Chief Justice Roberts brushed aside the label of "penalty" given to the payment required of those who fail to carry insurance. Nor did it matter, he wrote, that the payment was designed more to influence behavior than to raise tax revenue. The penalty functioned like a taxâand plenty of taxes, like those on cigarettes or other disfavored things, are enacted principally to create incentives rather than raise revenue, he wrote Again wtf is he talking about? Paying taxes on cigarettes or other disfavored things would require you to PURCHASE those things!!!!! I can't comprehend his opinion.
Not to mention that paying tax on cigarettes would only be an equal comparison if everyone was forced to purchase cigarettes. What if you opt not to smoke? Yeah, I'm not following the argument.
I don't know where you're getting that from, but it really doesn't make any sense.. you are not required to buy cigarettes. The purpose of a tax is to raise rev, not provide incentives to behave a certain way. regardless this is an ultimatum not a tax, we are being forced to purchase health insurance or pay a tax.. it is that simple.
what roberts is saying is that theoretically govt can say that if you DIDN'T buy ciggs you have to pay a tax. Its the same damn thing.
If that quote is accurate, then yea that is exactly what he's saying. How that makes sense, i have no idea.
"If any activity mandated by Congress accompanied by a money transaction can be construed as a tax, despite its commerce clause proscriptions, there is no limit to the power of the federal government over our lives. Permanent damage has been inflicted on this nation. Any future Congress with enough votes to override vetoes or with a like-minded president can now force US citizens to purchase anything at any time, under the guise of a tax. Congress has an unlimited power to confiscate resources-any and all-- from us by simply calling it a tax."