Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’
by Kerry J. ByrneOne way that leftists have managed to keep alive their dead, defeated, bankrupting theories on issues like so-called health care is by perverting the definition of very basic terms.
The word “right” is one of the most glaring examples of a definition that’s been distorted by the intellectual house-of-horrors mirror that is leftist theory.
Image: CATO Institute
Every American has the “right” to health care they argue.
They’re right. Every American does have a right to health care. In fact, they have that “right” right now. They have the right to buy insurance. They have the right to not buy insurance. They have the right to pay out of pocket. They have the right get a second opinion. They have the right to rub a little dirt on it and suck it up. They have a right to help out a friend in need.
What they don’t have is the “right” to health care in the perverted leftist sense of the word.
A “right,” in the traditional American lexicon laid out by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, is something that exists by virtue of our humanity. It is “inalienable” and we are endowed with these rights by our creator. No government or institution has the power to take away these rights. You exist, therefore these rights exist.
In the leftist sense of the word, though, a “right” is something very different. In fact, it’s not a “right” at all: it’s a handout provided to you by government, often at exorbitant costs to society.
“I have the ‘right’ to health care!” the leftists demand angrily. “Therefore, the government must provide it for me!”
Rights, in other words, are not innate to your humanity in leftist theory. Instead, rights are bequeathed to you like party favors by political Big Brothers: here’s a do-nothing job for Uncle Henry, here’s a tax exemption for a big donor and … oh, look, here’s some discounted healthcare for members of the big unions that support me.
The “right” to health care in leftist theory, then, is not something that you possess inalienably by virtue of your humanity. Instead, a “right” to them is a dehumanizing tragedy in the making.
The government that gives you your “right” to health care can just as easily deny you that so-called “right” to health care. They can take it away at anytime: if you end up in the wrong column of an actuarial chart, if you vote the wrong way, or, hell, in the very likely event that the system goes bankrupt, the government will be in a position to deny what once was your inalienable “right” to health care. Remember, the Soviet Union declared that its citizens had the right to everything from a home to a job. How’d that work out for them?
“B-b-b-b-b-but!,” scream the leftists. “Insurance companies can already deny you health care.”
No, they can’t. Insurance companies are certainly part of the problem. We’ve grown to depend on them too much and on ourselves too little. The system does need to be fixed.
But insurance companies cannot deny you the inalienable ”right” to health care. They do not have that power. They can only choose not to pay for certain procedures. You can still find another insurance company, seek help in a different state, find a charitable doctor to pay for it, benefit from a fundraiser or, worst-case scenario, benefit from the generosity of a well-funded, for-profit private health care institution.
After all, you still have the “right” to find that care. Even in a worst-case scenario in the current system, you only need the means.
But when government monopolizes the system, when government first decides what kind of care you’ll get, and when government next decides if they’ll even pay for it, your right to health care no longer exists.
At best, your rights will be forced underground into a health care black market: doctors illegally providing care in a cash-only medical economy – but probably one better than the legit “health care” system where patients have no rights but those regally gifted to them by the lords of big government (who, themselves, will never be denied care).
Look at Canada: it already has a vibrant cash-only medical economy. It’s called the U.S. health care system.
Your “right” to health care already exists. Don’t let the leftist and their perverted definition of the word take it away.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
259 Comments
As Judge Napolitano put it: Health care is a commodity not a "right".
I have a "right" to not be forced to provide your "right".
Modern government has strayed from its mission of protecting rights. Nowadays it's about "fairness," a nebulous concept the application of which has proven to be quite antithetical to protecting rights.
This metamorphosis of government's mission has been given the stamp of approval every step of the way by our so-called Constitutional defenders on the Supreme Court.
How about this idea: Anything that requires someone else to give you something is NOT a right. It's charity.
These are nothing but progressive views by radicals whom don't even know what it is they associate themselves with! I would like to know when Americans are going to rise up and tell politicians to STOP? When are they going to hold politicians feet to the flame to back up what they say that these are rights and SHOW US where in the Constitution it states that!? Worst off many that jump on this bandwagon don't realize this "click" they want to be a part of won't include them in the "final party" when the dust clears, these wannabe's will be cast to the side too. Ones like McCaines daughter don't realize they are being used and the words they throw around they haven't comprehended their meaning.
I have a name for all these wanna be progressives…
Cannon Fodder
They really dont get it, they will be 'thrown to the lions' by their own kind when the day comes.
Enough of that though I must go after republicans sitting idly by. Sorry they are, I haven't seen any republicans screaming their heads off on the House or Senate floor, seen walkouts or heard about any of them launching major Constitutional challenges to the radical machine being put in place. IMO the more the repubs sit quietly by while OUR REPUBLIC is systematically changed the more I believe they are nothing but a pack of RINO's on their way to extinction! Our founding fathers if they were here today would look on these men and women in disgust and shaking their heads in disgust at the American people! I truly believe that; remember they literally signed a death warrant on July 4th 1776 they were prepared to put their lives on the line for a better FREE life. Now today Americans take it for granted.
Will it take your precious American Idol or maybe Family Guy to be censored or canceled for you and your neighbors to wake up? No that wont happen right (This is America that will never happen… says who?)… maybe when your at the doctors office/hospital with your little one who is ill and your wait is 3 times longer it will click in your head; by then it will be too late! Remember this if they getaway with making this HC a right then that will open the doors for everything else to be a 'right' as well. You don't really think they will stop there do you. Next thing will be education, jobs, housing, food, internet etc make them all rights , that was tried in other lands and failed!
WAKE UP! Patriots I ask what are you prepared to do http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F452KybPEnQ ? This is the question you must seriously ask yourself and your family! Don't play their game… STOP and play your game through http://www.savingtherepublic.com
Yes for sure WE the People have rights. We also have the right to refusal! One thing we don't need is Government run Health Care. Examples of Gov't run is abundant all around us. The Postal Service is in complete collapse for cryin out loud. The school system, Medicare…Fannie n Freddie…I could go on and on but I won't! Let the free market do it's thing!
