Posted on 03/23/2010 4:10:31 AM PDT by tobyhill
The difference is that SSI is only paid on earned income and is paid to the federal government. This new law requires that you buy a service from a private company reguardless.
No. We still have November. If THAT fails...
I’d say the chances of this surviving Supreme Court review are very, very slim.
Social Security is a tax and welfare program. You do not “buy” it. There are no “accounts,” and you do not “pay in” to it.
The federal government does have the authority to tax us. It does not, however, have the authority to force us to buy something from a private company.
Anthony Kennedy and the four conservative justices should be very careful to watch their backs.
ROFL!
paybacks are hell.
Nor deny a citizen his liberty (pols keep avoiding talking about the jail time in this legislation) if he does not purchase a product, good or service that Congress mandates.
Health care is not a right -- health insurance is most certainly not.
And yes, it is very ironic that Republicans were the ones who tried to open up the insurance industry across state lines, thus allowing a basis for legal Legislative regulation while Democrats rejected it. Democrats have shown again and again and again that they hold the Constitution of the United States of America in utmost contempt.
I am sure he will do that right after Justice Ginsberg recuses herself from the next case the ACLU brings before the court.
“Social Security is “voluntary” Railroads and Teachers opted out and pay into their own system under different rules ie they have “privatized” pensions.”
Coverage is mandated by law. Which particular groups to apply SS to was always a matter of policy. Thus, SS started out only covering private workers, but over time eventually folded in government workers. But selected groups were permitted to opt out presumably on grounds that their own union-negotiated benefits plans were a much better deal than SS. These were politically powerful interests that Congress didn’t wish to antagonize etc. Private businesses—even those with extremely generous pension benefits—were never given the same option.
“Social Security is a tax and welfare program. You do not “buy” it. There are no “accounts,” and you do not “pay in” to it.
Exactly. While FDR shrewdly designed it to look like a conventional pension plan—i.e., pay in for many years, get a defined benefit at retirement—in reality it has been from the get-go a Ponzi scheme. Today’s payroll taxes pay for today’s elderly. They aren’t being banked or invested on behalf of those paying these taxes, nor is this entitlement being “funded” the way private businesses must “fund” their pension plans and retiree health benefits to avoid having them going belly-up or be unable to pay out promised benefits etc. As a consequence of not imposing the same discipline on our public retirement system that we do in the private sector, our promises vastly exceed our ability to pay for them—by an amount measured in trillions. You have no “right” to SS benefits, as Congress can at will reduce them arbitrarily or even eliminate them altogether. The taxes you paid in? Tough noogies: we spent ‘em a long time ago!
I wouldn't count on Scalia:
...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.
Justice Scalia, concurring in Raich
HF
Men in Black by Mark Levin.
I expect at least one major health insurance provider to “go Galt” and shut down due to these onerous regulations.
Can you imagine the howl that would go up if Blue Cross announced it was getting out of the business?
Pay the fine or go to jail. Is that a clear option, or wouldn’t the gestapo take the fine out of your salary or confiscate your property first? If we had the option of paying or jail, I think it would be great to overwhelm the jails and cry “Political Prisoner” to every media you could reach.
Yes. Is was in the original and is still there. And that is typical for the penalties for breaking all Fed Laws - Fine and/or Imprisonment.
*** or wouldn’t the gestapo take the fine out of your salary or confiscate your property first? ***
Yes the gestapo (IRS) 'prolly' would, IF you made enough money or owned property to confiscate to begin with. Or if you had money in a Bank Account.
But if you have like 5 kids and don't make a lot of money your penalty for not buying insurance can exceed all you own or are worth. Then its off to Fed Prison. (a Fine would be useless since you can't pay to begin with)
*** If we had the option of paying or jail, I think it would be great to overwhelm the jails and cry “Political Prisoner” to every media you could reach. ***
I concur. 200,000 'political prisoners' or more, wouldn't look too good.
I need to divest. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.