After the obamacare ruling will this be possible?

[Katzndogz]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

A federal mileage tax has already been proposed.

Obama administration floats draft plan to tax cars by the mile - The Hill's Floor Action

More fuel efficient cars means less gas sold. The loss may be made up on a mileage tax. This would hurt people with less fuel efficient cars, which puts people in the position of being forced to buy new cars or suffer the consequence of much, much higher transportation costs.

This will eventually give way to a general transportation tax that would cover all forms of transportation including walking. After all, don't people who walk use sidewalks, roads, traffic signals? Why should they pay NOTHING for the use of all these services?

 

[Lakhota]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

Say hello to the voices in your head.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is not a new power to tax. The power to tax has been there all the time. Nothing new about it.

In terms of limiting miles, not new either. During WWII almost everything you bought was limited. You had to have coupons to buy gas, tires, etc. So yes, the government can do that and has done it in the past.

Will they do it? Unlikely.

obnamacare was unlikely but it became as is
obamacare not being a tax was how it was sold but it is a tax. You think the government setting a mileage overage tax is unlikely? I say you're insane. The government will do it because of the global warming facade

It was not unlikely. It was inevitable. The Clintons first proposed this kind of thing and couldn't get it started. By the time Obama became President no one was disputing that something of this nature was required, it was just a matter of how. The mandate everyone is calling socialism was actually put forth as early as 1989 by The Heritage Foundation, a well-known conservative think tank. It was part of a compromise in lieu of providing people with a medicare like government option. It is also inevitable that we will see universal health care. Probably within the next 10 years, regardless of who is in the White House.

I am not insane on the gas tax in dealing with global warming. At least, it won't happen until it is far too late. Such a thing would take real leadership and there is no such thing in government today. The House will not allow it to happen because each of their members are far more concerned about getting re-elected than they are in solving any problems.

Here's how the mileage tax will work when you pay your taxes and vehicle tag your mileage record will be submitted if you go over the set amount approved by the government yo will be taxed. Look for it to happen within 4 years if obama is re*elected.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

A federal mileage tax has already been proposed.

Obama administration floats draft plan to tax cars by the mile - The Hill's Floor Action

More fuel efficient cars means less gas sold. The loss may be made up on a mileage tax. This would hurt people with less fuel efficient cars, which puts people in the position of being forced to buy new cars or suffer the consequence of much, much higher transportation costs.

This will eventually give way to a general transportation tax that would cover all forms of transportation including walking. After all, don't people who walk use sidewalks, roads, traffic signals? Why should they pay NOTHING for the use of all these services?

I didn't know that until after I started this thread.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

Say hello to the voices in your head.

I can't help that I am smarter than you

 

[Lakhota]

I like taxes. I always send in a little extra just to help out.

 

[Vast LWC]

As in to force you to buy something they will tax you. That has never been done before.

The reason why the Supreme Court said it was constitutional as a tax was that the 16th Amendment allows Congress to tax people in whatever manner they deem fit.

Whether that's as a penalty for something, as an income tax, or as a cigarette tax, it doesn't matter in the least.

Think of this as the same thing as an anti-smoking tax, only, in this case, it's an "anti-mooch-off-the-system" tax.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I like taxes. I always send in a little extra just to help out.

You must love those illegal wars that your extra taxes are spent on.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As in to force you to buy something they will tax you. That has never been done before.

The reason why the Supreme Court said it was constitutional as a tax was that the 16th Amendment allows Congress to tax people in whatever manner they deem fit.

Whether that's as a penalty for something, as an income tax, or as a cigarette tax, it doesn't matter in the least.

Think of this as the same thing as an anti-smoking tax, only, in this case, it's an "anti-mooch-off-the-system" tax.

The tax was if you bought something you were tax, not to force you to buy something or you will be tax is not protected under the constitution, tyranny is not a protection of the Constitution and an illegal tax is tyranny.

 

[Vast LWC]

This is only the beginning, once we allow the dictator in chief to totally ignore the constitution it is down hill. How far we drive, how many hours can I run my AC in the summer. the list can go on. It is pure socialism any way you spell it.;

The president does not have the power to levy taxes.

Constitutionally, that responsibility is one that belongs entirely to Congress.

 

[Lakhota]

As in to force you to buy something they will tax you. That has never been done before.

The reason why the Supreme Court said it was constitutional as a tax was that the 16th Amendment allows Congress to tax people in whatever manner they deem fit.

Whether that's as a penalty for something, as an income tax, or as a cigarette tax, it doesn't matter in the least.

Think of this as the same thing as an anti-smoking tax, only, in this case, it's an "anti-mooch-off-the-system" tax.

Amen!

Romney’s Big Tax Bluff: Why It Will Haunt Him

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As in to force you to buy something they will tax you. That has never been done before.

The reason why the Supreme Court said it was constitutional as a tax was that the 16th Amendment allows Congress to tax people in whatever manner they deem fit.

Whether that's as a penalty for something, as an income tax, or as a cigarette tax, it doesn't matter in the least.

Think of this as the same thing as an anti-smoking tax, only, in this case, it's an "anti-mooch-off-the-system" tax.

Amen!

Romney’s Big Tax Bluff: Why It Will Haunt Him

How about those illegal wars you help to maintain when you bragged about sending in a little extra in taxes?

 

[Vast LWC]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

A federal mileage tax has already been proposed.