The Conservative Edge
I guess high speed internet falls in the last group?
It is a shame that the original "life, liberty, and property" was changed. Much of what has happened to date is because of a lack of respect for property. On the other hand, can you imagine the mortgage mess if the right to property was twisted to meet certain ends?
The progressive left does not understand the difference between an inalienable human right, and the socialist ideal of redistribution of assets to establish “fairness”.
I have individual rights and am free to decide if I do or dont want health insurance. I understand Obamacare exempts christian scientists and the amish from being forced to buy in. First "civil" rights stole private property rights from individuals and its been a proverbial slippery slope. As when the left justifies forcing you to buy health insurance because they weere able to earlier pass laws to force you to buy auto insurance. Sometimes i think the govt. is insurance.
If its a right then………
1.you must eat to stay alive…..new right
2.you must have water….new right
3.No clothes could freeze to death…new right
4.got to have a job to pay for health care…new right
rights come from your creator….not men and women in government…then again the left does worship the President..
Health care is a commodity, and everyone has the right to have it if they want it. Just like a $20,000,000.00 mansion is a commodity and everybody has the right to own one. It is called the right to pursue happiness. Key Word: PURSUE. You can have these things if you pursue them; in other words, do the work required to achieve them.
A right cannot exist where it creates an obligation for someone else. Period.
Until this ideal returns to the core of the thinking of the majority of people and becomes a driving principal behind our government, we're going to be doomed.
I love what Walter Williams said recently about taxation and entitlements: "Absent Santa Claus or the tooth fairy, the only way government can give one American a dollar in the name of this or that good thing is by taking it from some other American by force."
keep and bear arms – I won't buy your S&W
use your free speech – I won't make your sign
pursue happiness – I won't give you tickets to Disney World
stay healthy – I won't pay for YOUR health insurance
I will and do donate to good causes – to force me to is tyranny
FDR, that icon of the progressive movement gave gave us, or, tried to give us the so called second bill of rights…
The progressive left has been insidioulsy twisting the words of our founding documents to come up with entirely new definitions. Prime example: Freedom OF religion has become Freedom FROM religion. When you hear them use terms like 'fairness' and 'justice', get ready for the twist.
Botom line: FREEDOM to choose, FREEDOM to excell, FREEDOM to achieve the heights of success are in the hands of each of us, if we are willing to work and to sacrifice to achieve them. FREEDOM is an alien concept to the social justice, equal distribution crowd. They start from the premise that they are OWED something just for showing up. They feel an entitlement for just having been born into this great nation without the sense of what it has take, the struggles to succeed, the sacrifices that have been made to preserve the FREEDOM to become what WE choose.
This SH!T has got to stop, and it has to STOP NOW!! We are just one simple step from a precipice that once we cross over, there will be no going back. NOVEMBER IS COMING, MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
Methinks you're getting a bit radical here.
You've not seen Republicans fighting health care ? Where have you been since Sen Brown got elected ? Do you not realize that the Republicans only recently got enough votes in Congress to be able to carry on a fillibuster. I'm seeing Republicans (not all of them all the time, but all of them when it it really matters) blocking the progressives in congress time and time again. Now that the progressives want to use reconciliation (50+1) to pass health care, the Republicans are planning an 'amendment marathon' to continue the pressure on Obama.
I get the distinct impression the Republicans are fighting a delaying action until re-inforcements can arrive with the November vote.
You've not seen them raise major constitutional challenges to a PROPOSED BILL because every time they do, the Dems claim the bill is not final yet and it will be 'fixed' before being passed. SCOTUS cannot rule on a law that has not yet been passed, but several Republicans as well as several Attorney's General have stated that if this passes, they will be raising constitutional challenges.
If the Republicans were 'just rolling over' please explain to me why the White House & MSM are doing a full-court-press to pass this beast and claiming they are being balked by the Republican 'Obstructionism'.
The Dems are running scared because they know that most of them are on VERY thin ice with their constituents if they've not already gone to far supporting this garbage. That's not being mentioned much by the WH & MSM because the Dems want to keep up an appearance of solidarity. There's an Easter break coming up that should allow the Dems to get a fresh dose of people's opinion that should go a long way toward putting a stake in this health-care-zombie.
"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others." ~~ Ayn Rand
"Do not ever say that the desire to 'do good' by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives." ~~ Ayn Rand
"It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master." ~~ Ayn Rand
Most people do NOT feel the need for entitlements. Most people do NOT accept entitlements. They DO have the right to decent health care without having to worry about how they will pay for it, whether they can afford it or not. Most of the poster on this page are cold-hearted a-holes.
I agree with your husband on the 'right' for someone else to provide you medical care, but you still have the 'right' to health-care – you just have to provide it to yourself.
…so I can agree that there is a 'right' to health care without using the qualification of 'provided by the government' that the liberals/progressives tack on by assumption. It's this unstated assumption of government provision on the part of the liberals that causes me to do a '180' on 'health care rights'.
We have a right to freedom, and the socialist government healthcare mandates and commissions will take that away.
Government taxes are going up faster than premiums on health insurance, I'd rather give it to the insurance companies and keep my freedom. Duh.
.
When your so called "rights" cost everyone else their God given rights to freedom and liberty, then they can hardly be called rights at all.
They will deny services based on government fiat and rationing. I want to decide, not get Pelosi's permission.
If you're not a connected democrat or union member- no kidney transplant for you! That's what Castro, Chavez, Stalin, Mao, and the European countries do. They're already playing big favorites in the negotiations and wrangliing! Welcome to Dantes inferno.
.
You're so right mjkag!
