Obamacare easily survives supreme court

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

Obama was selling it by what it provided, the justices ruled on it based on how it is funded.

Only a buffoon couldn't understand that.

Obama said the way it's funded is not a tax hike. He sold the bill as something other than what it is. Since you chose to get personal here, allow me to retort. Only a brainwashed, unthinking Kool Aid drinker would fail to admit that.

When the federal government confiscates more money from its citizenry than it did previously, that's the textbook definition of a tax increase. Obama denied that to make the bill appear less objectionable. Is that the "change" we were promised? Only a buffoon would say "yes". Welcome to buffoonery.

Obama said it's not a tax hike. That means one of two things. Either he is a liar, or he doesn't know what a tax hike is. Those are the only two choices, there simply isn't a third choice. Only an ideologically-blinded buffoon would fail to see that. Try making that wrong.

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Obama said it's not a tax hike. That means one of two things. Either he is a liar, or he doesn't know what a tax hike is.

No, it actually means one of three things, he's a liar, he doesn't know what a tax hike is, or he's a politician who's fleeced you.

But only a buffoon would be fleeced right?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by likwid

No, it actually means one of three things, he's a liar, he doesn't know what a tax hike is, or he's a politician who's fleeced you.

But only a buffoon would be fleeced right?

Unless you're in on the take, you've been fleeced too. So you're either a buffoon or a crook.

[likwid]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Unless you're in on the take, you've been fleeced too. So you're either a buffoon or a crook.

It doesn't take either to have common sense.
And having actually done some reading.

Technically speaking the IRS collects more than just taxes, but, semantics, etc.

Calling it a tax just makes it constitutionally sound.

I'm gonna guess nobody realized that the "penalty" aka "tax" was collected by the IRS did they?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by likwid

It doesn't take either to have common sense.
And having actually done some reading.

Technically speaking the IRS collects more than just taxes, but, semantics, etc.

Calling it a tax just makes it constitutionally sound.

I'm gonna guess nobody realized that the "penalty" aka "tax" was collected by the IRS did they?

On what basis is it constitutionally sound? Are you saying the Constitution places no limits on the fedgov to tax. It lists three types of taxes that are allowed. Taxing inactivity is not one of the those types. And, obviously, the Constitution, ORIGINALLY, limited the governments power to tax. That's why the progressives fought so hard for the sixteenth amendment and created the income tax. Inactivity is not income. Taxing inactivity is not an excise tax and the capitation was a direct tax levied proportionally on the States. Where does taxing individual inactivity fit in the three types of taxes constitutioinally allowed? It doesn't, and Roberts knew it. But his decision now erases the taxing limitations in the Constitution and gives the government unlimited power through its now undefined general power of taxation. This is classic legislation from the bench. Nor does the decision eliminate the other judicial legislation regarding unlimited power through misuse of the commerce clause, as some think it does. This is simple and pure trashing of the Constitution in favor of allowing the fedgove to do whatever it wishes, with occasional dissents when 5 judges decide not to like what it does. This is government by whim, not by law.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

No, it actually means one of three things, he's a liar, he doesn't know what a tax hike is, or he's a politician who's fleeced you.

But only a buffoon would be fleeced right?

"or he's a politician who's fleeced you."

(1) Fleeced means tricked, which is pretty close to lying.

(2) When Obama was campaigning he promised change, bringing people together, and transparency. So if he "fleeced" anyone, that necessarily means he lied on the campaign trail, doesn't it? That doesn't sound like the "change" he promised.

(3) He didn't fleece me, because I don't worship at his altar. I didn't believe for one second he was going to add millions to insurance rolls, increase coverage for all of them, and lower costs. Only the Kool Aid drinkers got fleeced, not the people who live in the real world and act accordingly.

Yes, only a buffoon would allow himself to get fleeced by Obama. His opponents are obviously not the ones getting fleeced, however...his disciples are the ones getting fleeced. The people who buy into his liberal rehtoric are the ones getting fleeced. The ones who accept it when Obama says Medicare isn't going bankrupt, are the ones who are getting fleeced. The ones who accept it when Obama sas that Social Security isn't in serious trouble, are the ones getting fleeced.

Because Obama is tricking them into believing that all those benefits will still be there in 30 years. And they will not. The impact of the Baby Boomers is a mathematical guarantee that those benefits will not exist for subsequent generations, not at anywhere near current benefit and funding levels.

Unfortunately for liberals, arithmetic trumps ideology.

Likwid, I know Obama is full of crap when he denies that Social Security and Medicare are in serious trouble. Liberals don't question anything that comes out of his mouth, as long as he is promising to give them goodies. I know that 7-th grade mathematics means those benefits cannot possibly survive much longer, so I am planning accordingly. Liberals believe Obama's false promises. When the demographic earthquake of the baby boomer generation brings down the house of cards, those who believed Obama will be left with nothing but his empty promises. Those who use their brains will weather the storm.

I'm saving for retirement and my kids' education in post-tax accounts, and I'm almost done. When the house of cards collapses, and we realize that european-level income tax rates are the only way to pay our bills, I won't have much pre-tax income for you and your ilk to touch. Unfortunately, Obama is "fleecing", in your words, millions of saps into believeing that things are better than they are.

We'll see who gets fleeced, and who didn't.

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'm saving for retirement and my kids' education in post-tax accounts, and I'm almost done. When the house of cards collapses, and we realize that european-level income tax rates are the only way to pay our bills, I won't have much pre-tax income for you and your ilk to touch.

So tell me, since you're obviously on the up and up, who exactly is "you and your ilk"?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

So tell me, since you're obviously on the up and up, who exactly is "you and your ilk"?

You're damn right I'm on the up and up.

By you and your ilk, I mean liberals. The liberals that are responsible for the wonderful financial situations that every single blue state is in today...CT, MA, IL, CA...

Liberals like you who think it's sound economic policy to reward people to come to your state who don't want to work, and foce out people who want to work and be left alone. We are now learning that policy was short-sighted and stupid.