Justice Roberts????
- Thread starter RCG Trader
- Start date
my concern is the precedent has been set that govt can skirt any constitutional concerns simply by using the tax code.
they can coerce any behavior they want simply by saying "you don't have to do it, but you'll pay if you dont" "and if you don't pay, you go to jail"
so not sure i see the difference.
its like the govt setting weight guidelines for every american and if they don't meet that guideline, the taxes kick in. So, no problem you don't have to meet the weight guidlines but you better pay up or go to jail. duh.
that basically IS saying its illegal to not weigh a certain amount.
roberts is such an idiot the way he stated his opinion.
they can coerce any behavior they want simply by saying "you don't have to do it, but you'll pay if you dont" "and if you don't pay, you go to jail"
so not sure i see the difference.
its like the govt setting weight guidelines for every american and if they don't meet that guideline, the taxes kick in. So, no problem you don't have to meet the weight guidlines but you better pay up or go to jail. duh.
that basically IS saying its illegal to not weigh a certain amount.
roberts is such an idiot the way he stated his opinion.
Obama and his congressional allies repeatedly pledged no new taxes on the middle class. They are now stuck with having imposed a number of new taxes on Americans and theyâll have a hard time spinning their way out of that.
Every Democrat that voted for the Obamacare abomination will have to explain that vote this fall. Their silence concerning Obamacare over the last year tells you how eagerly theyâre looking forward to doing that.
With the Bush tax cuts about to expire, the Tea Party just got a shot in the arm.
Every Democrat that voted for the Obamacare abomination will have to explain that vote this fall. Their silence concerning Obamacare over the last year tells you how eagerly theyâre looking forward to doing that.
With the Bush tax cuts about to expire, the Tea Party just got a shot in the arm.
"Under the mandate, if an individual does not maintain health insurance, the only consequence is that he must make an additional payment to the IRS when he pays his taxes. See §5000A(b). That, according to the Government,means the mandate can be regarded as establishing aconditionânot owning health insuranceâthat triggers ataxâthe required payment to the IRS. Under that theory, the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance.Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, itmay be within Congressâs constitutional power to tax." -Roberts
So, Obama will be taxing those in financial distress, underemployed, unemployed, part time job holders, etc, Obama will be taking more money away from them unless they give money to the private health insurance business.
So, Obama will be taxing those in financial distress, underemployed, unemployed, part time job holders, etc, Obama will be taking more money away from them unless they give money to the private health insurance business.
A law to buy something is not a legal command??
If I don't park in the right spot I pay a fine, so parking regs are not a legal command? the government does not command me to buy gasoline, can't this idiot see that?
Roberts is hard to read, he painfully packages stupidity in all that verbage.