Ca Patriot
Regular Member
Beratta, enjoy the moment and keep gloating because this law is going to be repealed sooner rather than later.
You win for now.
You win for now.
TechnoWeenie
Regular Member
I am in that exact position now.
My unemployment paid about the same as my now, almost minimum wage job, does..
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
It does not.
Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)
It's in my tag line.... I keep forgetting that you can't read.
Freedom1Man
Regular Member
Please cite the law requiring citizens to have a SSN. Without a SSN they can not be taxed for this health care BS 'law' that you are so happy about.
BTW I did provide a link, it is pitiful that you can't look it up on your own. Ever and every time I post I here I post the case.
You have confirmed that all those who support forced socialism are idiots.
OC for ME
Regular Member
The expansion does not apply to the states....or more correctly put, the states can say "up your feds, we ain't doing it cuz we ain't got the money".
Thirdly, if the feds give the states the money to 'expand' medicade as you indicate, then the taxpayer, us, is on the hook as we are now for ER visits. Medicade is run by the states.
OC for ME
Regular Member
Many millions of our fellow citizen can not afford $300 a month.
In 2014 those poor folks who are uninsured will now be subject to a tax penalty for being poor and uninsured.
The poor will not become 'un-poor enough' to afford health insurance just because 2014 rolled around.
OC for ME
Regular Member
SCOTUS did not 'uphold' the ACA, they said they would not strike it down, will not address the issue, because they do not have the authority to strike down that which is in the sole purview of Congress....taxes. What they did is strike down the Commerce Clause angle that Congress wanted to use to implement the ACA.
While stating the obvious, that taxing authority belongs to Congress only....and I hope everybody already knew this....SCOTUS yesterday has placed the ACA squarely in the hands of the American people. We will only know the fate of the ACA after the November elections. It was the ACA that 'created' the TEA Party, there by creating the 2010 election results.
This decision more than any other SCOTUS decision clearly defines for the American citizen what liberals want America to be and what Americans want America to be. Based on the current sentiment the American citizen is not to keen on what liberals want America to be.
While stating the obvious, that taxing authority belongs to Congress only....and I hope everybody already knew this....SCOTUS yesterday has placed the ACA squarely in the hands of the American people. We will only know the fate of the ACA after the November elections. It was the ACA that 'created' the TEA Party, there by creating the 2010 election results.
This decision more than any other SCOTUS decision clearly defines for the American citizen what liberals want America to be and what Americans want America to be. Based on the current sentiment the American citizen is not to keen on what liberals want America to be.
rodbender
Regular Member
If you were not up for an Art.V convention before; Are you now ready for one?
I know, I know, we must wait to see if the "Republicans" repeal and replace it first (PURE HOGWASH). If they do not repeal it, or they replace it with something just as bad or worse, what will your reasoning be then?
Even if they replace it with something that drives down the cost of health care, we will still have the ruling that the feds can say, "You must buy (insert any product or service here) or be taxed".
The next time we have a libtard congress and a libtard president, will they tell us that we must get 50% of the electricity to power our homes and businesses from solar or wind (or any other "green" source) or be taxed? Will they say that there is a $5000 tax on each firearm purchase, or $1000 per year for each firearm you own? Congress could apply this to ANYTHING.
This needs to stop now. The rollercoaster is getting steeper and very soon the legal avenues will not be enough to stop it.
I do not want this to become a shooting revolution, but the peasants are getting very restless.
We need an Article V convention now!!! This is one of very few legal avenues we have to turn this ship we call America around. It's quite obvious that the courts are in as deep as the other two branches of government are.
If you are happy with the Constitutional oversteps that you like, you will also have to live with the Constitutional oversteps that you do not like.
Otherwise, the Republic is lost and the Constitution is dead.
If you have a better idea, let's hear it.
I know, I know, we must wait to see if the "Republicans" repeal and replace it first (PURE HOGWASH). If they do not repeal it, or they replace it with something just as bad or worse, what will your reasoning be then?
Even if they replace it with something that drives down the cost of health care, we will still have the ruling that the feds can say, "You must buy (insert any product or service here) or be taxed".
The next time we have a libtard congress and a libtard president, will they tell us that we must get 50% of the electricity to power our homes and businesses from solar or wind (or any other "green" source) or be taxed? Will they say that there is a $5000 tax on each firearm purchase, or $1000 per year for each firearm you own? Congress could apply this to ANYTHING.
This needs to stop now. The rollercoaster is getting steeper and very soon the legal avenues will not be enough to stop it.
I do not want this to become a shooting revolution, but the peasants are getting very restless.
We need an Article V convention now!!! This is one of very few legal avenues we have to turn this ship we call America around. It's quite obvious that the courts are in as deep as the other two branches of government are.
If you are happy with the Constitutional oversteps that you like, you will also have to live with the Constitutional oversteps that you do not like.
Otherwise, the Republic is lost and the Constitution is dead.
If you have a better idea, let's hear it.