Author Topic: Vote(d) 2012 ... can't mediate the Ho Ho's  (Read 128726 times)

Offline darqueseid

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #320 on: July 02, 2012, 03:30:20 PM »
Now the political issue with this becomes, why were we lied to by proponents of the bill saying it wouldn't be a tax in any way shape or form.

Why were not lied to by the proponents of the bill.  It really never was a tax in their mind nor intended to be a tax.  The "it's a tax" direction change came because they had no leg to stand on regarding Commerce Clause.  Sadly the SCOTUS bought into the tax defense. 

An even more interesting political issue with this ruling is this....

Constitutionality of the law aside, it is now an invalid law due to how it was passed alone without even getting into its content.  This is all because it is considered a tax.  Taxing legislation must originate from the House as per Article I Section 7 of US Constitution.  The actual bill that was passed originated in the Senate. 
Well, this isn't entirely correct, its true that the Bill may have originated in the Senate and was passed in the senate before the house, however the House compromised on several key issues and changed the bill quite a bit before they passed the measure.  Indeed they sent it back to the senate for confirmation and basically told them they wouldn't approve anything that wasn't their version of the bill.  Thus the senate actually passed the houses version of this legislation.  Its a minor quibble depending on how strictly you read that passage of the constitution.  One could technically say the actual bill passed originated in the house since it was that version that actually got passed...

Not that I expect things like the constitution or rules to get in the way of the legislation moving forward.

Also, I agree with the quote about SCOTUS being the final arbiter of Constitutionality.   Even the fact that it was a 5/4 decision like so many others shows that they don't have a single firm grasp on the matter of constitutionality.  Also, States and people also have right to ignore/nullify illegal/unconstitutional laws as part of checks and balances.  Doesn't mean they won't be slapped down for trying but they have the right to do so.

SCOTUS is supposed to be the interpreter though, I'm pretty sure that's their whole reason for existing in the first place. 

Be that as it may, I can agree that just because its their job, doesn't mean that they are always particularly good at it.

Offline archangel.arcanis

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #321 on: July 02, 2012, 10:26:03 PM »
Now the political issue with this becomes, why were we lied to by proponents of the bill saying it wouldn't be a tax in any way shape or form.

Why were not lied to by the proponents of the bill.  It really never was a tax in their mind nor intended to be a tax.  The "it's a tax" direction change came because they had no leg to stand on regarding Commerce Clause.  Sadly the SCOTUS bought into the tax defense. 

An even more interesting political issue with this ruling is this....

Constitutionality of the law aside, it is now an invalid law due to how it was passed alone without even getting into its content.  This is all because it is considered a tax.  Taxing legislation must originate from the House as per Article I Section 7 of US Constitution.  The actual bill that was passed originated in the Senate. 

Not that I expect things like the constitution or rules to get in the way of the legislation moving forward.

Also, I agree with the quote about SCOTUS being the final arbiter of Constitutionality.   Even the fact that it was a 5/4 decision like so many others shows that they don't have a single firm grasp on the matter of constitutionality.  Also, States and people also have right to ignore/nullify illegal/unconstitutional laws as part of checks and balances.  Doesn't mean they won't be slapped down for trying but they have the right to do so.
I should have italicized the political part of that statement. It would only be a political argument and not have any substance. Though I do think they did known it was a tax (at least planned to argue it that way) before it was ever passed, so they were disingenuous at least. As you said the challenge to it now being a tax that originated in the Senate is the next legal hurtle it will face.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #322 on: July 03, 2012, 12:54:39 AM »
I'm just amused with all the people saying they're going to move to <insert country here>. Wouldn't only a few countries in the middle east match their desired policies?
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16306
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #323 on: July 03, 2012, 12:22:46 PM »
It's extra amusing most of them seem to want to move to Canada...

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #324 on: July 03, 2012, 12:31:03 PM »
...Doesn't Canada have much more comprehensive social welfare?
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline darqueseid

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #325 on: July 03, 2012, 12:31:43 PM »
Well yeah, they want to go to Canada so they get free universal healthcare.  Wait, What? ;-)

Offline altpersona

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2000
  • #78
    • View Profile
    • You are here
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #326 on: July 03, 2012, 04:14:47 PM »
if canada were 4 or 5 hundred miles further south, i'd move.
The goal of power is power. - 1984
We are not descended from fearful men. - Murrow
The Final Countdown is now stuck in your head.

