Individual mandate in trouble?

[Polk]

Anyone should be angry though that those who don't really need emergency treatment are using the ER as a primary care facility.

 

[Full-Auto]

true, but you can also choose to grown your own food and that negates purchasing it from a store.

and if a zoning ordinance in your township prevents you from growing food... what? You starve?

what local zoning ordinance prohibits you from growing food in your own backyard? such as a garden........ genius idea.......

a GARDEN in your backyard will not sustain that household for then a few months at best.

Commercial growing in the cities is generally prohibited. But you want to whine some. Right?

 

[dblack]

Anyone should be angry though that those who don't really need emergency treatment are using the ER as a primary care facility.

Doesn't make me angry. EMTALA is a dumb law. It's mostly just obvious and funny that it produces dumb results.

 

[Polk]

Anyone should be angry though that those who don't really need emergency treatment are using the ER as a primary care facility.

Doesn't make me angry. EMTALA is a dumb law. It's mostly just obvious and funny that it produces dumb results.

I think there is a social value in not saying "you're poor and therefore your live is meaningless". Trading in human blood is something I find highly unethical.

 

[dblack]

I think there is a social value in not saying "you're poor and therefore your live is meaningless". Trading in human blood is something I find highly unethical.

Agreed. I also think there is a pathology in this country that presumes the way to address such moral yearnings is to order other people to do what we're too lazy to do ourselves. And that's what EMTALA does. It's what PPACA is all about.

To put it another way, if we think government should ensure that everyone has health care, then we should raise the funds legitimately, via taxation, and provide them with health care. I think it's wrong to simply turn to arbitrary mandates and demand that other people do things against their will to spare us from higher taxes.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Justice Kennedy has harsh questions for the govts lawyer.

Check out scotusblog

Not looking good for uncle Sam.

Its looking good for uncle sam, if you think uncle same is a representative of the constitution and not an overreaching federal govt that is

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I think there is a social value in not saying "you're poor and therefore your live is meaningless". Trading in human blood is something I find highly unethical.

Agreed. I also think there is a pathology in this country that presumes the way to address such moral yearnings is to order other people to do what we're too lazy to do ourselves. And that's what EMTALA does. It's what PPACA is all about.

To put it another way, if we think government should ensure that everyone has health care, then we should raise the funds legitimately, via taxation, and provide them with health care. I think it's wrong to simply turn to arbitrary mandates and demand that other people do things against their will to spare us from higher taxes.

Well said!

 

[Conservative]

It was passed in the manner outlined in the constitution. Therefore, it is the will of the people.

your position that all laws passed by Congress are constitutional, and the Supreme Court should have no review power, is not shared by members of congress...

When Congress passes unconstitutional laws. - Slate Magazine

Before that amendment was rejected, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, announced, "I'm not going to support a bill that's blatantly unconstitutional ... that suspends a right that goes back to [the Magna Carta in] 1215." He added, "I'd be willing, in the interest of party loyalty, to turn the clock back 500 years, but 800 years goes too far."

Specter's justification for then voting for a bill he deemed unconstitutional? "Congress could have done it right and didn't, but the next line of defense is the court, and I think the court will clean it up."

 

[Conservative]

and if a zoning ordinance in your township prevents you from growing food... what? You starve?

what local zoning ordinance prohibits you from growing food in your own backyard? such as a garden........ genius idea.......

a GARDEN in your backyard will not sustain that household for then a few months at best.

Commercial growing in the cities is generally prohibited. But you want to whine some. Right?

I tried explaining the fallacy of his argument, but it's like trying to explain physics to a 2 year old. They see your mouth moving, but simply don't have the mental capacity to understand you.

 

[Full-Auto]

what local zoning ordinance prohibits you from growing food in your own backyard? such as a garden........ genius idea.......

a GARDEN in your backyard will not sustain that household for then a few months at best.

Commercial growing in the cities is generally prohibited. But you want to whine some. Right?

I tried explaining the fallacy of his argument, but it's like trying to explain physics to a 2 year old. They see your mouth moving, but simply don't have the mental capacity to understand you.

Loners argument was pretty funny too.

Imagine, this is their best and brightest too.

 

[Decepticon]

Half the CONZ on here think taxes are a fricking crime against humanity. What the hell do any of them know about constitutional law? Even less.

The commerce clause is fricking HUGE in the world of SCOTUS.
One farmer lost his case against the fed government and told him he couldn't grow wheat on his own farm for his own use on that farm because it impacted interstate commerce, which was the domain of congress.

That's precedence, bitches. It means something in SCOTUS cases.
Which is a greater abuse of power? Compelling you to buy something as an investment in the entire community, much like taxation, or telling you what you can and cannot do on your own land?

Do some actual reading that's not some right wing retard site and you people might actually LEARN a thing or two about how your country ACTUALLY WORKS instead of how you think it does.

 

[Decepticon]

Not to crush you retard asshat contards...but....I'm going to crush you retard asshat contards now.




It all starts with a farmer named Roscoe Filburn, a modest farmer who grew wheat in his own back yard in order to feed his chickens.
One day, a U.S. government official showed up at his farm. Noting that Filburn was growing a lot of wheat, this government official determined that Filburn was growing too much wheat and ordered Filburn to destroy his wheat crops and pay a large fine to the federal government.

The year was 1940, you see. And through a highly protectionist policy, the federal government had decided to artificially drive up the prices of wheat by limiting the amount of wheat that could be grown on any given acre. This is all part of Big Government's "infinite wisdom" of trying to somehow improve prosperity by destroying food and impairing economic productivity. (Be wary any time the government says it's going to "solve problems" for you.)

