- Home
- Premium Memberships
- Lottery Results
- Forums
- Predictions
- Lottery Post Videos
- News
- Search Drawings
- Search Lottery Post
- Lottery Systems
- Lottery Charts
- Lottery Wheels
- Worldwide Jackpots
- Quick Picks
- On This Day in History
- Blogs
- Online Games
- Premium Features
- Contact Us
- Whitelist Lottery Post
- Rules
- Lottery Book Store
- Lottery Post Gift Shop
The time is now 1:48 am
You last visited
April 20, 2024, 1:11 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)
Did Roberts rule that way on purpose??
Published:
Updated:
Certainly brings new debate into the healthcare argument stating that this is a tax.
My question is why did the supreme court say in their ruling that it falls under tax rules.
They could have just as well said the mandate is not mandatory and a fine cannot be imposed .
They brought up the issue of tax in their ruling when I believe they should have not done that. Let the president or congress to decide that issue.
Did the fed attorneys bring up the issue that the fine was a tax in their arguments? ]
Anyhow I think Roberts ruled in favor for payback on the time Obama slapped down the supreme court in the state of the union message.
Created a whole new stink in DC by bring up the tax issue in the decision.
Comments
Does it state in the health bill that the fine is a tax? The fine was only to be collected by the IRS.
And there won't be any way to get out of paying.
The IRS will use all their usual methods including garnishing tax refunds or throwing your ass in jail.
Obama lied but Dems don't really care cuz they're all liars anyway.
But it's all moot cuz he's gonna be a one-termer.
Post a Comment
Please Log In
To use this feature you must be logged into your Lottery Post account.
Not a member yet?
If you don't yet have a Lottery Post account, it's simple and free to create one! Just tap the Register button and after a quick process you'll be part of our lottery community.
Register