Our rights will be preempted for someone else's idea of "fairness" and whoever the current tyrant happens to be.
.
You are so right. John Galt is smiling upon you.
Our moral obligation is to our own self interest. If someone doesn't care enough about their own well being, why should we?
.
You are so right. Government spending is not charity. It should remain government spending and not be used to bribe the electorate for votes.
And, before a single person ever gets their health care rationed, Nancy Pelosi better already be flying commercial!
.
I look at it this way: you certainly have the right to keep yourself as healthy as possible (what you're calling right to health care), but when you get appendicitis (or something else similar), there isn't any way you can provide that kind of care to yourself.
You are so right.
Used to be everything was allowed unless prohibited. Paradigm now is everything is prohibited unless explicitly allowed.
And it's all based on Big Gov's notion of what is "fair".
.
So this Obama health Care will alter your wallet,..current system…persons who are in an accident,… how???/
[...] from Big Government by Kerry J. Byrne: One way that leftists have managed to keep alive their dead, defeated, [...]
I love that at least 10 states are moving to challenge Federal HC mandates.
.
Except the left conveniently ignores that one does not have to own an automobile, and the laws mandating car insurance are state-based, not federal. Also, auto insurance operates findamentally differently than health insurance does. You own auto insurance to protect other drivers from yourself and vice versa. It only pays out in the advent of a catastrophe of some sort. When they decide to mandate health insurance, they leave out the idea that we have no option to avoid this except death, as that's the only way we can avoid needing health care. That's a little more extreme than simply not owning a car.
No medical marijuana?
No boats, no lights, no motorcar; not a single HDTV? Oh my!
.
Name a person or persons that you can name by name and location that was taken to a hospital and denied care until the insurance info could be found…
Translation: We have the right to free health care no matter who has to actually pay for it, and see how I'm not a big mean poopie head like the rest of you?
You are so right. We have a right to freedom and to be left alone and not have the government in our faces, or in our wallets.
Constitution is there to protect us against governments like the current one, that's why Obama is having such a tough time – he no like.
.
My, HLB, you sure are practicing hard at twisting conservative economic principles to fit your socialist progressive world view.
I wish people would understand we are moving toward no choice in anything.
Well, it depends on how you define "insurance" as a meta-concept.If you get excessively Heinleinian, where insurance is essentially a form of gambling, then government can be seen as insurance.
You pay a "premium" (taxes) against having "claims" for personal and property rights (the court and legal system), as well as "disaster insurance" (the armed forces) against foreign challenges to said rights.
The question of course is whether you consider the premiums too high in respect to the risks, and whether or not the insurance company (government) keeps screwing you over with deductibles (entitlements for someone else), constant rate increases (additional taxes and fees), and changes to the basic policy terms (mandates and the like).
Mind you, it takes a particular way of viewing insurance to see government as the same, but that is pretty much what Heinlein spells out in "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress".
The Bill of Rights is not the Bill of Wants.
My socialists view of the world. I am LMAO. Conservative principles are for individual responsibility and not to pass your individual obligations to society. I guess you do not follow this principles. Have you ever looked up hypocrite in the dictionary. If you do you will see your picture.
Please feel free to send all your monetary assets to anyone who needs help….but to FORCE another free person to do the same is theft….it doesn't matter if you think that person is cold-hearted or not….if you do not comprehend freedom such as this you only have yourself to blame………
Who said I was in favor of Pelosi's plan. The author of this article was touting the freedom to be uninsured. Well, his "freedom" is affecting my wallet and I do not like it any more than paying taxes. So what is needed is a plan to encourage employers and their employees to pay for health insurance. I am tired of paying for blood sucking leeches.
Excuse me Ralph, but my wallet is already being affected. You see, any conservative will agree, there is no such thing as a free lunch. So the hospitals pass down the costs of the uninusered to the persons who can pay their tab and the government does the same thing. And where did I say I was in favor of Obama care.
Exactly. Our rights should have a limit, and that limit is when it infringes on someone else. We all have a right to spend our time and money as we see fit. If I feel that charitable giving is something that I want to do, then I can give as much as I want to whom I want; that belief in giving should not be forced on anyone else nor controlled by anyone else.
Uncle same should not force me to give in order to help someone else get free health care; if my philanthropic goal is to buy mittens for Ecuadorian chipmunks, then that is what I should spend MY money on.
Apparently, it's also a 'right' to take the hard earned money of one individual, and give it to another individual. Likewise, it is a 'right' to kill the unborn for any reason whatsoever. So many fun 'rights' on the Left! Weee!
So you are okay with forcing medical providers to give emergency care services to everyone, using that to justify forcing everyone to contribute to health insurance, proclaiming that a conservative principle of individual responsibility, and then you suggest others look up the word "hypocrite"?
Let me suggest you look up the acronym GIGO.
Can you read? It is AGAINST THE LAW FOR A HOSPITAL TO REFUSE ANYONE EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE. As a result they must pass the costs of the uninsured to their other paying customers. So we have a dilemma. If you do not want to pick up the tab for the persons who are so irresponsible they do not want to carry insurance, then the hospitals must be able to refuse care if a person can not prove they are financially able to pay for the costs. Otherwise, you have people scamming the system and passing their costs down to other persons. So much for conservative principles. The author of this article must be in favor of welfare mamas.
I never said I was in favor of forcing the hospitals to provide emergency care. But you certainly have a real problem if they can refuse persons based upon the ability to pay. Let's say, you are in an accident, which is not your fault, and your spouse grabbed your wallet out of the car. So when the ambulance comes, you are unconcious and have no proof of insurance. Hmmm. I do not like that scenario, but since you can not prove you have the abiltiy to pay, the ambulance should be able to drive away, leaving you there.
Health care is not a right. It is a service by which the service provider obtains his/her property. To say you have a right to another persons service is to say you effectively have a right to his/her property. This is slavery pure and simple. This is also what the government does is the act of collecting taxes. If you don't think taxes are slavery just try opting out of them.
