Comments on: Supreme Court Loser: Watch Out, Kids — Obamacare’s Coming for You

By: wantingbalance

wantingbalance — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:00:11 +0000

Librarian53 needs to spend a bit more time in the research section looking up the definition of “tax” and less time in the political fiction shelves. The basis of the court ruling, which supports Obama’s argument, is that the only reason the law can stand is that it is based on Congress’ power to tax. If this is not a new tax and does not fall under that congressional power, then Roberts would have ruled differently. Say what you will about the action the result is that Obamacare is the largest tax increase in the history of mankind and left to Washington will be used exactly as LBJ used Social Security…to ficitionally balance the federal budget while both liberty and health care erode.

By: helicohunter

helicohunter — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:47:23 +0000

I have chronic medical problems that require careful management. Health insurance has always been a must for me. When I was young, there was a period of time when 25% of my income went towards health insurance. I had to sacrifice an awful lot to keep that insurance. Young people today won’t need to make such huge sacrifices. No matter how healthy you are, you could be hit by a truck tomorrow. Hospitals are forced to write off huge sums of money for care given to those who can’t pay. Those costs are currently passed on to responsible folks who have insurance.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:37:58 +0000

I really don’t care one way or another about the bill, what I care about is the power that this gives the federal government and the precedent this creates. What the court said today was that no matter what else the Constitution says the “taxing” authority trumps that. The rest of the constitution is moot now as any liberty the feds don’t want you to have or exercise can be taxed away to the point only the rich will have that liberty.

By: pksk531

pksk531 — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:20:46 +0000

Those opposed to the law sound like EVERYONE is going to be paying the penalty. ONLY those who can get insurance but do not, who CHOOSE to go without will have to pay it – and it is not some huge amount like some are saying. An individual making $50,000 would be hit with $400.00. THat is it. Does not effect those with insurance, Medicare or Medicaid recipients. Gotta love the scare tactics- when the truth does not support their views, LIE [Death Panels!! Tax on everyone!!! BOO!]

By: AR

AR — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:00:05 +0000

I am 27, and a fiscal conservative, and based on this story, am more informed about the law than these neocon clowns (“neoclowns”?) who love to run up trillion dollar wars on the Bank of China MasterCard, but won’t let the Democrats adopt deficit-neutral (or even negative) laws that make health care a right (and a responsibility) in America.

This law requires BOTH that all those who can afford health care, purchase it, UNLESS that care costs more than 7-11% of one’s annual income, in which the government pays for the amount over that 7-11%.

By: Librarian53

Librarian53 — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 19:31:10 +0000

Mr. Danner is wrong. It isn’t a big new tax, it is called being responsible to have insurance. Does he recommend that businesses not buy insurance on their property to protect their financial well-being? I doubt it.