Is collecting taxes closely analogous to mandating purchases from private, third-party entities?

[coti]

[rucky]

1. Indirectly. Sometimes.

When tax money is awarded to private, for-profit contractors. We're mandated to buy multi-million dollar jet fighters from for-profit entities. We're mandated to hand schools over to privately-run charters.

I guess you can say we've contracted the insurance companies to administer the healthcare plan. It certainly doesn't leave a better taste in my mouth when you look at it that way, though.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. What actions are required of you in the jet purchase? None.

And I'm not aware of many situations where administration duties come with the right to take profits. In fact, in all other nations that mandate the purchase of health insurance, it is illegal to profit from providing mandated services. Our proposed mandate is first on the planet.

[rucky]

4. We don't really have a say in it, which makes it analagous in that sense.

Government contracts have profits built into it. They expect the contractor to take some profits - which can be maximized if they underdeliver on services or cut corners some other way.

[stevenleser]

2. Yes. A huge amount of what the government does involves purchasing goods and services from private

companies. From the paper printed out in government printers, to the cars driven by government officials on duty to...

[alc]

5. transparency & accountability

In theory at least, we can see the government's books. We see what taxes are collected and how they are spent. We can vote for those responsible for the budget and taxes.

Mandates are a way for the government to "provide" a service (health care) without suffering potential loss of votes by raising taxes. If premiums go up in a tax-based system, taxes have to go up or other items cut. In the mandate-based system, our "taxes" go up without congress needing to make cuts or take blame. They will blame the insurers or the oversight agencies. In a tax-based system, congress has incentive to keep premiums low. In a mandate-based system, they have an incentive to put as much space between them and the provider as possible (e.g. 100+ agencies regulating the industry) and are thus able to claim it's not their fault when our costs go up - greedy insurers or sloppy regulators, but not congress's fault. But by having all these layers of bureaucracy to protect them, they loose the ability to have much affect on premiums - so we can't vote for a change even if we want to.

[Statistical]

6. Read upon on Taxing Authority Jurisprudence.

Is taxing women who have an abortion $50,000 a defacto ban on abortion? Or just taxation.

If the govt made marijuana legal but put a 489230849038409% tax on it and put people who couldn't pay the tax in jail is that just taxation.


The courts have ruled many times on what constitutes legitimate taxation. The mandates is just that. To call it a tax would be to ignore a hundred years of Jurisprudence. When the intent of a tax/fee is punitive then it is no longer taxation.