So you are not in favor of it but we have a problem if we do not do it so we have to do it.
And because we have to do that, we have to force people to buy health insurance.
You do not "really" support it, but you can construct wonderful horror scenarios to show that you really Have No Choice (TM), and so there it is.
Uh huh.
No, Dave they are worse than that. They are misguided hypocrites. They are for "individual liberty" as long as their liberty can pass down the costs of their health care costs to other persons who will be forced to pick up their tab. They are no different than the welfare mamas or unisured illegal immigrants that are scamming their system they allegedly love.
Well, your "choice" to be ininsured is affecting my wallet because I carry insurance that I pay for and I am tired of paying for the costs the hospitals are forced to pass down to me. So if you firmly believe in your "choice", if you do not carry insurance, I want you to refuse medical care if you are injured in an accident. I do not care if this accident is not your fault. There is absolutely no proof that the person who caused the accident has the ability to pay for your injuries.
Or, get rid of Medicare, SS, minimum slave wages and 50% of government, and the people can now AFFORD to pay out of pocket for healthcare! Medicare denies more patients coverage than almost ALL private insurers. Neat huh? Mandated insurance, add in regulated pricing and finite money, you got a recipe for disaster. What happens to this system when we run out of money? No matter what Valerie "I love communists" Jarret tells you, we don't have infinite money, and there is no such thing as a free lunch. Would you like the government telling you how much you can earn? Give tax breaks to doctors who volunteer for free clinics. Lets rely on the charity of the American people, instead of relying on mandates from the government.
We have all heard of some of the improvements that could be implemented without using the unconstitutional means Obama promises like; insurance companies competing across state lines, tort reform and cutting out fraud, but we could do more.
We can't just deny coverage for an uninsured person who is in serious condition, but we CAN stop giving coverage to uninsured people who come in for every little sniffle they have and who do so because they know they are not going to pay anyway. If they come in on a stretcher then treat them, if not then they better have insurance or cash or they can get lost. One of the biggest drains by uninsured people are illegal aliens, no coverage for them would make a huge dent in our premium costs. When uninsured people do get treatment and don't pay then we should streamline a system where their assets can be taken to pay off their debt to the hospital so they have some skin in the game rather than soaking the system. If we did these things our premiums would come down far enough that many of those who are not currently able to afford insurance would be able to.
between 1956, to 1964 working as roofer my father was able to pay for the birth of his 6 children in cash, and emergency care for his 2 year old (me) when i almost died from pneumonia, he also paid in cash (or sometimes trade) for our GP Dr. Chan. county hospital was free at the time, but means tested, and not the greatest of care (it was paid for out of a county assessment)
can you tell me why we can't do this now. did insurance company's drive up the cost? (maybe partially) is it HMO'S (not sure, but the HMO is a government creation) i know the main problem is a web of progressive state and federal laws, regulations, and policy's regulating the medical field, and the medical insurance industry that is responsible for the bulk of the cost, as well as our governments outright refusal to deal with our illegal immigrant problem…..
and this government wants to make health care better? tell me how that works?
Liberals' demands for certain "rights" invariably results in another person's subjugation. For instance, my right to free speech does not require another person to publish my views or my right to free exercise of religion does not require another person to build me a church. If every single person in America refuses to assist me or agree with me, I still have those rights and can worship and speak alone on a street corner if needed.
But the "right" to healthcare is worthless if no doctor will treat me or the "right" to housing if nobody will build me a house or the "right" to food if no farmer will harvest crops. The only way these "rights" can exist is if the government forces another person to work for you whether they want to or not.
And what do we call it when a person is forced to work for another whether they want to or not?
No. Both of you are wrong. If taxes are cut, spending is cut, government is cut, working Americans will have MORE money in their pockets to do with as they wish. Only a complete moron would assume the government could use their money better than they could. I dare you to find ANYONE who will say this. If I force you to by something, with threat of incarceration, how can you say you are "free to choose"? lemme ask this HLB. If mandates are passed, and you can't afford insurance, who's gonna pay for it? Oh, right, taxpayers are! We will STILL be paying for uninsured, NOTHING will ahve changed, and we'll have a huge new bureacracy to pay for.
You are living in a dream world. Hospital costs can quickly mount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Persons who do not have insurance are forcing everyone to pay for their costs. This is not "freedom". It is people scamming the system. As far as illegal aliens, if they have insurance, I would rather have them treated then turn them away. You see, they are one more pocket the hospitals can pass the costs of the ininsured.
This is another topic. The author of this article was complaining his "freedoms were being eroded". One of those freedoms, was his freedom to not have insurance. In other words, the freedom to pass responsibility for his health to other persons.
Your rant has nothing, I repeat nothing to do with whether someone is or is not scamming the system by being uninsured. When persons accept responsibility, whether it is for the children they bear or the costs of their medical care, your taxes will go down. After all, you are so correct, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Most of the people on this board are hard working self reliant folks who not only have to pay for themselves, but end up having to pay for entitlements for lazy people (ie people who vote democrat/socialist). We are called heartless and greedy for being responsible and refusing to be forced to pay for others while a-holes like you are the real greedy people wanting to steal what others have EARNED because you are too lazy to take care of yourselves. Everyone has the right to decent health care…..IF THEY PAY FOR IT!
Until you get rid of the worthless POS that inhabit the urban areas little will change. No matter where they go…..country, municipality, state, county, village wherever they are a scourge on the people who carry the water and work for a living. The American public has spent over 40 TRILLION DOLLARS on their worthless asses and we are still counting. Enough…enough…. Get with the program or leave the country.
"Pelosi better already be flying commercial!"
What, her broom is not good enough?
