- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Can someone please explain the recent Obamacare ruling?
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:05 am to udtiger
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:05 am to udtiger
quote:
read up on severability clauses...and the absence of one in the ACA
I await the article calling their strategy stupid, with words like "owned", "clapback", or "destroys", etc.
Won't hold my breath though
This post was edited on 12/16/18 at 11:06 am
0
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:06 am to RollTide1987
The mandate was not removed.
The penalty for not paying the mandate was reduced but the mandate still exists.
Even though no costs are being created, the tax still exists.
Just accept that obamacare will never go away and that the republicans are the major reason why.
The penalty for not paying the mandate was reduced but the mandate still exists.
Even though no costs are being created, the tax still exists.
Just accept that obamacare will never go away and that the republicans are the major reason why.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:11 am to mahdragonz
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:18 am to mahdragonz
quote:
Even though no costs are being created, the tax still exists.
that's probably the weasel way out for Roberts,
which would confirm that he is actually a cuck
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:19 am to Powerman
quote:
When ACA was first being debated in court it was upheld as constitutional because the individual mandate was considered a tax
No, the individual mandate was ruled constitutional because of the tax. The entirety of Obamacare doesn’t depend on the individual mandate being constitutional. E.g. one of the biggest parts of Obamacare is Medicare expansion. The power of Congress to spend money is expressly laid out in the Constitution - it has nothing to do with the individual mandate.
This ruling will be overturned on appeal and probably it won’t even be heard by the Supreme Court. It’s a really, really bad decision.
This post was edited on 12/16/18 at 11:20 am
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:21 am to VOLhalla
Roberts twisted the ruling.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:22 am to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
I hate this narrative - why does there need to be a substitute? What was so evil with the system we had the day before the ACA was passed?
It sucked before ACA too.
If the GOP has no counter to Medicare For All they lose the debate. It’s that simple regardless if you hate it or not. We have reached a point where the American people believe everyone should have healthcare.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:33 am to bamarep
quote:
another note, it'll take probably a year or more for this to work its way up the ladder. Will the GOP as per usual be caught with their pants down an not have a suitable replacement bill in place?
This is what worries men. You have a golden ticket to remove the ACA, but without a replacement of any variety you create instability in the market.
Things arent going to magically revert to pre-2008 rates at this point without transitioning laws.
This post was edited on 12/16/18 at 11:33 am
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:40 am to DallasTiger11
The American people do want everyone to have healthcare. They DO NOT want healthcare as an entitlement. They have spoken loudly on this issue for 100 years. Accept it and move on taking away Christmas, voting rights for illegals, or whatever else has become issue #1 for sky screamers.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 11:47 am to bamarep
quote:
an not have a suitable replacement bill in place
Herein lies the problem. Government needs to remove itself from private healthcare. Repeal and strike down. Government replacement is not a constitutional option.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 12:10 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
I hate this narrative - why does there need to be a substitute? What was so evil with the system we had the day before the ACA was passed?
The 1% of the population who had a pre-existing condition but was too dumb to get Medicaid, Medicare, VA, TriCare, or group health insurance through their employer (all of which covered pre-existing conditions) had to either sign up for a high cost high risk plan or pay out of pocket.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 2:17 pm to DallasTiger11
quote:
Roberts upheld the ACA based on twisting the mandate into a tax.
This shite was infuriating. The Obama admin argued that it WAS NOT a tax in order to get the case heard in the first place.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 5:14 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
They have spoken loudly on this issue for 100 years.
Like we spoke on the issues of gay marriage and abortion? Well, I feel a lot better now.
Posted on 12/16/18 at 6:08 pm to CDawson
quote:
Herein lies the problem. Government needs to remove itself from private healthcare. Repeal and strike down. Government replacement is not a constitutional option.
Let's look at this another way. The current system under the ACA benefits the establishment, so they will fight to keep it.
What's more beneficial to them
Private healthcare set by the market which will be cheaper for most of us?
Public healthcare requiring most of us (including those who didnt want it or had alternative insurance) to pay for it.
Obviously the 2nd one is more profitable.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News