Obama administration floats draft plan to tax cars by the mile - The Hill's Floor Action

More fuel efficient cars means less gas sold. The loss may be made up on a mileage tax. This would hurt people with less fuel efficient cars, which puts people in the position of being forced to buy new cars or suffer the consequence of much, much higher transportation costs.

This will eventually give way to a general transportation tax that would cover all forms of transportation including walking. After all, don't people who walk use sidewalks, roads, traffic signals? Why should they pay NOTHING for the use of all these services?

As per your own article:

The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration.

“This is not an administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”

Which means that some flunky sitting around in the West Wing came up with this, and it never went any further.

Good try though.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

For those who find great satisfaction that obamacare passed because it was ruled a tax, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT.
The passage of obamacare was to help with the cost of medical care. Now what would stop the government from controlling the numbers of miles you put on your car in the fight to control global warming? You are only allowed to drive a certain numbers of miles or you will be taxed on every mile that you go over your pre-approved set mileage plan.

I actually see this happening if obama is elected. Can you afford the addition tax?

A federal mileage tax has already been proposed.

Obama administration floats draft plan to tax cars by the mile - The Hill's Floor Action

More fuel efficient cars means less gas sold. The loss may be made up on a mileage tax. This would hurt people with less fuel efficient cars, which puts people in the position of being forced to buy new cars or suffer the consequence of much, much higher transportation costs.

This will eventually give way to a general transportation tax that would cover all forms of transportation including walking. After all, don't people who walk use sidewalks, roads, traffic signals? Why should they pay NOTHING for the use of all these services?

As per your own article:

The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration.

“This is not an administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”

Which means that some flunky sitting around in the West Wing came up with this, and it never went any further.

Good try though.

second page of this thread

http://www.usmessageboard.com/5567381-post18.html

 

[Vast LWC]

The tax was if you bought something you were tax, not to force you to buy something or you will be tax is not protected under the constitution, tyranny is not a protection of the Constitution and an illegal tax is tyranny.

The Constitution does not dictate how Congress should tax anything, as per the 16th amendment.

The creators of the 16th amendment apparently thought that the people wouldn't be stupid enough to elect representatives that would vote in an "air tax".

It doesn't matter what the tax is, Congress can do it. If congress wanted to specifically tax anyone that used the name "bigreb" in a posting board, that would be within their Constitutionally mandated powers.

 

[Vast LWC]

second page of this thread

http://www.usmessageboard.com/5567381-post18.html

And, in the very first paragraph of your link:

Proving that once again is outgoing Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), attempting to revive an idea for a new tax that was so intrusive and unwieldy that even Barack Obama had to disavow it two years ago...

So, in other words, some dimwit for North Dakota bought up the idea that the President had already quite clearly said "no" on, when a member of his administration originally came up with it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

second page of this thread

http://www.usmessageboard.com/5567381-post18.html

And, in the very first paragraph of your link:

Proving that once again is outgoing Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), attempting to revive an idea for a new tax that was so intrusive and unwieldy that even Barack Obama had to disavow it two years ago...

So, in other words, some dimwit for North Dakota bought up the idea that the President had already quite clearly said "no" on, when a member of his administration originally came up with it.

Thanks to obamatax they now have precedent to move this forward.
From the second link

The Obama administration wants to spend $556 billion over the next six years on transportation projects, but they may have to get creative to pay for them. One "practical option" could be taxing drivers based on their mileage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is reporting.

The CBO has released a report on a potential mileage tax at the behest of Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.), the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, the Hill reports. While tracking mileage was once considered infeasible, the CBO concluded that new technologies

 

[Vast LWC]

Thanks to obamatax they now have precedent to move this forward.
From the second link

The Obama administration wants to spend $556 billion over the next six years on transportation projects, but they may have to get creative to pay for them. One "practical option" could be taxing drivers based on their mileage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is reporting.

The CBO has released a report on a potential mileage tax at the behest of Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.), the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, the Hill reports. While tracking mileage was once considered infeasible, the CBO concluded that new technologies

Congress already had the ability to tax in whichever way they chose fit.

They did not need a "precedent" to levy a tax.

The tax was rejected because it was stupid, not because it was unconstitutional.

Yes, BigReb, sometimes the President actually agrees with you.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

This is not a new power to tax. The power to tax has been there all the time. Nothing new about it.

In terms of limiting miles, not new either. During WWII almost everything you bought was limited. You had to have coupons to buy gas, tires, etc. So yes, the government can do that and has done it in the past.

Will they do it? Unlikely.

obnamacare was unlikely but it became as is
obamacare not being a tax was how it was sold but it is a tax.

There's nothing in the Constitution about "selling" laws.

You think the government setting a mileage overage tax is unlikely?

Yes. They can't even pass cap&trade.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Thanks to obamatax they now have precedent to move this forward.
From the second link

The Obama administration wants to spend $556 billion over the next six years on transportation projects, but they may have to get creative to pay for them. One "practical option" could be taxing drivers based on their mileage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is reporting.

The CBO has released a report on a potential mileage tax at the behest of Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.), the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, the Hill reports. While tracking mileage was once considered infeasible, the CBO concluded that new technologies

Congress already had the ability to tax in whichever way they chose fit.

They did not need a "precedent" to levy a tax.

The tax was rejected because it was stupid, not because it was unconstitutional.

Yes, BigReb, sometimes the President actually agrees with you.

Congress never had the precedent to force you to buy something via a tax. never before until obamatax.