Quote:
Originally Posted by justgo_withit
"We can be taxed even if we don't use it"
Same with public schools, police stations, firemen, public transportation, unemployment, my issued AF uniforms (thanks though!), my mother's salary as a state employee, clean water, trash pick up, road repair, street lights, power plants, etc. It is in the best interest of the country at large for these things to be easily accessible by all, even if the individual doesn't use it.
"What if congress decides that we should buy (whatever item, in this scenario a gun)"
Well then congress would have to say that it is of vital national importance for every citizen for be armed, prove that taxpayers are already paying for those who aren't armed, and make it easy to provide access to guns.  ). |
Your first paragraph I referenced above concerns, primarily, local and state governments. I have no problems with this type taxation. Massachusetts should be free to have any kind of health care they wish. Other states should be free to not have such if that is their decision.
In the second paragraph referenced you state that something must be of vital national importance for it to be taxed. There is no requirement of this in the ruling. The Legislative Branch must only decide to tax it. This is a huge expansion of taxing power of our Federal Government.
It comes down to whether one wants a large central government or not.