Will we have a repeat of the 2010 Congressional Elections due to TAXES and Obamacare?

[WillowTree]

That's old news....nothing was hidden on them, they were all mentioned when the Affordable Care Act was passed...hashed and rehashed by you all on the right....or did you forget that you have already whined and tantrum-ed on those taxes a few years ago?

but obama lied and said it wasn't a tax.. so I'll just keep repeating his lies if it's all the same to ewe.

but what is the difference willow? the penalty is THE SAME for the mandate, only now you can call it a tax penalty....big deal...nothing has changed what so ever...the mandate is constitutional, and if you break the rules of the mandate, you still have to pay a penalty, to the IRS....that was ALL in the original bill....it was always the IRS.

People aren't stupid, a tax or a penalty, or a penalty tax, or a tax penalty....people who do not have insurance who can afford it, will have to pay it. The result is the same...the penalty money always went to the gvt....

It's a non-issue trying to be made an issue....

those that were fine with the mandate before this ruling, will be fine with the mandate now, regardless of what you decide to call the mandate penalty.

Those that were against the mandate before this ruling, are still against it, regardless of CJ roberts declaration.

tax


Almost everyone with a brain knew right from the beginning that you cannot add 30 million people to the rolls without it costing a huge amount of money. Approximately 20 million of those won't be able to pay so the TAXPAER will pick up the bill. Every time you buy an over the counter medication you are paying a TAX on the bill. There are 21 other tax hikes embedded within this bill. And their other source of revenue is the 500 Billion dollars they are going to steal from the people who need the most care. The seniors.

 

[Jackson]

That's old news....nothing was hidden on them, they were all mentioned when the Affordable Care Act was passed...hashed and rehashed by you all on the right....or did you forget that you have already whined and tantrum-ed on those taxes a few years ago?

but obama lied and said it wasn't a tax.. so I'll just keep repeating his lies if it's all the same to ewe.

but what is the difference willow? the penalty is THE SAME for the mandate, only now you can call it a tax penalty....big deal...nothing has changed what so ever...the mandate is constitutional, and if you break the rules of the mandate, you still have to pay a penalty, to the IRS....that was ALL in the original bill....it was always the IRS.

People aren't stupid, a tax or a penalty, or a penalty tax, or a tax penalty....people who do not have insurance who can afford it, will have to pay it. The result is the same...the penalty money always went to the gvt....

It's a non-issue trying to be made an issue....

those that were fine with the mandate before this ruling, will be fine with the mandate now, regardless of what you decide to call the mandate penalty.

Those that were against the mandate before this ruling, are still against it, regardless of CJ roberts declaration.

Perhaps you weren't watching when rest of America was when the Justices came out with the ruling. The networks all initially reported that the mandate under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional because the government could not command citizens to buy anything and say it was a "penalty." NO PENALTY

However, they could tax as it was argued by their own attorneys before the court justices. That is where they came up with the tax, from the presidents OWN ATTORNEYS!!

Now, Obama is changing the game. Trying to say it's a penalty when that was STRUCK DOWN

 

[The T]

but obama lied and said it wasn't a tax.. so I'll just keep repeating his lies if it's all the same to ewe.

but what is the difference willow? the penalty is THE SAME for the mandate, only now you can call it a tax penalty....big deal...nothing has changed what so ever...the mandate is constitutional, and if you break the rules of the mandate, you still have to pay a penalty, to the IRS....that was ALL in the original bill....it was always the IRS.

People aren't stupid, a tax or a penalty, or a penalty tax, or a tax penalty....people who do not have insurance who can afford it, will have to pay it. The result is the same...the penalty money always went to the gvt....

It's a non-issue trying to be made an issue....

those that were fine with the mandate before this ruling, will be fine with the mandate now, regardless of what you decide to call the mandate penalty.

Those that were against the mandate before this ruling, are still against it, regardless of CJ roberts declaration.

Perhaps you weren't watching when rest of America was when the Justices came out with the ruling. The networks all initially reported that the mandate under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional because the government could not command citizens to buy anything and say it was a "penalty." NO PENALTY

However, they could tax as it was argued by their own attorneys before the court justices. That is where they came up with the tax, from the presidents OWN ATTORNEYS!!

Now, Obama is changing the game. Trying to say it's a penalty when that was STRUCK DOWN

Typical of Obama to FLAUT the law...isn't that whathe's been doing all along? All the more reson to vote his sorry ass OUT.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jackson, doesn't matter: ACA is constitutional.

We can't fight it by saying it is unconstitutional, because Roberts put that down.

We fight on the economy only.

 

[Jackson]

Jackson, doesn't matter: ACA is constitutional.

We can't fight it by saying it is unconstitutional, because Roberts put that down.

We fight on the economy only.

That is precisely why it is a tax. Thank you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We fight it as a tax that we don't want, but we are going to have to make adjustments to the fact that MR loves his romneycare, and we are going to see a version of it in his first month as president.

 

[Jackson]

We fight it as a tax that we don't want, but we are going to have to make adjustments to the fact that MR loves his romneycare, and we are going to see a version of it in his first month as president.

No, I don't see that happening at all. There will be committees that include both Democrats AND Republicans that take the positive, well thought out parts of ACA and dispose of the expensive bargaining chips that were put in to sweeten pots. There won't be waivers for some and not for others, in essence, it will be a fair proclamation that both parties can support withour unecessarily burdening the middleclass when they are facing the worst economic times we've known. It will take a great deal of time. Not overnight and no time to read the bill.

