Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-29-2012, 08:57 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,457,656 times
Reputation: 4243

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
The states are?

The states were told they didn't have to comply with the Medicaid expansion via a government issued gun to the head.

How exactly do you think Obama was going to cover 32 million more people?

He thought the states no longer had to adhere to the very narrow group of people eligible for Medicaid and that he would expand Medicaid to cover 133% of poverty level for all Americans.

The court told Obama and friends that was an emphatic no no and the Federal Government couldn't hold a government issued gun to their head to enforce that.
Exactly right! The more and more I read and think about the SC ruling, Roberts b*tch slapped the Constitution shredders. It was an odd ruling for sure, but it was the best ruling IMO. This ruling put the entire law back into Congress' hands to start appeals and put a huge road block up for Progressive Constitution haters by taking away their power to abuse the Commerce Clause like they wanted to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Beautiful Upstate NY!
13,814 posts, read 28,507,035 times
Reputation: 7615
The Republican Party will use this decision to drive home a 3-way victory in November. This issue is what The American Public is (and has been) fervent about...and the timing couldn't be a better gift for The Republican Party. The November elections for President, Congress and The Senate will hinge on this matter. And the number don't support the current administration's decision. The majority middle class just does not support it.

Good luck, Obama...you'll need it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:07 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,457,656 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfkIII View Post
The Republican Party will use this decision to drive home a 3-way victory in November. This issue is what The American Public is (and has been) fervent about...and the timing couldn't be a better gift for The Republican Party. The November elections for President, Congress and The Senate will hinge on this matter. And the number don't support the current administration's decision.

Good luck, Obama...you'll need it.
I absolutely agree! I think Roberts' move was brilliant to say the least. He helped the Dems put the final nail in their own coffin!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:07 AM
 
4,288 posts, read 2,060,758 times
Reputation: 2815
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
He didn't want to present it as a tax, because when you say that word, at least half of America froths at the mouth and loses capability of rational thought. Definitely some political spinning there...but that's what politicians do, right?
He did not want to call it a tax because he had promised no taxes on incomes below 250,000
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:07 AM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,324,953 times
Reputation: 3554
Can someone please tell me what is the real probelm? From what I understand this bill would lower the people who already have insurance rates and prevent them from overcharging with excessive administrative fees to the point that many of you will get some sort of refund over the summer.

The few of you who are so selfish to make the mean spirited remarks about paying for someone else's care, you are already doing that whenever someone who had a illness that never was treated and goes to the emergency room after it got worst. Who do you think pays for that visit not to mention the time spent on non-emergency treatments, yep we all do. So my question is why are you complaining about it, are you afraid that someone less fortunate is going to get healthy on your dime? <nods head in disgust>

We have become so self centered and so easy manipulated by wealthy politicans who btw have excellent healthcare for themselves and their families pretend like they have your interest at heart. If they had the same insurance that most of us had they would not be making cuts and changes to it in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Martinsville, NJ
6,175 posts, read 12,941,820 times
Reputation: 4020
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
He didn't want to present it as a tax, because when you say that word, at least half of America froths at the mouth and loses capability of rational thought. Definitely some political spinning there...but that's what politicians do, right?

At the end of the day, it's not truly a tax in the conventional sense. Taxes are typically something you must always pay based on your consumption or earnings. This is really a penalty that will only be paid by those who choose not to get health insurance. So for the vast majority of people, it's no impact at all in any way to their taxes. It's perfectly easy to avoid this penalty: get health insurance.
And you have no problem with the government forcing people to spend their money to purchase something they may not want to purchase? You believe that's a valid function of the federal government? I believe that's NOT a function of government. I believe I should decide if I want to buy something, and that no government should have a say in the matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,827,269 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
Romney was in favor of some portions of ObamaCare, but not as it is written, and not the corrupt legislative process with which it was passed into law.
Do you have ANY idea about what he wrote in the Op-ed? Heck, did you even bother to read it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:13 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
23,861 posts, read 24,122,798 times
Reputation: 15135
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
By the way, this is Settled Law now, step along.
So's the PATRIOT Act. Does Bush v. Gore ring any bells? You're OK with those "settled laws," right?

I never want to see you make a single complaint about any "settled law" again. You just gave up that right. I'm bookmarking your post for future reference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:15 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,682,360 times
Reputation: 4254
ObamaCare has put us in the position where both you and your insurance company are sitting at the table, fretting over a health insurance contract that neither you, nor your insurance agent want to sign. But you are forced to buy it, or be punished, and your insurance company must provide it, or be punished. Welcome to tyranny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
He didn't want to present it as a tax, because when you say that word, at least half of America froths at the mouth and loses capability of rational thought. Definitely some political spinning there...but that's what politicians do, right?
This president does nothing else but lie for political gain.

He said he would have C-SPAN cameras inside the room during health care debates, he lied, they had closed door, secret talks.

He said if we liked our health care insurance, we could keep it, and we have college students and employees who lost their health care insurance, and the only ones getting ObamaCare waivers are Obama's union cronies and a few businesses.

He said our health care costs and insurance premiums would drop, they have increased.

He said it was not a tax, it is a tax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
At the end of the day, it's not truly a tax in the conventional sense. Taxes are typically something you must always pay based on your consumption or earnings. This is really a penalty that will only be paid by those who choose not to get health insurance. So for the vast majority of people, it's no impact at all in any way to their taxes. It's perfectly easy to avoid this penalty: get health insurance.
It's a tax penalty. It must be a tax, because the federal government cannot punish people by taking away 1%-2.5% of their personal income ike that, unless it's a tax.

Either way, this is bad, our government has never done anything like this before. Where else are taxed by the feds for not entering into a contract with a private citizen? It's a 1% fine in 2013, and jumps to 2.5% in 2016, and it can go higher then that if government wants to do so.

It's not just that we have to buy health insurance, all that has changed, we are all being forced to buy insurance written by the bureaucrats at the HHS.

You can no longer buy a health insurance plan that you like, and your insurance company cannot sell it to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,864 posts, read 12,082,060 times
Reputation: 6744
Obama said that no one making under $200,000 a year would pay 'not one single dime' in taxes under Obamacare.
There are 21 new taxes in Obamacare, with 12 affecting people making under $200,000
Here's just one. You're running on your tax payer funded running trail in your town. You trip and break a leg. You will need crutches for awhile. Guess what- there is a new excise tax on the crutches.
People going to tanning booths are already paying a 10% tax when they use the booth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top