Anim-manga still sux.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #327 on: July 03, 2012, 05:10:09 PM »
Well yeah, they want to go to Canada so they get free universal healthcare.  Wait, What? ;-)

... and Sarah Palin has endorsed it.
 ;)
Your codpiece is a mimic.

Offline PlzBreakMyCampaign

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1962
  • Immune to Critical Hits as a Fairness Elemental
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #328 on: July 03, 2012, 10:04:15 PM »
I'm just amused with all the people saying they're going to move to <insert country here>. Wouldn't only a few countries in the middle east match their desired policies?
I'm not. One of my friends is a disabled vet who's leaving specifically because he doesn't recognize the country he sought to defend. Are we free when the government now has the power to tax us if we don't buy things? If you buy, you are taxed. If you don't buy, you are taxed. Why not just confiscate private property and get it over with? Imagine what will happen when the lobbyists cash in on this...

It's extra amusing most of them seem to want to move to Canada...
He's actually using it temporarily for an easier 'escape'
Well yeah, they want to go to Canada so they get free universal healthcare.  Wait, What? ;-)
Nothing is free.

... and Sarah Palin has endorsed it.
 ;)
Lol I want linkz

Offline darqueseid

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #329 on: July 03, 2012, 11:22:10 PM »
I'm just amused with all the people saying they're going to move to <insert country here>. Wouldn't only a few countries in the middle east match their desired policies?
I'm not. One of my friends is a disabled vet who's leaving specifically because he doesn't recognize the country he sought to defend. Are we free when the government now has the power to tax us if we don't buy things? If you buy, you are taxed. If you don't buy, you are taxed. Why not just confiscate private property and get it over with? Imagine what will happen when the lobbyists cash in on this...


Uhm #1 it's been that way for years if you want to own a car, so I'm not sure what new ground we're breaking. 

#2 what does being a disabled vet have to do with anything? I'm ex-army just so you know and I also fought for our country, and I happen to Think someone not having insurance so someone else has to pay your way is wrong. 

#3 The military doesn't usually look favorably on people who bring the group down, which is what people who go to the emergency room instead of having insurance are doing. 

Please, and im trying to say this as nicely as i know how, If you've got a point to make just give the argument, don't try to cash in on someone else's service that you really don't know anything about in order to further your agenda, it really bothers those of us who have served.

The bottom line is, if you don't have health insurance, your upping the costs for everyone who does, since personal responsibility is sorely lacking in this country, because it's the selfish "Me" generation, the government has had to mandate it. 


Offline skydragonknight

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2660
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #330 on: July 04, 2012, 01:58:21 AM »
"Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."

Pretty sad when you think about where we are in the Fatal Sequence.
Hmm.

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #331 on: July 09, 2012, 09:06:10 AM »
I'm just amused with all the people saying they're going to move to <insert country here>. Wouldn't only a few countries in the middle east match their desired policies?
Also, there's Somalia.
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7639
  • classique style , invisible tail
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #332 on: July 10, 2012, 07:46:54 PM »
Well yeah, they want to go to Canada so they get free universal healthcare.  Wait, What? ;-)
Nothing is free.

... and Sarah Palin has endorsed it.
 ;)
Lol I want linkz

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Sarah+Palin+Canadian+health+care+link+critics+sick/2661120/story.html

She's endorsed it with her feet, if not with her mouth.
Your codpiece is a mimic.

Offline skydragonknight

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2660
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #333 on: July 10, 2012, 08:03:18 PM »
Sarah Palin has no political philosophy. She simply does whatever gets her the most attention and favor. I feel sorry for anyone genuinely taken in by her act.
Hmm.

Offline Hallack

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • With Jetpacks
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #334 on: July 11, 2012, 01:30:18 PM »
It is really disheartening how many are taken by her act and the act of so many others.  :puke

Offline sirpercival

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline JohnnyMayHymn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 762
  • Former Lord of the Kitchen Sink
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #336 on: July 12, 2012, 08:20:36 PM »
« Last Edit: July 12, 2012, 08:30:08 PM by JohnnyMayHymn »
The Emperor
Can you find the Wumpus?