At least that is what we can look forward to.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I believe you are mistaken, but that is the nature of politics. It is the art of the possible. And it is not possible to go backwards on the issue of the nation and its health. There will be compromise, and, hopefully, the middle class will support it.

 

[Care4all]

but obama lied and said it wasn't a tax.. so I'll just keep repeating his lies if it's all the same to ewe.

but what is the difference willow? the penalty is THE SAME for the mandate, only now you can call it a tax penalty....big deal...nothing has changed what so ever...the mandate is constitutional, and if you break the rules of the mandate, you still have to pay a penalty, to the IRS....that was ALL in the original bill....it was always the IRS.

People aren't stupid, a tax or a penalty, or a penalty tax, or a tax penalty....people who do not have insurance who can afford it, will have to pay it. The result is the same...the penalty money always went to the gvt....

It's a non-issue trying to be made an issue....

those that were fine with the mandate before this ruling, will be fine with the mandate now, regardless of what you decide to call the mandate penalty.

Those that were against the mandate before this ruling, are still against it, regardless of CJ roberts declaration.

Perhaps you weren't watching when rest of America was when the Justices came out with the ruling. The networks all initially reported that the mandate under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional because the government could not command citizens to buy anything and say it was a "penalty." NO PENALTY

However, they could tax as it was argued by their own attorneys before the court justices. That is where they came up with the tax, from the presidents OWN ATTORNEYS!!

Now, Obama is changing the game. Trying to say it's a penalty when that was STRUCK DOWN

is the end result the same? Is there still a penalty or tax penalty for not following the rules of the mandate? Is the tax penalty structured the same as it was in the ACA? Is the amount of penalty still being paid to the IRS as it always was....?

YES to all of the above....

soooo, if you're saying the ONLY issue is what obama thought vs what the supreme court ruled.......so what? IT AFFECTS no one, any differently than it did when the law passed....the mandate is alive and well, and the mandate penalty is still the same as the bill....it still has to be paid to the irs as it was in the bill, by those who can afford to buy insurance, but choose not to follow the mandate.

Just because the Obama lawyers argued it was part of commerce clause really doesn't change a thing, when all said and done, the penalty is still a penalty, only now called a tax penalty....irs was always getting the penalty money, now and before the ruling.

bottom line....a mountain out of a mole hill is trying to be made by those who hate obama as president....and that's fine and dandy, but you are not gonna win anyone over to your side on this issue that wasn't on your side already....that's all i'm saying.

And taking this health care issue as the main issue of the election will rile the Dems to ''get out and vote'', vs. keeping the economy on the front burner...

Romney and what romney said during the passage of romneycare and how the federal gvt should follow his lead on the romneycare mandate and the penalty he instituted with it, is going to come back and bite him, BIG TIME imho.

 

[Jackson]

but what is the difference willow? the penalty is THE SAME for the mandate, only now you can call it a tax penalty....big deal...nothing has changed what so ever...the mandate is constitutional, and if you break the rules of the mandate, you still have to pay a penalty, to the IRS....that was ALL in the original bill....it was always the IRS.

People aren't stupid, a tax or a penalty, or a penalty tax, or a tax penalty....people who do not have insurance who can afford it, will have to pay it. The result is the same...the penalty money always went to the gvt....

It's a non-issue trying to be made an issue....

those that were fine with the mandate before this ruling, will be fine with the mandate now, regardless of what you decide to call the mandate penalty.

Those that were against the mandate before this ruling, are still against it, regardless of CJ roberts declaration.

Perhaps you weren't watching when rest of America was when the Justices came out with the ruling. The networks all initially reported that the mandate under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional because the government could not command citizens to buy anything and say it was a "penalty." NO PENALTY

However, they could tax as it was argued by their own attorneys before the court justices. That is where they came up with the tax, from the presidents OWN ATTORNEYS!!

Now, Obama is changing the game. Trying to say it's a penalty when that was STRUCK DOWN

is the end result the same? Is there still a penalty or tax penalty for not following the rules of the mandate? Is the tax penalty structured the same as it was in the ACA? Is the amount of penalty still being paid to the IRS as it always was....?

YES to all of the above....

soooo, if you're saying the ONLY issue is what obama thought vs what the supreme court ruled.......so what? IT AFFECTS no one, any differently than it did when the law passed....the mandate is alive and well, and the mandate penalty is still the same as the bill....it still has to be paid to the irs as it was in the bill, by those who can afford to buy insurance, but choose not to follow the mandate.

Just because the Obama lawyers argued it was part of commerce clause really doesn't change a thing, when all said and done, the penalty is still a penalty, only now called a tax penalty....irs was always getting the penalty money, now and before the ruling.

bottom line....a mountain out of a mole hill is trying to be made by those who hate obama as president....and that's fine and dandy, but you are not gonna win anyone over to your side on this issue that wasn't on your side already....that's all i'm saying.

And taking this health care issue as the main issue of the election will rile the Dems to ''get out and vote'', vs. keeping the economy on the front burner...

Romney and what romney said during the passage of romneycare and how the federal gvt should follow his lead on the romneycare mandate and the penalty he instituted with it, is going to come back and bite him, BIG TIME imho.

I think you are still confused. The Commerce Clause was the whole shebang and the federal government could not duplicate it because of this clause.

What Romney did was legal because it was within the borders of his state where the laws are interpreted more generously. But federally, it could not cross state lines and command a penalty or someone to buy something. What he did could not be duplicated nationally.

What happened in a tiny state with 8 percent uninsured could not happened with a country that is plagued with illegal immigrants. Romney won't have any trouble explaining this to most people. I think it is easy to understand.