As usual, you don't make sense.The fact that hospitals must receive and treat all emergency cases is another example of government intrusion, not a personal choice.While you denigrate the government on one hand, you're more than willing for them to pass the costs of insuring the uninsured to employers, instead of abandoning universal healthcare.
Hospital costs do not usually mount to hundreds of thousands of dollars quickly.Costs of this nature are usually only realized by terminally ill patients, mounting over time, not overnight.
So, now all of a sudden, you're in favor of a limited, decentralized government that won't intrude into our personal lives on a daily basis?The current regime in power is guilty of this more and more everyday, wouldn't you agree?
\\ Hanzo \\
You're the freaking hypocrite.You post inane comments defending the most idiotic Progressive policies, so enamored of BHO are you, then when it behooves you, you think you can be a Conservative for a day and rail against everyone who disagrees with you and call them a hypocrite?You're only running your big mouth because BHO is gonna' get even deeper into your pocketbook.I've got news for you, neophyte, this has been going on since he's been in office, and it's NOT gonna' stop.Wow, so reality hit you in the face for once, ha ha. /Hanzo/
Who is paying for your lack of insurance. I am. If you can not afford it, then move to a smaller house, do not eat out, better yet, cry me a river. I bet you just love to rant against the welfare mamas, but you just love having society picking up your tab for YOUR healthcare. Go to a dictionary and look up the definition of hypocrite. Well, I am sick and tired of paying for the welfare mamas and the conservtards like you who scam the system to benefit themselves.
Once again, you're the biggest hypocrite here, and a liar to boot.Tout some more Progressive BS and tell us how wrong Conservatism is, then come on here and gripe about the costs associated with these Progressive boondoggles.Then tell us we're in favor of having others pay for our medical bills.You're a putz.
Besides, idiot, the "system", as it is, was set up by your own big spending Progressives you support in every election, f'' ing moron.What an imbecile you are, as if you've not already been exposed as an incompetent already anyway……….Hanzo
Tell me,a-hole, where is the right to free healthcare spelled out in the Constitution? ~Hanzo
What a crock. Let me help you out, Hanzo. Who is picking up the tab for the uninsured. Hmmm. So what is your solution big boy? If someone comes to a hospital, in critical condition and they do not have insurance, the hospital should be able to say, TS call or see your chaplain. Hospital costs do not usually mount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Well, the average stay for one day in intensive care is more than $15-20,000 per day. I am sure this is chump change for you knowing your level of intelligence, but for most persons, they have a real difficult time pulling this out of their wallet. The problem you have is you can not see just how hypocritical it is to assert individuals should not rely on society to pick up their tab, but it is fine and dandy for society to pick up your health care costs.
What bizarro world do you live in? Most people do NOT accept entitlements? On this Earth? Human nature Dave, people will line up for miles for a free lunch. Why is it cold-hearted to expect one to take care of one's self if one is able? I bet you think you're better than people like me and others on here because you think you CARE more than we do about people. How arrogant and how wrong you are. You libs are all like little children hunting for unicorns. You have no thought or any regard for what it takes to produce a service that people want or need, and that's what healthcare is Dave, a service, a commodity, that is provided at a cost to you. Do you own a car? Do you own a home, or rent one? Do you have insurance for those things? That is not provided by the government and they work very well. They are market-based commodities that offer a myriad of coverages for different prices to suit what you need and can afford. Get it straight ace, people like you who want to take this country down a hole it could never climb out of just to satisfy some childish sense of fairness are the REAL A-Holes.
Do I have the "right" to have the same bonuses as insurance CEO's?Do I have the "right" to the same medical program Congress gets?Does the US government have the "right" to take over 1/6th of our economy?Do I still have the "right" to question my government? "Knock,knock","Who is it?""Interpol. Open up!"
[...] Click here to read more… [...]
When you rely on name calling, it simply shows how weak your argument is. Obviously, you never took Debate 101.
Since you are so brilliant, let me ask you something:
Where does the insurance money to pay for healthcare for the insured come from?
A) Exclusively from the premiums of the person receiving the healthcare
B) Magically generated when the premiums are paid
C) From a pool of all payers, using the interest generated by investing their premiums
Since you obviously do not know, the answer is C). That means even when you use healthcare from insurance, you are almost always using money from others to pay for your healthcare.
So really when you say you do not want to pay for the healthcare costs of others and so demand everyone get heath insurance, what you are really saying is you want more people to contribute to a pool to help pay your personal healthcare costs.
Your genoristy is duly noted.
I don't expect anyone to pay for my healthcare costs.Most people are not admitted to ICU when going to the hospital, and what do you think the average stay in the ICU is?
Which way do you want it, anyway?You seem very conflicted.On one hand, you support every other massive welfare boondoggle from your Progressive pals.On the other hand, you don't want to pay for it.
Where did I say I wanted society to pick up my healthcare costs?Do you have me confused with someone else?Or are you just confused? <Hanzo>
If Obama wants to redistribute the tax revenue to those who are not contributing to the common good, those who pay taxes should start a union of our own,,,and go on strike!!
No, I am not saying I want you you pay for my health care costs. This is why I pay insurance. Your example is simply not logical because if I did not have insurance, but paid the bill on time and in full, then somehow someone would be picking up my tab. Sorry. However, I am picking up the tab for the individuals who do not have insurance because the hospitals have to pass this costs down to their paying customers. Now go back listening to Rusty the Chickenhawk and Glenn the Idiot for further instructions.
Yes, you're a hypocrite."Who wants to stop payments to the welfare mamas, but pass…….. blah freakin' blah".I don't know, who? Not me.Who came up with these nefarious schemes in the first place, giving out entitlements in order to enslave generation after generation to poverty on the government dole, in exchange for votes?You and your ilk, that's who.
Does the "New Deal", or the "Great Society" ring a bell, you progressive sycophant?You're still a nutcase, just a pissed off nutcase because you finally realize you've been had by your political heroes.Must suck to be you. >Hanzo<
Blah blah.Give me a break.The very first time I came across your idiotic posts you engaged in ad hom attacks before anyone, right off the bat.Have you changed your tactics because every time you post a comment you're schooled by someone on this site?
So go ahead and refute my comments.You can't, hence the hissy fit about debating in a proper manner, what a joke. >Hanzo<
My example is how insurance works. You may not like how it functions, but that is not going to change the reality of it.
If you want more people paying in to insurance pools, then the effect is to have more people to pick up your health care costs, as well as having more people pay insurance premiums to cover the costs of the uninsured that still exist.
That you also want everyone to pay taxes to pay insurance premiums for people who cannot otherwise afford them just increases the number of people you want to have pay into the pool that is used to cover your health care costs.
As for your descriptions of "Rusty" and "Glenn":
"When you rely on name calling, it simply shows how weak your argument is. Obviously, you never took Debate 101."
Indeed.
No, I am proposing that we go to a system where we take the responsibility to pay for our own medical costs. You know based upon the good ol' conservative principles. If you want a solution, it can begin with mandating companies either pay for their employees health insurance or a combination thereof or they pay an exise tax for refusing to have this coverage. Oh, I know the conservtards will scream, but I am tired of paying a hidden tax for their lack of coverage every time I get medical care. The money raised can be used to pay for a credit for the uninsured to pay for a portion of their insurance costs. This way, they have a financial incentive to stay healthy.
Liberal Economics
You can quote story after story of the 'inequities' of our present medical delivery system, and each more heartbreaking than the one before. I would agree that our sysem is totally effed up. But you are not addressing the reason it cost so much. It costs so much BECAUSE the government got in the middle. Also because our government lacks the will to enforce its immigration laws.
We are a compassioneate people which is why we will never refuse medical treatment in an emergency but if you forgot your wallet at home, has no basis for not getting it at some point, your argument there is just completely stupid.
cont…..
If you want people taking responsibility to pay for their own medical costs, then you would want to eliminate insurance entirely. If people want to invest money to use for health care costs, they should do it on their own, and not pay some third party company that might decide not to allow their claims to get in the way.
Mandating companies pay for something is strictly interventionist.
Assessing an excise tax if they do not pay is strictly interventionist.
The reason medicine costs so much is a huge combination of factors but chief among them is the idea that it is FREE. Any time you give something away for free it gets abused. If you want more of something, subsidize it, if you want less of something tax the hell out of it. Simple, immutable fact.
Our emergency rooms are not full of emergencies. They are full of people who use it as primary care. They are in many cases though not all cases, illegals. You go and make a 'one size fits all' universal plan than true more people will be forced to pay, bringing the cost down somewhat, but you know what. I am not obese, I take care of myself, I am not likely to get pregnant or contract some nasty San Francisco based social disease, or any other host of maladies. Why should I pay for a plan whose benefits I will never need? Why can I not buy insurance for catastrophic circumstances and pay out of pocket, or an HSA for the run of the mill.
With the government approach, you and I have to pay for every low life, high risk SOB out there. NO THANKS.
cont..
You are only half-right. You are correct, the more persons who are in the pool, the more people there are that pay in the pool. You forgot to add with more insureds, the costs also increase because more is being paid out. As far as coverage for persons who can not afford them, well maybe they should work two jobs or cut back on other expenses. You know, the typical conserative dogma you so love to spout as long as it applies to the other guy. And finally, I am not debating Rusty and Glenn.
The hard facts for Nancy Pelosi:
http://crosssection.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/nanc...
Say, did you go to college? Did you ever have a course in economics? When you pay for insurance, you are footing the bill because you are also spreading the risk between the other insureds. So what is your solution since hospitals write off between 15-20% of their gross bills. Who do you think picks up the tab? I know this is a tough question to answer for you. So go to a mirror and ask this question. So lets assume the hospitals do not pass these costs down and simply eat them. I guess that is fine with you. After all, if they made more money, they might be able to afford better medical equipment that one day could save your life. But you have principles and by God, no one is going to tell me I am scamming the system. Oh, and I am curious, but are you in favor of mandatory automobile insurance. And finally, persons do have a financial incentive to stay healthy. You see, it is one thing to file bankruptcy for $5-10,000. It is another story for $50-100,000.
Now, if you try and throw that lame "everybody has to get auto insurance" argument out there, don't even! With auto insurance you can choose your coverage and buy it from anywhere. that whole argument is a non-sequiter.
The answer, or at least MY ANSWER, get government out of the insurance business altogether. They can still provide oversight and some regulation to prevent gross abuses, though they suck at the job as evidenced by everything they have oversight on already, but I digress. Take away the anti-trust protection, allow transferability and interstate competition. Allow insurance companies to specialize in different coverages (volume discounts) and for all those who use the emergency room as primary care for non-emergency, common maladies, kick them out.
cont…
So if we make more people pay for insurance costs will go up? And you consider this a good solution?
As for "typical conservative dogma", I am not a conservative, typical or otherwise, and I never suggest anything like that. But nice try.
As for knowing who you are debating, obviously you do not, or you would not have felt the need to try and impugn a particular source.
Instead it seems you are fine with demanding people pay into a system to support the costs of others "as long as it applies to the other guy".
If they are here illegally and still get whatever amount of care bill their country of origin. If their country will not pay or provide them with insurance themselves, we cut off that amount of foreign aid we send them. They will figure it out pretty wuick and stop using us as a dumping ground for their poverty and mismanagement.
Sound like tough love? Too bad. In our country as opposed to any other on the planet, our poor and those on welfare live better than anywhere else in the world and,,,,the biggest most prevelant health care problem they have aside from those arising from bad life decisions, is obesity. Go figure,,,everywhere else in the world it is starvation and malnutrition for the poor. Our myriad welfare programs support people just slightly lower of a lifestyle than those who work, and you are surpirsed that the Great Society and the War on Poverty are failures. Take a look at the ninth ward in N.O. LA. or look at what wonders compassionate progressives and unions have done for Detroit. Obama's template has that in store for all of us. Multiple generations of freeloaders. California is another prime example of progressives gone wild and look at their economy. I am a charitable person but give me an Effing break.
At some point we as a nation need to get a grip and start applying some good old fashioned COMMON SENSE and stop pissing away money on losers.
Sorry for this rant, but I am sick to death of this SH!T and I am done!
Let''s see. People have been scamming the system for a long time. I remember someone said, "Render unto Ceasar, what is Ceasar's and to God what is God's". So who came up with the Great Society, the government dole or persons not taking responsibilty for their own medical costs is not relevant. You see in my world, two wrongs do not make a right. And who said I was progressive. I would assume you are because you want others to pick up your tab. I would love to accept your position, but the problem is hospitals in this country, by law, must give and render aid to patients in need. So as long as this law is in effect, people will scam the system by not having insurance coverage. Now, if the hospitals could only refuse care. After all, it would only be fair. I am sure you have heard the saying, no pay, no play.
Did you go to college and take a course in economics? More importantly, did you understand it?
I am well aware of who picks up the tab. That you are so obsessed with your own medical costs that your let a raging fury over the merest hint that someone might get advice to take an aspirin, and even get said aspirin, for free, that you are incapable of realizing that your entire solution for not forcing people to bear the health care costs of others is to force people to bear the health care costs of others in another way.
Where in any of my posts did I say all persons must pay for all coverages? As far as a San Francisco social disease, well I had a very close friend die from AIDS from a blood transfusion in 1986. Where did I say you can not have high risk and a HSA for the rest? I simply said, we need to come up with a system that prevents the current uninsured and underinsured from scamming the system by flying blind. I can not believe a conservative would demand anything less.
It is in your system because most of the uninsureds do not have the money to pay for serious illnesses. So it is free.
If that is your position than you of all people should want no part of what the Dems are planning to stuff down our throats. Get the government out of the equation and let free common sense markets prevail. If we get sanity back into the system, prices will come down and we can start looking at making allowances for those who fall through the cracks in a much better fashion that we do presently or will under Obama care.
You are begging the question. The issue is persons need insurance for things, including their health care. Unfortunately, too many persons on this page simply do not understand, when they do not have health insurance, others pick up your tab.
[...] » Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ – Big Go… [...]
All 50 should be….
[...] » Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ – Big Go… [...]
If people had more money in their pockets via tax cuts, spending cuts, cutting government, and abolishing minimum slave wages, people wouldn't NEED insurance. They'd be able to pay for their healthcare out of pocket! Do you disagree with this? Instead of assuming all these things about me, why don't you actually READ the comment.
You don't know the first thing about me. You assume everything yet offer nothing. You are advocating MORE government intrusion in the misguided belief that if everyone is FORCED to buy insurance, everyone will suddenly have the money and you'll no longer have to subsidize them. You are wrong. Poor people will STILL not have money (via tax increases) and new bureaucracies to pay for. Taxpayers will STILL subsidize the poors' insurance through a mandate, AT a greater cost due to enlargment of government.
I think they are already doing it to "property," i.e. imminent domain property grabs to put up hotels to enhance the tax base, light rail lines to enhance "Smart Growth" (which amounts to forced high density), forced diversity in neighborhoods, making us pay for tax credits to home buyers, making us bail out Fannie and Freddie, etc. It doesn't matter what word is authentically used and defined, the leftists will co-opt it, misuse it, twist it, lie and distort it.
[...] » Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ – Big Go… [...]
Personally, I'm overjoyed you want to work a little harder, pay more taxes, and sacrifice the plan you have now for one ran with the efficiency of any bloated government bureaucracy, just so that I can get myself some FREE health care (as is my right).
You're a pal!
She was amazing….such prescient writings. She knew from experience in the Soviet Union what socialist suffering is….and warned us with those great books; Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead.
Allow doctors to write off charitable health care. Problem solved. Unfortunately, it would result in a sizable loss of tax revenue, and mean less people dependent on the Government, so don't expect any Democrats to get behind it.
The dismantling of the progressives will be a thing of beauty. They've got it coming.
Um, it has everything to do with it, genius. If people are pulled of the government tit, they will have to fend for themselves (or rely on charitble Americans), hopefully get a job, invest in their future how they see fit, and afford their own insurance. I don't understand why this concept is so foreign to you. You ARE American, right? It's our heritage. Responsibility is self-imposed chains. But I digress, logic isn't going to work. How about this, why don't we pay nothing more, and actually force our employees to do their job, and cut out the source of "scamming"? Why do we need totalitarian tactics to root out the corruption?
"They DO have the right to decent health care without having to worry about how they will pay for it."
That's awesome. Can I have a right to a decent car without having to worry about how I will pay for it?
You're obfuscating the issue.All you're doing is attempting to besmirch everyone because you think you can.Who on here said they wanted others to pay for their healthcare?It's in MY system?Where do you come up with this crap?You could be no more illogical than you are now, no possible way.<Hanzo>
Someone who said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" was Jesus Christ, btw.So, the politicians who you would support that come up with "Free healthcare" are not relevant to this issue?THE ones who instituted this garbage are now not relevant?Husker, you love BO, remember?You said by implication that you're progressive, you espouse every progressive meme that comes down the pike.Except healthcare, which you see hitting your wallet.Ahhh, so you don't vote principals, you vote with your wallet.Then why would you vote for BHO? The very one who would empty your wallet in order to pay for a "welfare mama's" healthcare.You're a raving lunatic. <Hanzo>
And why don't you drop the asinine insinuation that I expect or want someone else to pay for my healthcare, it makes you look stupider than you already have proven.Oops, too late.
