So the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, but the individual mandate is considered a tax?

The rest of the health care reform law, otherwise known as
“Obamacare,” will remain intact. Roberts decision says that states
cannot be penalized by the federal government by limiting the Medicare
funds they receive if they opt not to expand their rolls. This provision
was only slightly limited from its original construction in the ACA.

Nothing in our opinion precludes Congress from offering
funds under the ACA to expand the availability of health care, and
requiring that states accepting such funds comply with the conditions on
their use. What Congress is not free to do is to penalize States that
choose not to participate in that new program by taking away their
existing Medicaid funding.

The individual mandate was upheld as a tax — they found that the
federal government could not force individuals to purchase a product,
but a penalty could be imposed if they opted not to purchase the product
which is, in this case, private health insurance.

The tax provision survived in a 5-4 vote, with Roberts joining the
Court’s liberal justices. The perennial swing vote, Justice Anthony
Kennedy, read the Court’s dissent along with the Court’s traditionally
conservative justices.

After several months of contentious public debate and several
Congressional votes, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
passed in March 2010.

Despite passing Congress, albeit along party-line votes in the House and Senate, the law never became less controversial.

Polls of public opinion
on the popularity of the law have shown that health care reform
remained persistently polarizing even after its passage. Consistent
pluralities or majorities, with rare exceptions, continued to tell
pollsters that they favored the repeal of health care reform from 2010
even to today.

The action the Supreme Court has taken today is unlikely to settle
arguments that surround the constitutionality of the reform of America’s
health care system.

Now that Obamacare has withstood the Supreme Court ruling, this changes the Health care system. Unfortunately not enough people realize what the mandate really calls for. In the Obamacare Law, or as the Congress that does not want to be in hot water over questions regarding the individual mandate along with the mandatory rfid chipping, Yea, I know your gonna say I am delusional, but maybe you should look into the Health Care Bill, the original bill H.R.3200 says very clearly an implantable medical device that will be linked to an individuals bank account. This rfid mandate can be found between pages 1000-1010 in Obamacare H.R.3200. In the new Health care bill, H.R.3590 it states in one part that a class 2 medical device is over the counter products, like pregnancy tests. It refers to class 3 devices as those that are implantable, but later it refers to a class 2 device as implantable, so even if the mandate for an implantable radio frequency identification device is not visible in the revised H.R.3590, you can rest assured that your Government will find a way to squeeze this mandate in. Either it's already in the bill, or they will simply revise the medical terms, to befit the mandate of a class 2 device. I do however promise you if you were paying any attention to H.R.3200 from its birth, and if you have listened to conversations from both Barack Obama, or Mitt Romney, or even from the Dr. Paul himself, you will come to the devastating realization that this controversial health care reform law, does infringe on the last remaining civil liberties you have left.

Are you happy with the Supreme Court decision to uphold the mandate as a tax. Which by the way your not exempt from this "tax", so they merely found a loophole to uphold the individual mandate.