Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

$600-$1200 a day? How about $20 a day?

Do you realize this law is discriminatory to both poor and elderly people? Who can’t afford or physically can’t cut their lawns? They are the only ones who will pay this fine.

It's not discriminatory. Everyone has to pay whose grass is too tall.

Do you believe the ordinance is good or not? Not the fine amount, just the ordinance - yes or no?

City needs money. Rather than raising the fines on people who break city ordinances, would you like taxes raised on everybody, instead?

The ordinance breakers pay more.
Everybody pays more.

Pick one, Dell. "None of the above" doesn't work. The city needs money. Bring some revenue-raisers to the table.

(PS - but nice to see you admit that "expensive things", like healthcare for instance, are "discriminatory" to those that "can't afford it", or can't physically be healthy and not need it)

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Pick one, Dell. "None of the above" doesn't work. The city needs money. Bring some revenue-raisers to the table.

The city needs to reduce its need for money by reducing its army of patronage workers. An alderman and former mayor do not need a crew of bodyguards etc etc etc

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

(PS - but nice to see you admit that "expensive things", like healthcare for instance, are "discriminatory" to those that "can't afford it", or can't physically be healthy and not need it)

If Obamacare had a daily fine of $600-$1200 for not complying you'd have a point.

You don't because people who can't afford it whether by circumstances beyond their control or directly because of their own actions will be subsidized by those completely unrelated to them or their health situation.

Should homeowners in Chicago be forced to mow the lawns of those too old, poor and in some cases too lazy or should the city fine them $1,200/day until it adds up enough to foreclose?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

If Obamacare had a daily fine of $600-$1200 for not complying you'd have a point.

Finally! Good to see you finally admit that there is no enforceable fine for not purchasing health insurance in the PPACA.

Congrats

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Finally! Good to see you finally admit that there is no enforceable fine for not purchasing health insurance in the PPACA.

Congrats

Until 2014? You know when tax penalties go into effect.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Until 2014? You know when tax penalties go into effect.

You mean, when the line in the PPACA specifically prohibiting the IRS from collecting or attempting to collect those fines is in effect, too?

You've got dog **** all over your face. Ewwww.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

You mean, when the line in the PPACA specifically prohibiting the IRS from collecting or attempting to collect those fines is in effect, too?

You've got dog **** all over your face. Ewwww.

Guess 45 mins is a long time to remember.

November 8, 2011 9:21 PM
By The Associated Press NEDRA PICKLER (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON - (AP) -- A conservative-leaning appeals court panel on Tuesday upheld the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care law, as the Supreme Court prepares to consider this week whether to resolve conflicting rulings over the law's requirement that all Americans buy health care insurance.

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a split opinion upholding the lower court's ruling that found Congress did not overstep its authority in requiring people to have insurance or pay a penalty on their taxes, beginning in 2014. The requirement is the most controversial requirement of Obama's signature domestic legislative achievement and the focus of conflicting opinions from judges across the country. The Supreme Court could decide as early as Thursday during a closed meeting of the justices whether to accept appeals from some of those earlier rulings.

As far as dog crap on the face, look into the mirror!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Guess 45 mins is a long time to remember.

As far as dog crap on the face, look into the mirror!

You're just too simple-minded to understand this, I guess ... the additional sentence in the PPACA prohibiting the IRS from collecting those taxes is still in the PPACA, and will be there deliberately until the Congress takes it out.

Yes, there is language in there outlining fines. There is ALSO a sentence in there prohibiting the collection of those fines.

That sentence was put there on purpose, so the penalties didn't automatically kick in. The Congress will have to take the sentence out after they see the bill up and running, if they want penalties. They will not have to rewrite the entire bill for penalties, as the language will already be there. They just have to remove the prohibitory language to make the fines kick in, if they someday want to.

Do you not read any real facts about the PPACA? Ever?