Obama-care lands at the supreme court, what your thoughts?

[The Rabbi]

Somewhere will be the statement as to exactly what the court is asked to consider. Probably the central issue is the mandate. How far can the FedGov go in telling people what to do? A secondary issue might be the penalty, that the administration swears now is a tax, although Obama swore it wasn't.
In Lopez the court finally showed some kind of resolve on where Commerce is limited. The other cases involving commerce aren't as promising.
The oral arguments ought to be entertainining. I can hear Scalia now. And yes Kagan ought to recuse. But won't.

 

[The Rabbi]

If the government can make you purchase car insurance, pay into your social security retirement fund, medicare insurance, etc etc etc.., fining someone who does not purchase healthcare insurance is as legal as any of the aforementioned.

Of course when that person needs health care services the taxpayers will pick up the tab just like they do now!

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

 

[Rocko]

Ginsberg and Kagan are avowed Marxists. Sotomayor is a fucking retard, an Affirmative Action appointment.

Kennedy often leans left, but he is a constitutionalists and will vote to toss fascist care out.

I hope Ginsberg doesn't croke while Obama is in office, but even if she does, he can't pick worse.

Again, that's dangerously naive

Even with a republican congress?

 

[Rocko]

My first thought is 5 to 4, nice try socialists.

Then you are conveniently naive

Why? What do you think will happen?

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't have a freakin clue what will happen. But there are alot of factors at play here.

You are assuming there will be no changes in the Court before Obamacare is heard. A Constituional Justice could die of natural causes. He could become too sick to fulfill his responsibilities. Some Progressive lunatic could assassinate one specifically so Obama could pick a new justice. There are hundreds of possible outcomes that can effect the make up of the court and allow Obama another pick before this case is heard.

You are also assuming that 5 to 4 is guaranteed to fall on the conservative side. Justice Kennedy is unreliable. This is a historic fact.

We don't know how the question at issue will be framed. Will we be looking at the individual mandates or the entire law? If it's struck down will be struck down in part or completely?

This is precisely why we the people need to be diligent. Because the Courts can and do make bad decisions. Dread Scott for one. I would argue Roe v. Wade as another. More recently Kelo v. New London

This law never should have been passed and now we have to rely on an untrustworthy court to preserve our Constitution. This is far from a good thing.

 

[Foxfyre]

Somewhere will be the statement as to exactly what the court is asked to consider. Probably the central issue is the mandate. How far can the FedGov go in telling people what to do? A secondary issue might be the penalty, that the administration swears now is a tax, although Obama swore it wasn't.
In Lopez the court finally showed some kind of resolve on where Commerce is limited. The other cases involving commerce aren't as promising.
The oral arguments ought to be entertainining. I can hear Scalia now. And yes Kagan ought to recuse. But won't.

Yep. Initially it was not called a 'tax' because that made it more unpopular. But since passage, it is now called a 'tax' which makes it much more difficult for anybody to sue for damages. More government doublespeak with language changing so they can impose more of their will on an increasingly unwilling public.

 

[Sunshine]

If the government can make you purchase car insurance, pay into your social security retirement fund, medicare insurance, etc etc etc.., fining someone who does not purchase healthcare insurance is as legal as any of the aforementioned.

Of course when that person needs health care services the taxpayers will pick up the tab just like they do now!

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.


I have said for years that medicaid patients should have a copy on their services even if it is just 1 dollar. A think is only worth what you pay for it. And those of us who work and pay premiums have copays. Why shouldn't everyone.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Another.....

....OBAMA WIN!!!

Can the Teabaggers handle it?

​

 

[JRK]

Ginsberg and Kagan are avowed Marxists. Sotomayor is a fucking retard, an Affirmative Action appointment.

Kennedy often leans left, but he is a constitutionalists and will vote to toss fascist care out.

I hope Ginsberg doesn't croke while Obama is in office, but even if she does, he can't pick worse.

Again, that's dangerously naive

En lighten us

 

[Rocko]

I don't have a freakin clue what will happen. But there are alot of factors at play here.

You are assuming there will be no changes in the Court before Obamacare is heard. A Constituional Justice could die of natural causes. He could become too sick to fulfill his responsibilities. Some Progressive lunatic could assassinate one specifically so Obama could pick a new justice. There are hundreds of possible outcomes that can effect the make up of the court and allow Obama another pick before this case is heard.

