Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (615769)	6/11/2011 12:07:45 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1579797

>> But I do think its more reasonable than many other local, state, or federal, intrusions in to the economy. I can't characterize it as "more or less". They're all atrocious. But mandates that act directly on the people are, I think, more personally intrusive. Some regulation in a particular area may not bother me. But I hate the slippery slope when it involves government power. Because it will always be abused somewhere down the line. One of the justices last week slammed Obama's attorney with the question of whether a similar "mandate" could be used to insist that we all purchase long-term care insurance. After all, many of us are going to be a drain on public coffers somewhere down the line. The Obama attorney said, no, that's just a bridge too far. But the response was totally inadequate. One can EASILY envision such a mandate under a future liberal president with the backing of a liberal congress. It is difficult for me to imagine a Supreme Court upholding the individual mandate, although, stranger things have happened.