HeyYou Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 My major malfunction here is, the Federal Government telling me I WILL purchase X product, or I will be "taxed"In my state, I am required to maintain auto insurance in order to legally drive a vehicle. The thing is that in most of the state, having a reliable means of transportation is a requirement in order to get any sort of job. If I don't have it, I don't get "taxed" I get slapped with a heavy fine and have my drivers license taken away, so it is not really a "choice" beyond deciding which company I end up buying from. Even if these laws serve only to give these companies business, they have been on the books for well over 30 years now, and nobody has seemingly challenged their legality. Many other states have similar laws. My major malfunction here is, the Federal Government telling me I WILL purchase X product, or I will be "taxed"In my state, I am required to maintain auto insurance in order to legally drive a vehicle. The thing is that in most of the state, having a reliable means of transportation is a requirement in order to get any sort of job. If I don't have it, I don't get "taxed" I get slapped with a heavy fine and have my drivers license taken away, so it is not really a "choice" beyond deciding which company I end up buying from. Even if these laws serve only to give these companies business, they have been on the books for well over 30 years now, and nobody has seemingly challenged their legality. Many other states have similar laws. That tired argument has been used to justify a universal tax by the left. You do not have to own a car, you can take public transportation, you can walk...if you elect to own a car then you pay for the privilege and abide by each state's regulation of that privilege. However if you elect not to own a car then those fees and regulations are not applicable to you....your choice .The Health Care tax is not elective.....it is mandated. Exactly what A says. I would also point out, that in some states, you are NOT required to carry insurance. The reasoning behind requiring it, (in some locations) is because of the inherent harm it is possible to do to yourself, and others, with a car/truck/motorcycle/otherpowertransportation. The healthcare mandate has none of those qualifications. By the mere act of being alive, I MUST throw money at some private company for insurance. So far as I am concerned, that is a dangerous precedent to set. The fed can REQUIRE that I purchase something, or I will be "taxed"...... The reasoning being used here could also be used to force me to buy a house. Or a car. Or any other product/service offered by some other entity, be it a private company or not. All in the name of commerce? No. I do NOT want that particular precedent upheld. The potential for abuse there is absolutely astounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisnpuppy Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Congrats on another closed debate thread folks.~Lisnpuppy In case you are wondering read all the personal slinging and you will get the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts