Posted on 03/04/2015 1:57:17 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
“NPR: A Ruling Against Obamacare Would Have Broad Implications”
That’s quite the gender insensitive statement...even if women and minorities would be hurt most...
Thanks Bush
2 maybes
>>”When younger and healthier people drop out of the market because they no longer have access to subsidies, that causes premiums to increase.”<<
Ya think? The same is true for food, housing, and other things.
If I have medical issues that I can’t pay for (I do want to use Health Insurance as it was intended), I will die (IRL) rather than stick the USA with the bill.
I don’t have kids — theoretically I don’t have a dog in the fight for long term. But I love the USA more than than my own life.
But if I can get long life and a truly free USA, that would be a good ending :)
Somehow despite Republican control of the House and Senate, NPR continues to be funded.
Who are the broads they would haveimplications on.
yep, implications like; the government has no business dictating to the health care industry who gets it, what they get, what the cost is and whether they live or die and when.
They’re certain to blackmail Roberts again. He’ll vote with Obama, I’m afraid.
Gruber himself said zerocare would ‘churn the markets’ for some time after implementation.
So RATS don’t have problems with churning markets. Let’s churn it back to a free market, with no IRS involvement.
And if that family is living paycheck to paycheck with all those kids, they almost certainly qualify for free CHIPS for the kids.
Not to worry libbies. 0 would never give up his citizen financial data collection centers. He needs the info to squeeze even more blood out of the American taxpayers
FUNPR!!!
“If the court sides with the plaintiffs, it would mean millions of people could no longer afford health insurance.”
Hint to National Proletariat Radio: they can’t afford it now. Neither can the taxpayers (and their children), who are already $18 trillion in debt.
The Federal Reserve will ensure that all the money needed is available to the Nanny-State, even if savers and workers need to be raped with zero interest rates and massive debt monetization.
Only a financial collapse will force a reform of the US Government - and even then, I doubt it would make anything better. Our government will simply follow the path of Argentina in that case.
The issue goes even beyond Obamacare. The bigger issue is whether Supreme Court Justices are required to read the English language, which is entirely clear in this case. A ruling in favor of Obama will mean that no law written in English need be obeyed.
No, it is because the law never covered those states, and the IRS unlawfully overreached its charter, misinterpreting the law, to cover the states. NPR's bias is showing.
The biggest thing it would imply is that there are still some Americans in Congress.
“The subsidies are bringing about [$400] million a month into the state of Florida and [$200] million a month into the state of Texas,”
That’s mob bankster money!
Oops! I misread that as RPEAL instead of a SCOTUS ruling.
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.