- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
While the recent decision that ObamaCare is legal is wrong as a number of different levels, including and especialy that there is not Constitutional authority whatsoever for anything of this nature (prevailing disregard of the Constitution notwithstanding). Following this comes the implications of such a huge power grab and government control over a huge sector of the economy, and of course the fact that this is going to exacerbate rather than mitigate the foundational problems which are supposedly the issue at hand.
By far the most dangerous implications in my reckoning are the fact that we have just witnessed the Supreme Court with the deciding vote case by the supposedly conservative Roberts determine that ignoring the Constitution is legal, and that, perhaps even more ominous, it is perfectly acceptable for the government to engage in extortion so long as it is packaged as a tax. With the exception of protective tariffs, it has been understood and accepted throughout our history that taxes exist for the purpose of raising revenue with which to operate the government. Now we are venturing into territory in which we have never openly ventured before. We have tested the water with using taxes to modify behavior in form of actual taxes on tobacco which represent a major part of the final cost and proposed (but never enacted) taxes on such things as ammunition which would multiply the cost by generally around a factor of ten. The 1934 National Firearms Act places a $200 transfer tax on regulated weapons which was done clearly to prevent access to such devices although I don't recall that being openly admitted, coupled with the fact that, although this doesn't change the principle, at a practical level it affected a relatively small number of people. This is especially true when contrasted with a punitive tax serving as a vehicle of extortion against any and all who breath air.
It would appear that the fact of the matter is very clear. The question which is more frightening yet is now that the Supreme Court has determined that state-sponsored extortion is legal, where does it end?
By far the most dangerous implications in my reckoning are the fact that we have just witnessed the Supreme Court with the deciding vote case by the supposedly conservative Roberts determine that ignoring the Constitution is legal, and that, perhaps even more ominous, it is perfectly acceptable for the government to engage in extortion so long as it is packaged as a tax. With the exception of protective tariffs, it has been understood and accepted throughout our history that taxes exist for the purpose of raising revenue with which to operate the government. Now we are venturing into territory in which we have never openly ventured before. We have tested the water with using taxes to modify behavior in form of actual taxes on tobacco which represent a major part of the final cost and proposed (but never enacted) taxes on such things as ammunition which would multiply the cost by generally around a factor of ten. The 1934 National Firearms Act places a $200 transfer tax on regulated weapons which was done clearly to prevent access to such devices although I don't recall that being openly admitted, coupled with the fact that, although this doesn't change the principle, at a practical level it affected a relatively small number of people. This is especially true when contrasted with a punitive tax serving as a vehicle of extortion against any and all who breath air.
It would appear that the fact of the matter is very clear. The question which is more frightening yet is now that the Supreme Court has determined that state-sponsored extortion is legal, where does it end?
Last edited:
