Scotus predicitons re: Obamacare

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by CarlV

5-4 partisan hardline on anything that would cost the healthcare industry. They will probably say that the 26 year old on parents policy is ok because that is actually more cash to the industry.

Carl

I think you've captured the essence of the Conservative side.......

[BlueStreak]

If the mandate is struck down, but the rest of the bill passes, this decision will be the worst disaster to have hit the US economy in a long time......

It will be more; "You can have it all and pay for none of it."

That NEVER works.

Dave

[whell]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

If the mandate is struck down, but the rest of the bill passes, this decision will be the worst disaster to have hit the US economy in a long time......

It will be more; "You can have it all and pay for none of it."

That NEVER works.

Dave

As I noted earlier, even if the mandate is struck, the revenue (tax) provisions of the act could well be upheld (in fact, that seems likely to me).

[wgrr]

One thing not mentioned much is the big insurance companies do not want the mandate struck down. They will lose millions of new customers.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

If the mandate is struck down, but the rest of the bill passes, this decision will be the worst disaster to have hit the US economy in a long time......

It will be more; "You can have it all and pay for none of it."

That NEVER works.

Dave

That has been, however, a prominent plank in the GOP platform for about 3 decades. More accurately, it is "You can have it all, but must pay for it with tax cuts."

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by whell

As I noted earlier, even if the mandate is struck, the revenue (tax) provisions of the act could well be upheld (in fact, that seems likely to me).

Yes, but we would still have far too many uninsured placing undue burden on the system. I would like to see everyone covered, but if at all possible I would rather make them pay for their own, then have my taxes raised to cover them. The poor I don't mind helping out. Young, middleclass suburbanites, who simply refuse to pay because they think they don't need insurance piss me off.

When I hear the argument that, "Young people don't really need it, so why should they be forced to pay for it?", my blood boils. Really? Come on. There should be no need to explain why. We were all twenty somethings once. Sports, drug and alcohol abuse and just plain jackass shenanigans that young people engage in make them an even higher risk (In regard to accidental injury.) than us more mature folks.

Dave

[djv8ga]

Roberts is taking way too long writing his decision. He is a modest man & feels like he really needs to explain why he is voting against the law IMO.
Also, the court does not want to do another Roe V. Wade type decision that never becomes part of the American fabric.
I say (hope!) the whole thing goes down for these reasons.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

Roberts is taking way too long writing his decision. He is a modest man & feels like he really needs to explain why he is voting against the law IMO.
Also, the court does not want to do another Roe V. Wade type decision that never becomes part of the American fabric.
I say (hope!) the whole thing goes down for these reasons.

Why do you think it is Roberts writing the decision?

Regards,

D-Ray

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Why do you think it is Roberts writing the decision?

Regards,

D-Ray

Inside info.

[Oerets]

With this court my guess it is "expect the unexpected".



Barney