Health care

[Kazan]

I'm not sure if they will make it a right.  That's just what i believe it should be.  I do believe change is coming and universal health care once approved won't be revoked. 

No they won't make it a right because what is involved in amending the constituion, it would just be to much work for the politicians. No they would rather usurp the constituton by passing bills into law no matter how unconstitutional they are.

[Soul Crusher]

You do pay those taxes though... Every time the yearly budget puts money in Defense and you pay your taxes, you pay the free speech tax, the freedom tax, and the right to bear arms.

You also pay taxes for transportation and any other service you use.

Providing for the nation defense is a requirement under the constitution.

[Kazan]

First of all, if you believe the 1st statement you made, then I expect that you don't utilize the Highways, Defense, or any other government program that you most likely do.

That statement sounds great when being altruistic, but the fact is that you will not live on a shack and survive in the forest by yourself. As a matter of fact, had the government not created ARPAnet, you wouldn't be using the internet today... So, you typing your statement on an internet forum is quite hypocritical.

To your point about a not for profit government entity putting the insurance companies out of business... Maybe that's true... However, to say that all of these jobs will be lost seems a bit hypocritical. If this new government entity has to do the same type of work that the private insurance company has to do, then they will need people to do that work.

Those people will have jobs.

In fact, the only people who will probably lose their jobs are the fat cat CEOs most likely.

I'm not against a profit, but you can't sit here and tell me that the Insurance Companies couldn't compete. Either they can do it better cheaper or they can't.

That's what competition is all about right?

And for all those services I pay taxes for State, Federal .....

How can it be competition when one company has to make a profit and one doesn't?

[tu_holmes]

Providing for the nation defense is a requirement under the constitution.

So is the right to "Life" "Liberty" and "The Pursuit of Happiness".

I can't do any of that if I'm sick and have no healthcare to help me get through it.

[tu_holmes]

And for all those services I pay taxes for State, Federal .....

How can it be competition when one company has to make a profit and one doesn't?

Then you have to admit that maybe the insurance companies are just a bad business model to be in.

[Kazan]

You do pay those taxes though... Every time the yearly budget puts money in Defense and you pay your taxes, you pay the free speech tax, the freedom tax, and the right to bear arms.

You also pay taxes for transportation and any other service you use.

It says right in the constitution "To provide for the common defense" don't believe me go look for yourself.

The taxes I pay for transportation, highway etc are administered by the state, see the 10th amendment.

[Kazan]

Then you have to admit that maybe the insurance companies are just a bad business model to be in.

WTF?

[Kazan]

So is the right to "Life" "Liberty" and "The Pursuit of Happiness".

I can't do any of that if I'm sick and have no healthcare to help me get through it.

Life - the government isn't going kill you
Liberty - the government isn't going to oppress you
Pursuit of Happiness not the guarantee of happiness

[tu_holmes]

It says right in the constitution "To provide for the common defense" don't believe me go look for yourself.

The taxes I pay for transportation, highway etc are administered by the state, see the 10th amendment.

I know what the constitution says about the "common defense". How does that negate what I stated at all?

It doesn't.

They are administered by the state, but you pay to the feds.

Again, not anything

WTF?

Did I stutter? Maybe the idea of insurance companies is just outdated. OR maybe they can prove why they're the better option. What's so difficult about that?

[Soul Crusher]

So is the right to "Life" "Liberty" and "The Pursuit of Happiness".

I can't do any of that if I'm sick and have no healthcare to help me get through it.

Wrong TU!  

You want to be guaranteed "life" via a right to health care.  However, what about the right to "happiness" as you claim?  

What do the taxpayers have to provide you to fulfill that right TU?  

[tu_holmes]

Wrong TU! 

You want to be guaranteed "life" via a right to health care.  However, what about the right to "happiness" as you claim? 

What do the taxpayers have to provide you to fulfill that right TU? 

WRONG.

I said "pursuit" of happiness... They are not the same thing.

Life - the government isn't going kill you
Liberty - the government isn't going to oppress you
Pursuit of Happiness not the guarantee of happiness

Your interpretation. Not everyones.

[Soul Crusher]

WRONG.

I said "pursuit" of happiness... They are not the same thing.

Your interpretation. Not everyones.

200 years of constitutional law says so.

[kcballer]

Life - the government isn't going kill you
Liberty - the government isn't going to oppress you
Pursuit of Happiness not the guarantee of happiness

So you aren't down with the death penalty.

[MB]

Healthcare is not a right.  With that said, it needs to be overhauled to make it affordable.  The first step is to remove the insurance companies from the picture.  Then, let free market competition bring down the cost of service.  There's no reason we should have to fear going broke over a medical procedure. 

[Soul Crusher]

Healthcare is not a right.  With that said, it needs to be overhauled to make it affordable.  The first step is to remove the insurance companies from the picture.  Then, let free market competition bring down the cost of service.  There's no reason we should have to fear going broke over a medical procedure. 

100%.  If you look at it though, many states enable monopolies whereby smaller companies canty compete with larger ones because of all of the govt mandates on policies that can be written within the states themselves. 

This alone has driven the costs to ridiculous levels. 

Add med mal insurance on top of that and doctors end up having a huge overhead just to make bills.   

[Kazan]

WRONG.

I said "pursuit" of happiness... They are not the same thing.

Your interpretation. Not everyones.

Really, whats to interpret? Thats always the leftist way, you talk of interpretation like the constitution is some 10 million page document written by martians. It is short concise and means exactly what it says.

[Kazan]

Healthcare is not a right.  With that said, it needs to be overhauled to make it affordable.  The first step is to remove the insurance companies from the picture.  Then, let free market competition bring down the cost of service.  There's no reason we should have to fear going broke over a medical procedure. 

I hate to admit it, but I am old enough to remember medical care before the "insurance companies". We actually had a family doctor, I can remember going to get the vaccinations for school and it costing a whopping $25. The government as usual fucked this up and now they pound their fists and scream for reform because the frankenstein monster they created has started destorying the town.

[Kazan]

So you aren't down with the death penalty.

Don't they teach anything about the constitution in school anymore? If there is dealth penalty it is determined by the state, not the federal government. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.

[Kazan]

They are administered by the state, but you pay to the feds.

Ah I don't think so.

[kcballer]

Don't they teach anything about the constitution in school anymore? If there is dealth penalty it is determined by the state, not the federal government. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.

But isn't that then unconstitutional? It is the taking of life isn't it?

[tonymctones]

But isn't that then unconstitutional? It is the taking of life isn't it?

the constitution outlines the federal govts powers anything not given to the federal govt is left to the state govt's to decide.

[Soul Crusher]

the constitution outlines the federal govts powers anything not given to the federal govt is left to the state govt's to decide.

KC is a little deficient on his understanding of the constitution. 

[Dos Equis]

Don't they teach anything about the constitution in school anymore? If there is dealth penalty it is determined by the state, not the federal government. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.

The feds have the death penalty too.  That's why Timothy McVeigh is dead. 

[tu_holmes]

Really, whats to interpret? Thats always the leftist way, you talk of interpretation like the constitution is some 10 million page document written by martians. It is short concise and means exactly what it says.

That's not leftist at all. Interpretation of the constitution is one of the primary jobs of the supreme court actually.

How is that "leftist"?

What a silly thing to say.

[Kazan]

That's not leftist at all. Interpretation of the constitution is one of the primary jobs of the supreme court actually.

How is that "leftist"?

What a silly thing to say.

There is nothing silly about it, the constitution is written in plain english. The only people who want to "interpret" anything are those who want to do something unconstitutional.