The federal government, of course, claims authority over all commerce (even when such claims are blatantly in violation of the limitations placed upon government by the Constitution). But Roscoe Filburn wasn't selling his wheat to anyone. Thus, he was not engaged in interstate commerce. He wasn't growing wheat as something to use for commerce at all, in fact. He was simply growing wheat in his back yard and feeding it to his chickens. That's not commerce. That's just growing your own food.

But get this: The government insisted he pay a fine and destroy his wheat, so Filburn took the government to court, arguing that the federal government had no right to tell a man to destroy his food crops just because they wanted to protect some sort of artificially high prices in the wheat market.

This case eventually went to the US Supreme Court. It's now known as Wickard v. Filburn, and it is one of the most famous US Supreme Court decisions ever rendered because it represents a gross expansion of the tyranny of the federal government.
Feds order farmer to destroy his own wheat crops: The shocking revelations of Wickard vs Filburn


Way to prove you frickin dolts have NO CLUE about what you're talking about here.

 

[dblack]

Half the CONZ on here think taxes are a fricking crime against humanity. What the hell do any of them know about constitutional law? Even less.

The commerce clause is fricking HUGE in the world of SCOTUS.
One farmer lost his case against the fed government and told him he couldn't grow wheat on his own farm for his own use on that farm because it impacted interstate commerce, which was the domain of congress.

That's precedence, bitches. It means something in SCOTUS cases.

That's a good point. The case is hardly a slam dunk. But precedent can (and in this case should) be reversed. We'll see how it goes. Looks like Kennedy and Roberts are the 'deciders'.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Half the CONZ on here think taxes are a fricking crime against humanity. What the hell do any of them know about constitutional law? Even less.

The commerce clause is fricking HUGE in the world of SCOTUS.
One farmer lost his case against the fed government and told him he couldn't grow wheat on his own farm for his own use on that farm because it impacted interstate commerce, which was the domain of congress.

That's precedence, bitches. It means something in SCOTUS cases.
Which is a greater abuse of power? Compelling you to buy something as an investment in the entire community, much like taxation, or telling you what you can and cannot do on your own land?

Do some actual reading that's not some right wing retard site and you people might actually LEARN a thing or two about how your country ACTUALLY WORKS instead of how you think it does.

How is my health insurance INTERSTATE commerce?

My insurance company is based in Boston and my payments to them stay in state, I live in Massachussetts, my doctor is in MA, and I don't do any dealings with my insurance company over state lines.

How is that interstate? I don't see it please enlighten me.

 

[Claudette]

He can't.

Hell. Insurance companies can't even compete across State Lines in most States.

 

[Conservative]

Not to crush you retard asshat contards...but....I'm going to crush you retard asshat contards now.




It all starts with a farmer named Roscoe Filburn, a modest farmer who grew wheat in his own back yard in order to feed his chickens.
One day, a U.S. government official showed up at his farm. Noting that Filburn was growing a lot of wheat, this government official determined that Filburn was growing too much wheat and ordered Filburn to destroy his wheat crops and pay a large fine to the federal government.

The year was 1940, you see. And through a highly protectionist policy, the federal government had decided to artificially drive up the prices of wheat by limiting the amount of wheat that could be grown on any given acre. This is all part of Big Government's "infinite wisdom" of trying to somehow improve prosperity by destroying food and impairing economic productivity. (Be wary any time the government says it's going to "solve problems" for you.)

The federal government, of course, claims authority over all commerce (even when such claims are blatantly in violation of the limitations placed upon government by the Constitution). But Roscoe Filburn wasn't selling his wheat to anyone. Thus, he was not engaged in interstate commerce. He wasn't growing wheat as something to use for commerce at all, in fact. He was simply growing wheat in his back yard and feeding it to his chickens. That's not commerce. That's just growing your own food.

But get this: The government insisted he pay a fine and destroy his wheat, so Filburn took the government to court, arguing that the federal government had no right to tell a man to destroy his food crops just because they wanted to protect some sort of artificially high prices in the wheat market.

This case eventually went to the US Supreme Court. It's now known as Wickard v. Filburn, and it is one of the most famous US Supreme Court decisions ever rendered because it represents a gross expansion of the tyranny of the federal government.
Feds order farmer to destroy his own wheat crops: The shocking revelations of Wickard vs Filburn


Way to prove you frickin dolts have NO CLUE about what you're talking about here.

cross posting is a no-no here, Deceptimoron.

Cross posting is not allowed and is considered spam.

 

[Conservative]

He can't.

Hell. Insurance companies can't even compete across State Lines in most States.

allowing sale of health insurance across state lines would go a long way to reducing costs for health insurance.

 

[sealybobo]

I hope the right wingers in the supreme court do play politics with this so the voters understand how important it is to have a Democrat in the White House. Justices are retriing and we already have to deal with Roberts for at least 30 years unless he gets ill god willing. They need to throw Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas off the court.

 

[Full-Auto]

I hope the right wingers in the supreme court do play politics with this so the voters understand how important it is to have a Democrat in the White House. Justices are retriing and we already have to deal with Roberts for at least 30 years unless he gets ill god willing. They need to throw Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas off the court.

So you can not surrender your freedom fast enough.

Typical for the left.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

He can't.

Hell. Insurance companies can't even compete across State Lines in most States.

allowing sale of health insurance across state lines would go a long way to reducing costs for health insurance.

Indeed it would, but since we don't how can it be regulated under the interstate commerce clause?