Recommended Posts
DanG 1
See livendives post above.
My personal feelings have nothing to do with it. I always saw this as a tax. I may have even posted that opinion here, I don't remember. It is no different in my mind from the tax I pay every year for choosing not to have children. I am being taxed more than you because of my inaction vis-a-vis impregnating my wife. If you choose not to have health insurance, you will be taxed more than me. It's not different. You can play with the words all day, but social taxes are all the same.
- Dan G
My personal feelings have nothing to do with it. I always saw this as a tax. I may have even posted that opinion here, I don't remember. It is no different in my mind from the tax I pay every year for choosing not to have children. I am being taxed more than you because of my inaction vis-a-vis impregnating my wife. If you choose not to have health insurance, you will be taxed more than me. It's not different. You can play with the words all day, but social taxes are all the same.
- Dan G
rehmwa 2
QuoteSee livendives post above.
My personal feelings have nothing to do with it. I always saw this as a tax. I may have even posted that opinion here, I don't remember. It is no different in my mind from the tax I pay every year for choosing not to have children. I am being taxed more than you because of my inaction vis-a-vis impregnating my wife. If you choose not to have health insurance, you will be taxed more than me. It's not different. You can play with the words all day, but social taxes are all the same.
Fine, Shotgun is still my candidate for president (since Nightengale left the forums). But you've moved into my candidate for VP.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
QuoteQuoteWhere does it say the IRS will come after you?
Doesn't have to. Where is it written that the ONLY taxing body in the USA is the IRS?
I pay lots of taxes to the Great State of Illinois and to my county, township, city, school district... without any participation by the IRS.
More non-sequitur babble. Will the IRS come after you for not paying your taxes to the State of illinois? What other collection authority does the IRS have other than collecting taxes and assessing penalties for non-payment of taxes?
That duck is quacking pretty loud!!
davjohns 1
QuoteQuoteI think the Supremes dubbing it a tax has settled the argument. Now, individuals can be taxed for failing to buy a product.
Didn't we already have that? Last I checked, you could claim tax credits for GoodSense upgrades to your home, or buying a hybrid car, i.e. spending money on things deemed good for society. If healthcare coverage is deemed similarly good for society, how is providing a tax exemption for purchasing it different?
Blues,
Dave
Because there is no tax exemption. Those other things give you a choice. You didn't have to upgrade your home. You might not have the money right now. You didn't have to buy that car. You had the choice of spending your money on things that are deemed good for society.
Now, you are required to spend that money regardless of your assessment of your household budget, needs or desires. It's the difference between a carrot and a stick. If I offer you a reward for doing something, you have the freedome to choose. If I offer you punishment, you can choose, but I can up the punishment until you must comply or die (fiscally in this instance).
I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
rehmwa 2
QuoteIf I offer you a reward for doing something, you have the freedome to choose.
Any "reward" for one guy, just means the others have to pick up the slack (i.e., you are forcing your neighbors to subsidize your car purchase). So it's still a punishment for those that choose to not go after the reward. What business does the government have for offering a reward for doing something, anyway? It's not their business.
However = I agree this is DRAMATICALLY upping the interference factor, it's a much more BLATANT implementation of the concepts. I'm very worried that both parties will be able to springboard off of this to force the public to act and think and live by their arbitrary social standards.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
I think his argument is that you are taxed more when you do not purchase a home or a hybrid automobile. So in essence you are taxed for NOT doing something. I believe this is at the heart of John Roberts thinking.
QuoteQuoteIf I offer you a reward for doing something, you have the freedome to choose.
Any "reward" for one guy, just means the others have to pick up the slack (i.e., you are forcing your neighbors to subsidize your car purchase). So it's still a punishment for those that choose to not go after the reward. What business does the government have for offering a reward for doing something, anyway? It's not their business.
However = I agree this is DRAMATICALLY upping the interference factor, it's a much more BLATANT implementation of the concepts. I'm very worried that both parties will be able to springboard off of this to force the public to act and think and live by their arbitrary social standards.
Not only worried they might, there's no doubt about it they will. Once they finish handing out exemptions to political donors.
davjohns 1
QuoteQuoteIf I offer you a reward for doing something, you have the freedome to choose.
Any "reward" for one guy, just means the others have to pick up the slack (i.e., you are forcing your neighbors to subsidize your car purchase). So it's still a punishment for those that choose to not go after the reward. What business does the government have for offering a reward for doing something, anyway? It's not their business.
However = I agree this is DRAMATICALLY upping the interference factor, it's a much more BLATANT implementation of the concepts. I'm very worried that both parties will be able to springboard off of this to force the public to act and think and live by their arbitrary social standards.
I fully agree. I have long spoken against deductions of any sort. It is just 535 people who don't know me, trying to tell me how to live my life. I was just pointing out that this new assertion is a game changer.
I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
Didn't we already have that? Last I checked, you could claim tax credits for GoodSense upgrades to your home, or buying a hybrid car, i.e. spending money on things deemed good for society. If healthcare coverage is deemed similarly good for society, how is providing a tax exemption for purchasing it different?
Blues,
Dave
(drink Mountain Dew)
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites