Alright. Lets make a few things clear. Based on the summary's I've read, the Government can't make you buy something with the Comerce clause, but apparently penalizing you for *not* doing something it deems to be right and proper can be considered a tax.
Also keep in mind that the reason the 'Majority Opinion' (I'm not going to get into Robert's possible flip flop) states the law must stand is they don't want to mess with what Congress can and can't tax.
It took an *amendment of the Constitution* to allow the Congress to impliment an INCOME TAX!
Try to remember that as I throw out a couple of examples.
Lately, one of the things people have been going off about is that the government is starting to think people are too fat. We probably are, admittedly, but its not the government's business to care, in my opinion.
So what if the next law of the land states that you need to eat healthy. To determine what healthy is, they pick a bunch of fruits and vegtables, and state that you must by X amount per month. I don't know what X is, but lets say its half a pound of each, per month.
If you don't, the first year it'll cost you, 200 dollars in a penalty tax. It might be cheaper to pay the tax.
The second year, the rate goes up by 100 dollars, and so on, ad-infinitum, until you decide its cheaper to just buy the damned vegitables.
Government wants more green energy. People aren't buying enough, and the company's building Green Energy aren't making money for whatever reasons. So the government passes a law that states that every house should have six photovolaic panels on the roof to suppliment the energy use by the house. Those panels should be bought by, hm... say, Solindra.
If you don't buy six panels (who's size is determined by the size and worth of your home, natch) for every year you haven't mounted them, you pay a thousand dollars extra in taxes. However, after five years, it goes up to five thousand dollars, and continues going up until you're paying far more in taxes, then you would to just buy the damned panels.
And, just to prove I can throw in a 'Conservative' example, that would be just as wrong:
Colt, an American icon, and a gun maker has fallen on tough times. We can't possibly let such a name slip into obscurity. Of course, bailouts are pretty unpopular now, so the government can't just write them a blank check. So, we're going to state that Every man and woman over the age of 18 should own a firearm. And infact, we think you should own a firearm of the AR-15 variety. But, it has to be built by Colt.
For every year you don't do this, we're going to tax you five hundred dollars. After five years, the tax will go up to about fifteen hundred dollars. After seven, the tax will be three thousand dollars.
All that sounds fair, right?
Didn't think so - but thats roughly what the SCOTUS decision on ObamaCare has opened the door for.