Obama '08?

Splitting hairs, perhaps, but there have been two other cases ruling that the health care bill is constitutional. This will certainly end up in the Supreme Court once a lower court ruling is agreed upon as being the appropriate test case.

True, Cyclo, but without the mandate the whole bill falls apart. Would you agree?

You have nothing better than the 'Oh yeah? You're stupid!' argument, Ican. It is not persuasive in the slightest.
This statement of yours is unsupported by any rational argument of yours.

I ask you directly: who wrote the bill that causes taxes to go up on everyone, including the Estate tax, in 2011? Which party wrote it? Which signed the bill?
The last version of the bill to cut taxes was written, adopted and signed by Republicans with the approval of some Democrats in 2003. The bill scheduled the tax cuts to expire by the end of 2010. In 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010, the Republicans repeatedly asked the Democrat majoritties in both houses of Congress to make these tax cuts permanent. But the Democrat majorities have done nothing to make these tax cuts permanent.


Answer that and you'll know who to blame for the situation.
Therefore the Democrat majorities 2007 thru 2010 are responsible for NOT making these tax cuts permanent. Therefore, I blame the Democrat majorities for not making these tax cuts permanent

Quote:
Such sales have resulted in the sale of business property to pay the tax. Such sales of business property have often resulted in the reduction of the business that resulted in reductions in the number of the business's employees.

Provide proof that this is true.
It's obviously true that when inheritance taxes have taxed inherited businesses, such that those who inherited such businesses could not pay the inheritance tax without selling part or all of the business, the business was reduced by sale of part or all of it. You provide proof that such has NEVER happened.

Cycloptichorn

You provide proof that such has NEVER happened.

You're the one, Cycloptichorn, who is by implication alleging that such NEVER happened.

Ican's latest: You're the one, Cycloptichorn, who is by implication alleging that such NEVER happened.

Hey ican, it is simple common sense that it has happened. Why can't cyclops then know that it has probably happened?

Hey ican, it is simple common sense that it has happened. Why can't cyclops then know that it has probably happened? Cyclops should at least read the following, which provides proof enough, plus other useful information.
http://www.nodeathtax.org/deathtax/killthedeathtax
"When surveyed, family businesses say that the estate tax is one of the leading causes of failure. Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents in one survey of family businesses reported that the estate tax makes survival of the business more difficult.[iv] In another survey, 98 percent of heirs cited “needed to raise funds to pay estate taxes” when asked why family businesses fail."

True, Cyclo, but without the mandate the whole bill falls apart. Would you agree?

Without the mandate the law will be ripe for repeal or serious revision.

Without private insurance what is left but the so-called public option, or socialized medicine.

Henry E. Hudson, the federal judge in Virginia who just ruled health care reform unconstitutional, owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in a GOP political consulting firm that worked against health care reform. You don't say!

As the Huffington Post and others first noted last July, Hudson's annual financial disclosures show that he owns a sizable chunk of Campaign Solutions, Inc., a Republican consulting firm that worked this election cycle for John Boehner, Michele Bachmann, John McCain, and a whole host of other GOP candidates who've placed the purported unconstitutionality of health care reform at the center of their political platforms. Since 2003, according to the disclosures, Hudson has earned between $32,000 and $108,000 in dividends from his shares in the firm (federal rules only require judges to report ranges of income).