Obamacare, Healthcare, etc.

[Xno Kappa]

I am because the ruling today did just that. There is nothing to stop congress from forcing us to buy something now or face a tax. If you don't find that notion scary I feel sorry for you.

It's not scary at all, home grown broccoli is vital for me to survive and remain healthy throughout my entire life. Breaking my leg and not having any broccoli on me is a ridiculously frightening thought.

[Kirin]

Because broccoli is the same thing as health insurance.

If it's framed under premise of a tax, the SCOTUS apparently agrees.

I guess I just fail to see, regardless of how trivial or minute the comparison seems to be, that there is legal precedent now that as long as it is framed as a "tax penalty" then congress can legislate what it wants us to buy until a case reaches the SCOTUS and they say otherwise.

I agree that saying you could get 51 senators and 218 house reps and the president to agree on something like broccoli is silly and way out of the realm of possibility. But could this now be applied to something more serious like forcing citizens to purchase bonds, debt, prop up failing companies, or even invest in companies or face a tax penalty?

[Ragnus]

There is seriously a huge difference between buying health insurance and buying broccoli.

Most liberals we're crying this same thing when The Patriot Act was passed and there seemingly hasn't been a massive onslaught of governmental abuse on the levels that they were warning the American people about. "Omg! Big Brother is going to take over the whole country and every phone call is going to be backed up on hard drives to be used against everyone when they get pulled over for speeding!" <-vast over exaggeration btw.

As stupid as our government is, there is still the concept of "Just because they can, doesn't mean they will"

[archibaldcrane]

The scary part of this ruling is that they ruled the Gov can do this becuase it's a tax. Basically this gives them the power to pass any law mandating you buy something or you have to pay a tax. Just off the top of my head it could have been used to help bail out the failed American Motor companies. You don't want to buy an American car? Well you can now pay a tax on that.

You realize that buying foreign cars have been subject to tariffs (taxes) at government discretion for a century, right?

[Dimmauk]

There is seriously a huge difference between buying health insurance and buying broccoli.

Most liberals we're crying this same thing when The Patriot Act was passed and there seemingly hasn't been a massive onslaught of governmental abuse on the levels that they were warning the American people about. "Omg! Big Brother is going to take over the whole country and every phone call is going to be backed up on hard drives to be used against everyone when they get pulled over for speeding!" <-vast over exaggeration btw.

As stupid as our government is, there is still the concept of "Just because they can, doesn't mean they will"

Now is not the time to be rational thought. I say let the war on barackoli begin!

[takeDat]

I am because the ruling today did just that. There is nothing to stop congress from forcing us to buy something now or face a tax. If you don't find that notion scary I feel sorry for you.

The way I understand it. It costs everyone more when someone without healthcare doesn't pay their hospital bill after receiving care. Its more of a way to recoup losses and soften the blow rather than force a private service upon people.

[Synbios]

There is seriously a huge difference between buying health insurance and buying broccoli.

Most liberals we're crying this same thing when The Patriot Act was passed and there seemingly hasn't been a massive onslaught of governmental abuse on the levels that they were warning the American people about. "Omg! Big Brother is going to take over the whole country and every phone call is going to be backed up on hard drives to be used against everyone when they get pulled over for speeding!" <-vast over exaggeration btw.

As stupid as our government is, there is still the concept of "Just because they can, doesn't mean they will"

Just because right now it doesn't seem likely, doesn't mean in the future it wont happen.

You realize that buying foreign cars have been subject to tariffs (taxes) at government discretion for a century, right?

Yeah I know it's a bad example but as I started typing I looked out my window and saw my car and was using that as an example.

[Correction]

Just because right now it doesn't seem likely, doesn't mean in the future it wont happen.

What?

[Komm Suesser Tod]

What?

Something something slippery slope.

[Kuya]

In the same vein of what archi mentioned, the government doesn't need to tax you in order to get you to buy what it wants. It can simply impose tariffs or non tariff barriers to increase the cost of buying competing brands in order to prop up another.

[ringthree]

Seriously though, with legal precedent, what is stopping congress from drafting legislation saying we must purchase broccoli grown here in the US or face a tax?

I'm honestly curious, not trying to be an asshole or fall into dumb arguments. Let's go even as far as saying because of the upheld ACA, with "product x's" numerous benefits towards continuing to decrease healthcare costs, why could congress not say we need to purchase it or face a tax?

Dude, if you are scared by this, you have no fucking clue about the Commerce clause...

And I am a raving liberal here, but I really don't think you have a good grasp of what the court has already decided on the breadth of the power of the Congress.

[Kurokikaze]

Been posting this on my conservative friend's FB pages who are all crying foul:

[kuronosan]

Already tears of sadness on my Facebook.didn't know there were so many ignorant shitheads out there.

[Rhinox]

New fb avatar

[Synbios]

In the same vein of what archi mentioned, the government doesn't need to tax you in order to get you to buy what it wants. It can simply impose tariffs or non tariff barriers to increase the cost of buying competing brands in order to prop up another.

Ok let me restate what I said a little differently (which is actually more accurate to what happened/can happen). The government now has the ability to say "all US citizen must own a Ford vehicle or you pay a tax penalty". This would then force all citizens to either buy a Ford or pay a tax. Mind you, people who don't even have a license or ever want to drive a car would then be subject to paying the tax. Yes this is an extreme example, but today's ruling made this a real possibility.

[Mazmaz]

So no one's questioning why a conservative judge sided with the liberals to get this through?
Maybe I'm just a conspiracy theorist though.

[kuronosan]

That is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard.

[Dantrag]

Ok let me restate what I said a little differently (which is actually more accurate to what happened/can happen). The government now has the ability to say "all US citizen must own a Ford vehicle or you pay a tax penalty". This would then force all citizens to either buy a Ford or pay a tax. Mind you, people who don't even have a license or ever want to drive a car would then be subject to paying the tax. Yes this is an extreme example, but today's ruling made this a real possibility.

Except... bull shit. Health Insurance is a completely different beast. Health insurance is something that, wait for it, MUST BE GIVEN TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL NO MATTER WHAT.

[Kirin]

Dude, if you are scared by this, you have no fucking clue about the Commerce clause...

And I am a raving liberal here, but I really don't think you have a good grasp of what the court has already decided on the breadth of the power of the Congress.

No, I understand the Commerce Clause. But I am saying in a courtroom with two lawyers arguing legal points and precedent and a judge (supposed) to be ruling based on interpretation of law, with this SCOTUS precedent now set what could congress, even fantastically, say you have to purchase or face a tax? Could they even forbid purchase of something or face a tax? Stranger things have happened with legal precedent.

Except... bull shit. Health Insurance is a completely different beast. Health insurance is something that, wait for it, MUST BE GIVEN TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL NO MATTER WHAT.

Ehh, just to nitpick. Health care is a right. Doctors cannot refuse treatment. Health Insurance is not necessarily health care.

[Synbios]

Except... bull shit. Health Insurance is a completely different beast. Health insurance is something that, wait for it, MUST BE GIVEN TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL NO MATTER WHAT.

Take today's ruling which basically says the bolded, but why? Why must it be given to every individual no matter what?