> Just amend the constitution if you want the feds to do more stuff.
Because that totally won't lead to another argument, amiright?
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 27 minutes after the original post[^][v]#330,399
@330,397 (C)
That's a lot more work. Much easier to enforce lies though illegitimate applications of power.
GreenBear !BEERiVqJJw joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^][v]#330,400
More information would be helpful.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 21 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^][v]#330,402
I am excited. Inb4 the law is completely overturned in a 5-4 decision split along party lines.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU double-posted this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#330,404
individual mandate survives as a tax!! Yay!!!!
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU triple-posted this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#330,405
Fuck yeah, the law is upheld, with some minor restrictions on the federal government's ability to terminate states' Medicare funds. I am going to do a little dance.
(Edited 59 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 30 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#330,407
inb4 laws requiring Americans to purchase Christmas Presents.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#330,410
@previous (E)
lol read the opinion, bud. It was upheld through the "lay and collect taxes" clause, not the commerce clause.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,412
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
inb4 additional taxes for Americans opting not to purchase Christmas presents.
better?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,413
@previous (E)
I don't know, I'm not done reading the opinion yet. Maybe you should actually read it before forming an opinion about how stupid it is.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,414
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
When did I say I thought it was stupid? I support universal subordination. It really is the only way to ensure everyone is protected.
The government should use punitive taxes for everything precisely because it works. How many millions of people have quit smoking because of taxes? There's more people smoking weed than cigarettes now and it's basically because weed isn't taxed directly.
And yes, for the record, I support forcing Americans to buy gifts for one another. It's the only way to ensure everyone has a happy Christmas.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,415
@330,405 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
There's no mandate to stand still, but if you don't you will be taxed $100b. Just saying.
I CAN'T BELIEVE IT'S NOT UNCONSTITUTIONALâ„¢
Kathryn !MMo/DwqyBY joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,424
> inb4 additional taxes for Americans opting not to purchase Christmas presents.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,425
Paging mountainman.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 29 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,427
US Laws n politics n direction of the wind. If the opposing party wins, wind shifts.
GreenBear !BEERiVqJJw replied with this 14 years ago, 18 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,428
What the fuck is going on you vague yanky bastards?
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 35 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,429
@330,413 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
It's not really an absurd comment or anything, same thing as the broccoli question which you'll hear constitutional scholars discuss.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,431
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
And that is exactly what is wrong. We had a President who hated Broccoli & as result he invaded Iraq. Broccoli was the cause of it all.
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,432
@330,413 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Also, no one is actually going to read all this shit. I love you.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,439
@330,415 (C)
Read from the bottom of pg. 41 in the Majority opinion.
ill quote from a bit further down (bottom of pg. 42.) I'm on my phone so it.won't be perfect
"Second, Congress' ability to use its taxing power to influence conduct is not without limits...[We have invalidated] punitive executions obviously designed to regulate behavior otherwise regarded at the time as beyond federal authority."
That whole section will answer your concerns, if you want to read it. The court didn't just flip a coin and decide this case capriciously.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 14 years ago, 2 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,440
@330,432 (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc) > sharing opinions on the internet without reading > 2012
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,443
@previous (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
This is minichan. Adjust your expectations accordingly.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 38 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,444
@330,432 (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
I know. I love you too.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,445
@330,439 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Did not read. I let a mass of CNN Pundits read it multiple times - call in attorneys & former Super court law clerks & more pundits. This will go on for days and days. In between the OTHER PARTY says they will suspend it the minute the other party wins office (One day this always happens the other party does win.)
Prohibition legal act of congress; failed.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,449
@previous (J)
Wouldn't surprise me if Chief Justice Roberts only voted for it to actually give Romney a chance at winning the election. Seems he had virtually no chance without this.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,455
@previous (E)
Roberts did refer to George Washington re Death and Tax's.
Romney carries the burden of starting mandated health care when he was Gov. Also he raised tax's while he was Gov, so it will make for a lot of butthurt. TV ads will add to economy & that is a good thing. I TVio them OUT!
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,457
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 13 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,458
@previous (E)
Dolt bak atcha. Waz in the shower with CNN on. If you want perfection you're in the wrong place. Look at net & Ben was behind the curve on the quote.
