Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 55 of 55

Thread: adults required to have health insurance

  1. #41
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4030717]Only ludicrous if you don't believe in inflation which is like not believing in the tooth fairy. We are far from the richest country in the world on many real measurables. We are clearly the most powerful in terms of our military ability.

    We have an awful balance sheet with unfunded liabilities that stretch out for generations that will crush us without either a huge economic expansion or huge cuts in services.[/QUOTE]

    none of that adds up to " we are broke"

    [quote]
    And again, you nor the Federal Govt. has no right to force me to buy something from a private compnay that I do not wish to buy.[/quote]

    Warfish where does the constitution guarantee this?

  2. #42
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,562
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4030695]the difference is that if you wreck your car, society as a whole doesn't pay to get it fixed.

    if a homeless person collapses on the street, and gets wheeled into an ER, that entire visit is paid for by you and me.

    Warfish says driving is optional. Living is not optional. This proves my point. There is inherent risk in living life, and we all share that risk, whether we pay insurance or not. the more people who buy insurance, the less the risk on society as a whole.[/QUOTE]

    This doesn't even remotely address my statement.

    But why should that stop you from repeating your talking points over and over and over again? :rolleyes:

  3. #43
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,562
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4030838]

    Warfish where does the constitution guarantee this?[/QUOTE]

    Try reading the 10th Amendment :rolleyes:

    It's amazing that people can't understand that the Constitution was written specifically to outline the limitations of government, not to document its power.

  4. #44
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4030838]none of that adds up to " we are broke"



    Warfish where does the constitution guarantee this?[/QUOTE]

    When you start answering my questions, I'll answer yours.

    You've been a total and utter dodge on every one thus far. May I suggest if you're going to do that, at least go tot he effort of excuse making LiL goes to, and just decry any uncomfortable questions as "illogical", "offtopic". "Irrelevant", etc, etc, etc.

    (By the way, the answer to your question is that the Constitution is a document that enumerates Federal Power. I.e. is sets limits on Federal Power, not on our freedoms. The burden to prove the Fed has the power is on the Fed, and yourself, not on the Citizenry. I'd would say this is a core part of your problem.....in yopur World, if tghe Constitution doesn;t say you can't (or even if it does), then you can, Federal power in ultimate. In my world, if the Constitution does not grant a power, the Fed has no right to use such a power. And in this case, they have no explicit right to this power, unless you can cite your enumerated power than does.....let me save you the effort, the (D) use the All-Powerful Commerce Clause as a catch all for their Power Grabs, including this one).

  5. #45
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4030885]When you start answering my questions, I'll answer yours.

    You've been a total and utter dodge on every one thus far. [/quote]

    its hard to answer 7 posts at the same time.

    [QUOTE=Warfish;4030885]
    (By the way, the answer to your question is that the Constitution is a document that enumerates Federal Power. I.e. is sets limits on Federal Power, not on our freedoms. The burden to prove the Fed has the power is on the Fed, and yourself, not on the Citizenry. I'd would say this is a core part of your problem.....in yopur World, if tghe Constitution doesn;t say you can't (or even if it does), then you can, Federal power in ultimate. In my world, if the Constitution does not grant a power, the Fed has no right to use such a power. And in this case, they have no explicit right to this power, unless you can cite your enumerated power than does.....let me save you the effort, the (D) use the All-Powerful Commerce Clause as a catch all for their Power Grabs, including this one).[/QUOTE]

    the civil war effectively ended the rights of states... it was the bloodiest conflict in US history (still is) and the end of the day the states do not have rights to overrule the directives of the government.

    Considering the huge effect that the cost of healthcare has on the economy... dont think the commerce clause is misused...

    as for JetPotato's logic

    [quote]
    Really? I didn't make a choice to learn to operate the vehicle, purchase the car, and my insurance? I was forced to do all that against my will? [/quote]

    you chose to eat food, drink water and breathe air... life is apparently optional as the posters in this thread noted. if you want to live without the proper insurance there are ramifications... just like driving without insurance. what Obamacare is was widely considered a great idea by GOP'ers 10 years ago... now Obama does it, it's terrible. I don't get it.

  6. #46
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4030904]its hard to answer 7 posts at the same time.[/quote]

    So why try, amirite?

    Especially when you have no answer beyond "It makes me feel good, so it must be good".

    [quote]dont think the commerce clause is misused.[/quote]

    Anything that reduced our liberty, and increases Federal Power, you'd classify as "not misused". You are, in your core arguments here at JI, a Facist and a Tyrant. You support Federal totalitarianism and power, as long as it's your side in power passing laws that restict the freedoms of those you don;t care about, hate, or just don't agree with. Just like every other Tyrant throughout history, you wallow in propaganda about good intentions, whilst working diligently to reduce liberty, and increase the power of Government. Clearly, in your heart, you see man as pathetic and stupid and worthless, unable to take care of himself in even the most basic ways without Mother State to watch over and dominate him.