You are also assuming that 5 to 4 is guaranteed to fall on the conservative side. Justice Kennedy is unreliable. This is a historic fact.

We don't know how the question at issue will be framed. Will we be looking at the individual mandates or the entire law? If it's struck down will be struck down in part or completely?

This is precisely why we the people need to be diligent. Because the Courts can and do make bad decisions. Dread Scott for one. I would argue Roe v. Wade as another. More recently Kelo v. New London

This law never should have been passed and now we have to rely on an untrustworthy court to preserve our Constitution. This is far from a good thing.

OK, your right, it's not approprite to crack open a bottle champagne, just yet.

 

[JRK]

Of course when that person needs health care services the taxpayers will pick up the tab just like they do now!

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.


I have said for years that medicaid patients should have a copy on their services even if it is just 1 dollar. A think is only worth what you pay for it. And those of us who work and pay premiums have copays. Why shouldn't everyone.

Look we all ready have a social system in place for the poor and the retired, its called medicare
Why add another one on?
I contribute every week and so does everyone else that works

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course when that person needs health care services the taxpayers will pick up the tab just like they do now!

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.

.

You say I'm wrong and then go prove my point. Thanks.

And no, this bill does not require that everyone contribute. The opposite. Low income people will get vouchers from the gov't for health insurance. That is not contributing.

 

[Claudette]

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.

.

You say I'm wrong and then go prove my point. Thanks.

And no, this bill does not require that everyone contribute. The opposite. Low income people will get vouchers from the gov't for health insurance. That is not contributing.

It sure ain't

Those of us with insurance will pay higher premiums to cover all those without. We will be paying for ourselves, our families and all those who can't afford to take care of themselves.

Doesn't work for me.

 

[signelect]

IF the SC approves this bill we are in more trouble than I can imagine. If it is approved, renounce your citizen ship, move to a foreign country, sneak back in and apply for benefits.

 

[Sunshine]

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.

.

You say I'm wrong and then go prove my point. Thanks.

And no, this bill does not require that everyone contribute. The opposite. Low income people will get vouchers from the gov't for health insurance. That is not contributing.

So you want low income people to die outside the hospital and be stacked like cord wood? LOL.

This bill does not replace medicaid. That will always be around. But there are people who end up on it, and who end up as write offs who would/could get insurance. But they can't. This bill is for people who do not have and cannot get insurance on their own. You know, the working poor. Or even the not so poor who are uninsurable. I several people here who are independent contractors of one type or another, but they can't get insurance for themselves. It would give them the ability to purchase insurance. And THEY really want it to go through!

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

 

[JRK]

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.

.

You say I'm wrong and then go prove my point. Thanks.

And no, this bill does not require that everyone contribute. The opposite. Low income people will get vouchers from the gov't for health insurance. That is not contributing.

It sure ain't

Those of us with insurance will pay higher premiums to cover all those without. We will be paying for ourselves, our families and all those who can't afford to take care of themselves.

Doesn't work for me.

to confirm
Health insurance costs deal blow to Obama - FT.com

 

[DontBeStupid]

Of course when that person needs health care services the taxpayers will pick up the tab just like they do now!

The taxpayer doesn't necessarily pick up the bill, sunshine.

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.


I have said for years that medicaid patients should have a copy on their services even if it is just 1 dollar. A think is only worth what you pay for it. And those of us who work and pay premiums have copays. Why shouldn't everyone.

Isn't it funny how all the "conservatives" here, who complain that the poor have no skin in the game, suddenly now want to have no skin in the game.

 

[eflatminor]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

Is it therefore legal to steal the insurance policy? After all, if I only have to HAVE it...

!00% Constitutional? Can you please point to the enumerated power giving the federal government the power to force us to buy...sorry, have...insurance?

 

[JRK]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

Health insurance costs deal blow to Obama - FT.com
we have a system in place for those who cannot afford it them selves, its called medicare and medicaid
There is nothing constitutional about the democrat party telling me I have to purchase insurance
stop with the spin
And as far as your use of the unions
UAW got Obama this time
It will not happen again I can promise you