April 15th Obamacare bill

[Wolfstrike]

Being one of the last patriotic Americans left in the country, I told my employer I will not be signing up for mandatory heath care bills, regardless of what Obama says.

It sounds like my Obama/Roberts tax will be an estimated 9 grand this year.



My question is, do you think the Obama/Roberts tax will bring people to the republican party when they receive a massive tax bill this year?

 

[Dale Smith]

Being one of the last patriotic Americans left in the country, I told my employer I will not be signing up for mandatory heath care bills, regardless of what Obama says.

It sounds like my Obama/Roberts tax will be an estimated 9 grand this year.



My question is, do you think the Obama/Roberts tax will bring people to the republican party when they receive a massive tax bill this year?

They can only take that amount if that is what you have coming back to you. That is why I always make sure I break even.

 

[sonic]

Good. Glad you're paying your share, although putting yourself in that situation is pretty absurd.. The Republican Party membership is at an all time low at 23% and dropping due to the exceptional dysfunction. It's sad, but they brought it on themselves.

 

[emilynghiem]

Being one of the last patriotic Americans left in the country, I told my employer I will not be signing up for mandatory heath care bills, regardless of what Obama says.

It sounds like my Obama/Roberts tax will be an estimated 9 grand this year.



My question is, do you think the Obama/Roberts tax will bring people to the republican party when they receive a massive tax bill this year?

Dear Wolfstrike:

I also do not believe I should have to "register" or "prove" I bought insurance or paid membership as the only way to show I'm not planning to dump health care costs on other taxpayers.

I have committed no crime that justified depriving me of liberties, labor forcing me into involuntary servitude to pay the fees or fines, and requiring me to report or meet conditions in a business deal with insurance providers I never agreed to, was consulted on, or signed onto. So why am I held to a business contract with terms I didn't agree to?

I would like to write up a one page letter asking President Obama, my Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, ACA spokesperson Nancy Pelosi, and Supreme Court Justice Roberts "what crime did I commit to merit depriving me of free choice to pay for and provide for health care through other means besides insurance mandates through federal govt under threat of tax penalty". If Cruz weren't so tied up fighting Trump for the nomination, I'd ask him to take this on, and campaign to replace Justice Roberts who should be removed from the bench for not kicking this bill back to Congress to fix but "reinterpreting" it as a tax when it was not passed as one.

In the meantime the LEAST INTRUSIVE way I've found to avoid paying a fine to this program I don't believe in,
is to pay 45 a month to the Christian Health Care Ministries (where skipping 3 months or more still means paying the fine to govt for the months there was no coverage).

I would like to organize teams of people who believe as I do
"we are being forced to pay money to keep the rights and freedoms we had before this bill was passed" and to KEEP TRACK of the money it is costing us to keep our previous status as exempt from this contested bill, so we do not have to register or report under these federal regulations we do not believe in, never agreed to terms, and never signed an agreement to follow.

If we all pay 45 a month, or keep track of the 2.5% of our taxable income that is fined for any months that aren't exempted, then we can keep a tally of how much it is costing us to defend our "previous inalienable rights" that the govt violated with these mandates infringing on our beliefs. And this is the CHEAPEST way we know to afford to buy our freedom back. It's basically paying the minimal political extortion until the bill gets corrected and the mandates are made OPTIONAL.

Another possible shortcut is expanding the "domestic violence" exemption to include "political abuse" and ask to waive fines for any uncovered months that "constitutional objectors" could not by conscience comply with the mandates because it violates our beliefs to go along with abusive unconstitutional tactics for political manipulation.

The Dept of Justice has a definition of domestic abuse and violence that could "loosely" apply here as depriving "a partner in a relationship" from access to the income in order to control threaten or intimidate them economically.

Domestic Violence | OVW | Department of Justice

We define domestic violence as a pattern of abusive behavior in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner. Domestic violence can be physical, sexual, emotional, economic, or psychological actions or threats of actions that influence another person. This includes any behaviors that intimidate, manipulate, humiliate, isolate, frighten, terrorize, coerce, threaten, blame, hurt, injure, or wound someone.

I ARGUE THAT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PEOPLE AND GOVT HAS BEEN ABUSED THIS WAY.

Again although the "domestic abuse" exemption doesn't require any additional paperwork,
it may still require registering an application for an exemption from the federal exchanges.

To remedy the situation I propose that all other Constitutional objectors who feel abused, coerced, violated and discriminated against for our creed by this mandate we have argued was unconstitutional use these two methods of minimalizing the cost and paperwork for exemption:

A. sign up and pay 45 a month to get exempted as cheaply as possible but keep track of the money, receipts and records so that is can be charged back to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERS who passed this bill and/or endorse it and/or failed to revise it to make it OPTIONAL given the fact that it violates beliefs of dissenters

B. for the months that such objectors did not have knowledge of alternatives, but were subject to COERCION to pay fines for noncompliance due to Constitutional BELIEFS, where by CONSCIENCE we could not follow this policy that contradicts our core beliefs, we can ask the same Democratic Party Leaders to either allow an "equally loose interpretation of the Justice Dept's definition of domestic abuse and violence to apply to these objectors"
arguing they used a "loose interpretation" of taxing authority to justify this bill and mandates in the first place.

If they argue that literally that is NOT what is meant by domestic abuse, it means individual partners only, and does not apply to collective relations between people and govt; then I would argue that the govt also does not have LITERAL authority to regulate the individual health care, financial and business decisions of citizens but only has collective authority to make general policies (such as all citizens required to pay for their costs so it isn't passed on to taxpayers, but this can be done by any means they believe in and choose so it doesn't infringe on their personal liberties, religious freedom, conscience and right to choose).

The advantage of claiming the "domestic abuse" exemption is that it doesn't require any additional paperwork. However, it may still require registering an application for an exemption from the federal exchanges.

So to prevent this from burdening citizens who are Constitutional objectors, I would ask local Congress and Senate officials to set up a system for tracking these objectors on the grounds of Constitutional beliefs in paying for health care through free market and free choice, where the money is going to be paid back and the paperwork is done for them to prevent a worse burden than has already been imposed.

If we even argue to set this up, it will make a statement that this is imposing, should never have passed with this conflict in it, and should have been corrected sooner.

As it is, it is going to cost the Democratic Leaders who passed and enforced this bill
at least 45 a month per person, plus either the fine for each uncovered month, or the cost of legal and legislative/administrative work to allow the "domestic violence" exemption to be expanded to apply to these people who have been coerced economically, deprived of liberty and income, against our Constitutional beliefs.

I would like to start tallying the head count, the cost and the damages that we are going to ask
the Democrat leadership to pay for as the very minimum cost of violating our equal civil rights to exercise our beliefs in free market health care provisions without financial penalty, discrimination by creed, and harassment.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Good. Glad you're paying your share, although putting yourself in that situation is pretty absurd.. The Republican Party membership is at an all time low at 23% and dropping due to the exceptional dysfunction. It's sad, but they brought it on themselves.

Libtards need people to pay their "fair share" so that they can do sh**.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

$9K sounds like an exorbitant amount given that yearly health care premiums for an individual are rarely that high.