    It's amazing to me how little you value your own freedom and liberty Bit. I can only hope one day an Administration passes some mandate, or limitation of freedom, that DOES offend and worry you. If only to open your eyes to what you are.

    I won't be holding my breath on that though....

  7. #47
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,902
    Most adults who are capable of obtaining health insurance do so. Most adults that can afford health insurance buy it. Most adults who can provide the necessary information to get health insurance oblige.

    The first two, the disabled and the poor, have an out; Medicaid. The last group is the one I would bet taxes the system the most, those that are here illegally. Sure, there is some overlap with the first two groups (more so with the latter), but for the most part this is what everyone is getting at without saying as much.

  8. #48
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,562
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4030904]
    the civil war effectively ended the rights of states... it was the bloodiest conflict in US history (still is) and the end of the day the states do not have rights to overrule the directives of the government.
    [/QUOTE]

    we've had some dumb comments in this forum before. but this one is right up there with the worst of them.

    tell me bit, then what is the purpose of states? why don't we just do away with them? what is the function of state government?

  9. #49
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,169
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4030928]So why try, amirite?

    Especially when you have no answer beyond "It makes me feel good, so it must be good".



    Anything that reduced our liberty, and increases Federal Power, you'd classify as "not misused". You are, in your core arguments here at JI, a Facist and a Tyrant. You support Federal totalitarianism and power, as long as it's your side in power passing laws that restict the freedoms of those you don;t care about, hate, or just don't agree with. Just like every other Tyrant throughout history, you wallow in propaganda about good intentions, whilst working diligently to reduce liberty, and increase the power of Government. Clearly, in your heart, you see man as pathetic and stupid and worthless, unable to take care of himself in even the most basic ways without Mother State to watch over and dominate him.

    It's amazing to me how little you value your own freedom and liberty Bit. I can only hope one day an Administration passes some mandate, or limitation of freedom, that DOES offend and worry you. If only to open your eyes to what you are.

    I won't be holding my breath on that though....[/QUOTE]

    Whoa, aren't you a 'states righter?' Isn't that simply trading one "totalitarian" and "tyrant" for another, but just closer to home? Delegating powers to the State governments isn't promoting freedom or liberty, it's promoting that the State be your master. Why is that better than the current system? Here, I'll ask you a basic question regarding the Constitution: In what order of priority and authority would you put these entities mentioned in our Constitution: "We, the people;" "the States;" "the United States" (as represented by the Congress/Executive/Judicial branches of the federal government)? Complicated question, but at the core of many debates here....

  10. #50
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,798
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4030501]Are you being serious?

    I would be issued an invoice for the services, Ambulance and Hospital.

    In my case, the insurance I choose to buy would cover it.

    In othe rcases, they'd be issued a bill for it if they choose no coverage.

    The fail of the system is not the care or the insuance I purchase.

    It's the folks who walk on the bill and get away with it.[/QUOTE]

    You wrote

    [QUOTE]
    My body is not societies anything. It's mine and mine alone, the idea my body is ssociaties sickens me to my core...and sscares the **** out of me, for what such a blithe statement says about the speaker.
    [/QUOTE]

    If that was true in my example you'd be left laying on the street. But the way things currently work you are taken to the hospital.

  11. #51
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,562
    [QUOTE=long island leprechaun;4031169]Whoa, aren't you a 'states righter?' Isn't that simply trading one "totalitarian" and "tyrant" for another, but just closer to home? Delegating powers to the State governments isn't promoting freedom or liberty, it's promoting that the State be your master. Why is that better than the current system? Here, I'll ask you a basic question regarding the Constitution: In what order of priority and authority would you put these entities mentioned in our Constitution: "We, the people;" "the States;" "the United States" (as represented by the Congress/Executive/Judicial branches of the federal government)? Complicated question, but at the core of many debates here....[/QUOTE]

    I have some simple questions for you. Real simple:

    1) At the ballots, which of your votes carries more weight? The vote in the federal election or the one in your state election?

    2) What policies are easier to reform or repeal once enacted? State or federal?

    3) If you're displeased with say, your property taxes, would it be more feasible to move to a new town or state? Or more feasible to move to a new country if they had been instituted on that level?

    4) If a state comes up with effective legislation within its borders that keeps its citizens happy or employed, will other states maybe feel compelled to follow suit or customize to the needs of its own residents? Do states not compete for jobs and taxpayers?

    5) Why is social legislation that is right for California also right for Oklahoma, regardless of their desires?

