Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

If You Are Happy About The SCOTUS Ruling...

Posted by on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:29 PM
  • 68 Replies
1 mom liked this
...are you concerned at all about the precedent this could set? I'm not normally an alarmist, but realistically I could see the leading to things like: a tax penalty if you have a vehicle that doesn't get at least XX MPG, a tax penalty if you use more that XXgallons of water a year, a tax penalty if your household produces more than XX pounds of trash, etc. Does this concern you at all?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
by on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:29 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
romalove
by SenseandSensibility on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM
3 moms liked this
I am unhappy so not who you are asking but

YES YES YES
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JakeandEmmasMom
by Gold Member on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:35 PM
1 mom liked this
Feel free to post your thoughts, even if you are unhappy. LOL!

Quoting romalove:

I am unhappy so not who you are asking but



YES YES YES
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
4kidz916
by Gold Member on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:39 PM

I'm unhappy and yep, I think this was a terrible decision that will lead to a lot more taxes.  

trippyhippy
by on Jun. 28, 2012 at 8:53 PM
5 moms liked this
I am happy because of what it means for my special needs child, I only wish the healthcare overhaul went further with complete universal healthcare.
Kmary
by Bronze Member on Jun. 28, 2012 at 9:37 PM
9 moms liked this

I have mixed feelings about the ruling today, but I rarely get myself worked up with the "slippery slope" argument.  There is a slippery slope argument to almost every controversial topic, but in my opinion they rarely materialize.  Examples:  it's entirely feasible to allow abortion, but to still prohibit late term abortions.  It's perfectly reasonable to legalize same sex marriage, but still prevent people from marrying their dog.  We have the ability to allow certain things and prohibit others.  So I think slippery slopes are often just alarmist BS, to be completely honest.

Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Jun. 29, 2012 at 6:02 AM
5 moms liked this


Quoting Kmary:

I have mixed feelings about the ruling today, but I rarely get myself worked up with the "slippery slope" argument.  There is a slippery slope argument to almost every controversial topic, but in my opinion they rarely materialize.  Examples:  it's entirely feasible to allow abortion, but to still prohibit late term abortions.  It's perfectly reasonable to legalize same sex marriage, but still prevent people from marrying their dog.  We have the ability to allow certain things and prohibit others.  So I think slippery slopes are often just alarmist BS, to be completely honest.

In the case of taxes, the slippery slope is demonstrable.

The slippery slope is also demonstrable in the case of government, generally.  The more government grows to "help" us, the more it also grows in its control of us, although not necessarily in ways we've anticipated.

In the days of the Founders, there was major debate about a national bank.  One side insisted it was necessary, the other side reminded the rest of the control England had over the colonists through banking, the influence of national debt, ect...We got a national bank and now the US Federal Reserve chairman is often referred to as one of the most powerful if not the most powerful man in the world. Thos interest rate manipulations and bond sales have a personal impact on Americans, and open us up to vulnerability due to market fluctuations, here and on the opposite side of the planet.

For taxes, it began on a national basis to fund war, now federal taxes can fund nice things like libraries and mail service, but it also funds "conflicts" and black ops, it also goes to bureacratic boondoggles like air conditioning empty buildings, it also gets wasted away when year end budget surpluses (more on specific projects and funds) are spent on unnecessary items in order to justify the same budget for the project the next year.

And now there is the ability to penalize through the tax code, for things WE DON'T BUY.  (This is much different from, for example the ability of the EPA to fine for noncompliance with emissions rules. ) Now that is confirmed by SCOTUS as constitutional.

My take on the "slippery slope" is more of "an open door."  Keep my door closed and I can get half-lost in a book with the toddlers playing nearby.  Keep my door open and I have to stay vigilant ALL THE TIME, with quick reaction time required.  With the size and scope of government as it is today, it is literally impossible for individual citizens to watch that door adequately.  This is one of the main principles of conservativism: that big government becomes unmanageable and can even get in the way of progress. 

Honestly, I am rather moderate on some things, but I do think that it would be much more possible for citizens to keep a watchful eye if the bulk of government taxing and spending decreased at the national level and were the biggest at the local level. 

This tax change with Obamacare is not just a little thing.  It is a fundamental change. Unfortunately it can't even be changed if all the states repeal Obamacare.  The theory has been declared, by SCOTUS.

Not to be too discouraging, though, it is not too late.  SCOTUS rulings tend to be tied to social norms.  If we change, if we move toward principles of less federal government, things can be much better for our kids and even better for their children.

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

gsprofval
by Gold Member on Jun. 29, 2012 at 6:11 AM
2 moms liked this

Yes, I am very concerned.  Waiting to be ordered to by a Prius and to be told how and when to take every breath. It feels like that is what this jerk wants.

SwannK
by Member on Jun. 29, 2012 at 6:14 AM
2 moms liked this

 The healthcare bill does have a tax penalty if you do not purchase health insurance. However, there is no real penalty for failing to pay that tax.. So in essence there is no real mandate.

SwannK
by Member on Jun. 29, 2012 at 6:29 AM
1 mom liked this

 g) ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The penalty provided by this section
shall be paid upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and
except as provided in paragraph (2), shall be assessed and collected
in the same manner as an assessable penalty under subchapter
B of chapter 68.
(2) SPECIAL RULES.—Notwithstanding any other provision
of law—
(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—In the case of
any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed
by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to
any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such
failure.
(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES.—The Secretary
shall not—
(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property
of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty
imposed by this section, or
(ii) levy on any such property with respect to
such failure.

You are Not required to buy Health Insurance because there is no Penalty if you do not.

rocketracer
by Gold Member on Jun. 29, 2012 at 6:41 AM


Quoting gsprofval:

Yes, I am very concerned.  Waiting to be ordered to by a Prius and to be told how and when to take every breath. It feels like that is what this jerk wants.

Get ready for a mileage counter device....some poitiicans think that since fuel efficient cars get more mile per the gallon the gov't will lose tax revenue from fuel so they are finding out other ways to get their money $$$.  Just lovey!

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)