Offline Hallack

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • With Jetpacks
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #337 on: July 13, 2012, 11:22:25 AM »
Yeah, that one was hilarious. 

Offline PlzBreakMyCampaign

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1962
  • Immune to Critical Hits as a Fairness Elemental
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #338 on: July 18, 2012, 08:28:14 PM »
I'm just amused with all the people saying they're going to move to <insert country here>. Wouldn't only a few countries in the middle east match their desired policies?
I'm not. One of my friends is a disabled vet who's leaving specifically because he doesn't recognize the country he sought to defend. Are we free when the government now has the power to tax us if we don't buy things? If you buy, you are taxed. If you don't buy, you are taxed. Why not just confiscate private property and get it over with? Imagine what will happen when the lobbyists cash in on this...

Uhm #1 it's been that way for years if you want to own a car, so I'm not sure what new ground we're breaking. 

#2 what does being a disabled vet have to do with anything? I'm ex-army just so you know and I also fought for our country, and I happen to Think someone not having insurance so someone else has to pay your way is wrong. 

#3 The military doesn't usually look favorably on people who bring the group down, which is what people who go to the emergency room instead of having insurance are doing. 

Please, and im trying to say this as nicely as i know how, If you've got a point to make just give the argument, don't try to cash in on someone else's service that you really don't know anything about in order to further your agenda, it really bothers those of us who have served.

The bottom line is, if you don't have health insurance, your upping the costs for everyone who does, since personal responsibility is sorely lacking in this country, because it's the selfish "Me" generation, the government has had to mandate it.
I wouldn't bother with this if it weren't for the last two paragraphs.

1) Either you don't understand that I was talking about the newly invented action of "taxing" when something is not bought, or you believe there are "taxes" levied by the government for not buying a car. I'd love to see the latter.
2) Veterans are people who made a living opposing people in a specific middle eastern country. Disabled ones are ones that aside from their ability to do so, would presumably still be doing that. Thus there is no change in opinion: they didn't "quit." And now I wonder what I said that makes you think you are somehow disagreeing with me about communal medical payment resources. Just to be clear, you seem to be taking a conservative position on your #2.
3) "instead of?" So insurance stops emergency room visits? Private practices see people without insurance too. In fact its probably more expensive to go to the emergency room without insurance than to a private clinic, assuming both can provide the needed care.

Can I ask what "agenda" I am furthering? Balanced discussion? Fairness? Communist impulses? Crazy right-wing tinfoil hat impulses? Which do you think of me? And once you decide on that, how am I "cashing in on" bringing up just how serious I take this issue? What benefit can I possibly get from wasting my time to type out to someone that they really should try to be fairer-handed to those who are considering expatriating? You seem to be saying I'm doing this for myself and not others. Is that in line with anything I have done here, aside from asking questions (I am guilty of being curious)?

The "If you've got a point to make just give the argument" basically is you demanding I come out swinging, so that those here have even more objections to the limited and reasonable critiques in this thread. I bet you'd love to have more to tear into. You first. And even then I'll probably say no thanks.

Besides the comma splices in "The bottom line is, if you don't have health insurance, your upping the costs for everyone who does, since personal responsibility is sorely lacking in this country, because it's the selfish 'Me' generation, the government has had to mandate it," you seem to be saying that those who use economic substitutes (and therefore not participating in what would otherwise be an increase of demand) are actually making insurance prices rise. No other economic good behaves this way. Perhaps you might think this due to medicare/medicaid which is simply a government intrusion into the market. Please tell me you don't find this forceful aberration of economic efficiency to be acceptable. That is the problem, not the lack of a powerful government forcing its citizens to partake in what they do not want to.

Sarah Palin has no political philosophy. She simply does whatever gets her the most attention and favor. I feel sorry for anyone genuinely taken in by her act.
:eh Taking on one's own party does not earn favor.... It does earn attention. Perhaps she's a glutton for punishment. If she wants to take the beatings for other women in politics, more power to her.

Well yeah, they want to go to Canada so they get free universal healthcare.  Wait, What? ;-)
Nothing is free.