    6) What exactly is the issue with handling social issues at the state level? Given that The Constitution clearly limits the federal government's power to exactly what is defined within it, shouldn't the burden be on you to prove why social matters shouldn't be handled on the state level, rather than on me to prove why it shouldn't be on the federal level? Please explain the objection here (although I don't expect the real answer from you or any other lib).


    I'll tell you what my ideal scenario is. I'm not the hater of liberalism you might believe. What I'd like to see is a small, conservative federal government that maintains a military for self defense and enacts simple legislation in the interest of interstate and international commerce. I'm fine with liberals sticking around though. I'll need them to enact liberal social policies on my local level. Take your fight on health care, gay marriage, etc. etc. here. You have my support. But the minute you tell me that the ideas that you and I both agree on also have to be inflicted upon those areas that disagree with us, then I'm done with you.

    It's the biggest hypocrisy of liberalism. They love to paint themselves as the defenders of equality. Everyone should be treated equally. We should all be accepting of other people's race, sex, age, sexual orientation... but not their beliefs. Defend the rights of all... except for those that have more.

  12. #52
    [QUOTE=long island leprechaun;4031169]Whoa, aren't you a 'states righter?' Isn't that simply trading one "totalitarian" and "tyrant" for another, but just closer to home?[/quote]

    Yes, to a point.

    However, the States also have Constiutions they must live up to, and I can always leave a State for another State more in tune with my positions.

    [QUOTE]Delegating powers to the State governments isn't promoting freedom or liberty, it's promoting that the State be your master.[/QUOTE]

    Again, States also operate under strict limits of power and authority, as well as under the Constitutional limits and Bill of Rights. The State will operate Policy as it sees fit, but it cannot be my "master" in the same way the Federal Govt. can.

    [QUOTE]Why is that better than the current system?[/QUOTE]

    Because I can choose what State to live in the Union. I cannot choose which Federal Govt. to live under, or even vote to limit it's power int he same way I can in my own State.

    [quote]Here, I'll ask you a basic question regarding the Constitution: In what order of priority and authority would you put these entities mentioned in our Constitution: "We, the people;" "the States;" "the United States" (as represented by the Congress/Executive/Judicial branches of the federal government)? Complicated question, but at the core of many debates here....[/QUOTE]

    1. We the People
    2. The Constitution as Orignally Intended, including all Amendments
    2. The States
    3. The Federal Govt.

    In that order.

    Oh, wait, I'm playing the LiL game wrong......your questions are irrelevant, illogical, straw men filled muddly and inconsistnet, and unworthy of beign answered. ;) While I'm being tongue in cheek here, I won't lie, if folks don't start returning the courtesy of answering my own questions as directly as I answer theirs once in a while, I see no reason to stick around.

  13. #53
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,169
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4031334]Yes, to a point.

    However, the States also have Constiutions they must live up to, and I can always leave a State for another State more in tune with my positions.



    Again, States also operate under strict limits of power and authority, as well as under the Constitutional limits and Bill of Rights. The State will operate Policy as it sees fit, but it cannot be my "master" in the same way the Federal Govt. can.



    Because I can choose what State to live in the Union. I cannot choose which Federal Govt. to live under, or even vote to limit it's power int he same way I can in my own State.



    1. We the People
    2. The Constitution as Orignally Intended, including all Amendments
    2. The States
    3. The Federal Govt.

    In that order.

    Oh, wait, I'm playing the LiL game wrong......your questions are irrelevant, illogical, straw men filled muddly and inconsistnet, and unworthy of beign answered. ;) While I'm being tongue in cheek here, I won't lie, if folks don't start returning the courtesy of answering my own questions as directly as I answer theirs once in a while, I see no reason to stick around.[/QUOTE]

    Forget your add on, which doesn't add anything and I think overall I would agree with you. There are of course numerous situations where the order would change between states and federal government, but I do think the founders intended that the principal operational day to day government that people would deal with would be at the state level. Obviously, in the case of war, foreign affairs, commerce between states and foreign countries, and judicial review, the United States is supreme (the "more perfect union" thing). But putting the people first is really critical to the whole balancing act actually working. In the end, I do believe very strongly that the founders intended to protect the individual and minority factions (as Madison called them) against the tyranny of the state or federal government.

  14. #54
    Speaking of mandates how come HHS can issue waivers out like Candy to constitutents of Nancy Pelosi. 20% of the waivers so far have come out of her district.

    If you can't apply the law evenly where is the due process? Who the hell is HHS to issue waivers on a Congressional law that should impact all of us equally.

  15. #55
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4031334]
    Because I can choose what State to live in the Union. I cannot choose which Federal Govt. to live under, [/QUOTE]

    well that's not entirely true. You could live in a different country. You'd rather not but you _could_

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us