Several famous authors have uttered lines to this effect. The first was Daniel Defoe, in The Political History of the Devil, 1726:
"Things as certain as death and taxes, can be more firmly believed."
Ben 1817: Ripped it off
"'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes."
Benjamin Franklin
Franklin wrote -
"Idleness and Pride Tax with a heavier Hand than Kings and Parliaments; If we can get rid of the former we may easily bear the Latter."
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,459
Also, in the opinion Roberts specifically refers to Ben Franklin, not George Washington. Perhaps you should inform him of his doltishness as well.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,461
@previous (E) > Dolt bak atcha
I am sorry, I am so sorry I am triple redundant sorry. I am inside a black hole saying I am sorry. I am human. Someone on CNN referenced George Washing on something. Will you ever forgive my mistake? If I believed in Jesus fucking Christ, he would forgive me, will you?
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,500
hooray!
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 39 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,525
So what was the end result?
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 49 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,545
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
See @330,405, (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) it was upheld, but not on the basis the Democrats would have preferred (the commerce clause).
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,547
@330,525 (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
Obama got pretty much everything he wanted, just not exactly how he wanted it. The individual mandate (forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty) was deemed constitutional but as a tax, not as an extension of the commerce clause. The Medicaid parts of the bill (forcing states to cover more people with their Medicaid funding or risk losing all their federal Medicaid money) was struck down in part. The court ruled that the Federal government can't take away all Federal aid, but it can refuse to give any more aid to states that fail to comply with the expanded coverage given under the law.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,549
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) > The individual mandate (forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty) was deemed constitutional but as a tax, not as an extension of the commerce clause.
This sounds like the uninsured has to pay a tax now. Is this correct?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,550
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
Yes. If you're uninsured and refuse to buy health insurance you will pay a penalty that is no more than the market price for health insurance.
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,555
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
So basically it's either pay for health insurance or pay for nothing?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,559
Right, but the money you pay goes towards paying for government health care programs (I think).
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,565
@330,439 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Actually I think Roberts and Kennedy did lol
Anonymous C double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,566
@330,550 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) > market price > forced by government to purchase
lol
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,567
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,582
@previous (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
I don't know what that means.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 19 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,587
@330,555 (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
There is a cut off for the poor. Poor get subsidized or something like that. If you can afford health care but chose not to pay up, then you get hit with that tax.
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,589
@previous (J)
So how do they determine rather or not someone cannot afford healthcare?
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^][v]#330,592
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
Some arbitrary official standard that you can find on the net. Maybe not so arbitrary.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 12 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,656
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,666
@previous (E)
Fairy tales can come true, it can happen to you
If you're young at heart.
For it's hard, you will find, to be narrow of mind
If you're young at heart.
You can go to extremes with impossible schemes.
You can laugh when your dreams fall apart at the seams.
And life gets more exciting with each passing day.
And love is either in your heart, or on it's way.
Don't you know that it's worth every treasure on earth
To be young at heart.
For as rich as you are, it's much better by far
To be young at heart.
And if you should survive to 105,
Look at all you'll derive out of being alive!
And here is the best part, you have a head start
If you are among the very young at heart.
squeegee joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 28 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,667
Where do i go to get my free money?
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,668
squeegee !firstkPE1Q replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,758
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
i dunno, i didn't read that long ass law
I just voted for Obama so we'd get it, and now it's passed, so...
where's the money, i need money so i can go see a doctor.
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,772
@previous (squeegee !firstkPE1Q)
I'm pretty sure Obamacare doesn't just hand out free money like that.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 42 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,781
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
Wait... The Tea Party has been lying to me all along?? They said states would get free money to give away to drug addicts and pregnant teens. You mean to say that I've been cultivating a meth habit and impregnating as many teens as possible all this time for no good reason?
Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,782
@previous (N)
Is the Tea Party still relevant? I haven't heard much about them lately.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,808
@previous (Kathryn !TGirlYJKXM)
The Tea Party is a bunch of wannabe libertarians without the balls to legalize pot. So yeah, they're not all that relevant.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,825
@previous (E)
But pot is for niggers and the Tea Party is not racist.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,828
@previous (O)
The Tea Party isn't libertarian either, which makes them every bit as irrelevant as the rest of the Republican blowhards.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#330,889
@330,781 (N)
Damn. If you can't trust some illiterate hillbillies then who can you trust???