... and Sarah Palin has endorsed it.
 ;)
Lol I want linkz

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Sarah+Palin+Canadian+health+care+link+critics+sick/2661120/story.html

She's endorsed it with her feet, if not with her mouth.
Aw on quick glance this just look like her mom just made her go to a larger city when she was young so there was a hospital. Seems practical. Not exactly the funny I was hoping for.  :-\

ADMG, can you play devil's advocate for a bit. I've been getting busier and busier.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: Vote 2012 ... Take It To The Convention edition.
« Reply #339 on: July 18, 2012, 10:23:06 PM »
Because this probably isn't obvious, the following (until later when I mention Plz specifically after the rant, it'll be obvious) is not directed at anyone specific.  Except Ron Paul at one point, but not until then.  Mostly I just got tired of the Libertarian extremist view of taxes that is just so stupid I had to rant.  Guess what people?  Taxes are necessary!

Guess what?  Private property is a myth.  One of the most successfully persistent ones.  Not many people actually own truly private property.  You live on the mainland US?  That land is owned by the US.  Not you.  You own the deed, but it still belongs to the US government.  They let you stay there and do with it what you will, within the zoning permits and other legal restrictions (no murder and such).  Individual laws vary with the state, and vary with ethical and moral "correctness", according to opinion, but still.  Point is, the only people who own actual private property own lands outside of national borders.  You may hate the idea, but governments own all the land inside their borders.  Not individuals.

On taxes: you want to use the things that the government pays for?  You pay taxes.  It's as simple as that.  This is something that conservatives don't seem to get.  Taxes are not theft.  They are payment.  For a number of (expensive) services.  Services such as protection (military and police), transportation (roads), healthcare, education, a ton of stuff.  If you refuse to pay taxes on principle that they are theft, and use the roads, you are the one stealing.

The trick is figuring out what should the accepted value be.  If the only accepted value is 0, then no taxes=no government=no services, and you can't complain when people come around and steal your stuff.  Or when all currency becomes worthless, since that's a government thing.  Oh, and speaking of that, you know how libertarians are all about the gold standard?  Well, Ron Paul is all about the gold standard?  The dollar is on a standardized currency right now, as much as he would hate to admit it.  The standard?  Trust.  I'm not saying it's a good standard, I'm saying that it is a standard.  The standard for all currency is trust that it will be worth what you buy with it.  This is determined by a complex interaction of supply and demand, as well as flat out BS (re: faith).  Also, can't complain when the roads don't get paved, can't complain when someone murders your family, can't complain when someone cheats you out of services, etc.  So yes, taxes are a necessary thing, unless you want a total anarchy.  A true total anarchy, not the idealized BS anarchy most anarchists expect to happen.  You can complain about how much they are, you can complain about what they are being used for, but you can't complain about them existing.

Okay, enough ranting.

@Plz: 3: Lack of insurance increases the cost for all medical services, because they service has to happen regardless of whether the person pays or not (in the case of emergencies).  Someone has to pay for the services, and that job falls to the government and insurance companies.  Because who else would?  It just increases costs for everyone, except those who don't pay.  Wait, isn't that what the economic conservatives have a problem with in the first place?  People getting the benefit but not paying?  Also, insurance is not like any other economic good.  Well, except money things, like loans, banking, the stock market, and gambling.  Insurance is a combination of gambling and banking.  The point is, just because no other good behaves that way doesn't mean that this one doesn't as well.  Here's how insurance companies work in a nutshell: A bunch of people buy the insurance.  The company makes money.  A few people get sick/hurt/whatever.  The insurance company spends money to cover them.  If more and more people abuse the system, then the insurance company has to keep spending more and more money on those who aren't putting as much into the system.  This increases the costs for those who are paying.  By increasing the number of people who are paying, you decrease the total cost, because the same number of people are taking money out.  This is what the health care bill does.  Basically.  Well, part of it.  They other part is an anti-discriminatory clause that is supposed to help people qualify for the insurance, instead of getting turned down because of bad luck.  Whether or not that should be up to individual companies is up for debate, but personally I think it's a good thing.

Anyways, the point of all of this is that taxes: necessary.  Government: necessary.  Government intervention: necessary.  The only thing up to debate in this is how much the government should intervene.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20