I'm not too enthusiastic about the quality of doctors we'll have in a few years. Who is going to take out all the loans to go to medical school in order to be a slave? The universities will have to ease some of their requirements in order to fill the need for license physicians. The government will starts offering more grants and scholarships to less qualified people. Doctors will essentially become civil servants. If you think Obamacare is scary now, wait until they get Cliff Claven to operate on your prostate.
Funny. You say this in another thread in direct conflict of the post I am replying to:"
Who is paying for your lack of insurance. I am. If you can not afford it, then move to a smaller house, do not eat out, better yet, cry me a river."
So which is it? Either people CAN make lifestyle changes and afford insurance, or they cant. Even though you are wrong, at least be CONSISTENT in your errors.
Humorous cartoons on Obamacare at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/category/health...
Well, have a nice dinner with your family then.I know who is picking up the tab for "free" medical care.Why would you think otherwise?You know how smaaaart I am, I've schooled you many times myself.;^)
I think you hate the fact that you are now espousing a Conservative position.You can't stand it, it's really getting under your skin.Come to the dark side Luke, we have cookies!
I read on another post that your child had brain cancer and all is well now.This is a first rate example of how wonderful our healthcare system is, the best in the world.We need to fix some wrongs, but not by reinventing the system in the image of our bloated government beauracracy.
I have 3 children myself, and my family and I will pray for the continued good health of your little one. <Hanzo>
He has a point, though. When you consider that the GOP and conservatism will essentially be dead if this monster passes, then the Republicans aren't really fighting at all. Sure, the Dems might lose a few seats in November…but do you think the Republicans will have the courage to revoke Obamacare? Not when Democrats and the MSM are wheeling out their human props and screaming "VOTE REPUBLICAN AND GRANDMA WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD HER KIDNEY DIALYSIS!" The minute Obamacare passes, the debate will shift from "should we or shouldn't we have it?" to "Who's gonna give ya the the biggest handout?", and the answer to that question has always been Democrats. Obamacare will seal Democrat power over this country for generations. You'll be lucky to get a conservative Republican elected to White House toilet cleaner.
Healthcare is provided by people. At the other end of the debate are a group of highly trained doctors, nurses, therapists, and technicians. They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and years in training, honing their skills and abilities so they may practice medicine. Claiming to have a "right" to healthcare means that you are claiming these people's skills and abilities as your own. That they are servants to your needs. That is slavery, pure and simple.
You cannot create a right to another person's abilities.
But since when have the progressives ever understood slavery anyway? And leave it to the first black President to re-instate slavery and indentured servitude.
Sorry, Bronx, but I did not say that costs will go up if more are insured. I simply said the insurance pool will pay out more claims as more are covered. Whether costs go up or down is dependant upon the level of risk of the additional insureds. But then again, you should know this.
Hey! Your head is on fire…get your boyfriend to piss on it will ya?
So you are aware who picks up the tab? I see. It is quite all right with you for persons who go without insurance and then do not pay for the services they recieve, but by God, when those welfare mamas pick up their check, they are taking my money. Hmmm. I guess consistency never crossed your mind.
Charity is voluntary, you have described theft
So your expectation that someone else pay your bills is cold-hearted? I think THIEVES are cold-hearted. It isn't that they don't have health care. Saying they don't is the complete lie that THIEVES like to tell. They have it. They just don't want to pay for it.
There is NO right to have someone else pay for your life. Period. A right to life. Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Period.
Now run along little child, ask your mommy and daddy to keep pay for you
Well, at least we know you know nothing about football. Bo is Bo Pelini, Nebraska's football coach. Oh, and by the way, who will pay for your three children's health care if you do not have insurance? Look up medulloblastoma. Oh, I know it would not happen to you because bad things do not happen to good people.
You do not have a right to someone else's property or their earnings.
I have never taken a free government benefit of any kind other than my public school education. For this my parents paid property taxes. The problem with your system is hospitals are required by law to give aid to critical patients regardless of ability to pay. As long as this law is in effect, people will scam the system. But do you really want to go to the other extreme?
Yes, and who said I was in favor of a government run health care system? Believe it or not, government monopolies in virtually every instance do not work. So my point of comparing mandatory automobile insurance and health insurance is still valid.
Well, they already write it off because they never recieve their fee. If you want them to write off the value of their services, the uninsured have simply past the cost of their irresponsibility to the government. Additionally, if you allow the doctor to write off the value of their services even though they were not paid, no one would pay income taxes because people would be writing off the cost of the services for any charitable work they performed.
I say to those that want your dear leader government to pay for it all…try this: all you progressives can choose to pay a fee (70% of your income) to the federal gov to help out all those that want your subsidized help. Then, the government can build medical schools and health clinics staffed by students (free tuition) on every corner where you and the freeloaders are then required to go to for any and all health care.
This will make you happy…I swear…course, the illegals will go back to Mexico cuz they ain't gonna pay. And then when the substandard care results in you and your ilk dropping like flies, who's gonna rescue you? nobody pal…you get what ya pay for.
What is inconsistent about telling persons to live within their means and do not pass the costs of their care down to the general public.
I am simply requiring you to take care of yourself and not to rely on others to pay your bills. Oh, I know you are the ones who will never get sick. Additionally, where did I state I was in favor of a government run program?
I know a little about football, it's just not on the top of my list of priorities.I live in Cincinnati, we only know UC and OSU.
I have health insurance for my children, paid for by myself.Your sarcasm drips.I feel sorry for you, your cynicsm seems to have taken over your core being.If one of my children were struck down by any disease I'd be griefstricken and I'd do anything I could to help them.I think that if they were cured I'd be the happiest person alive also.Just sayin'.Have a good night, hug your children and thank God, as we all should. *Hanzo*
So get a union job loser. You will get everything for free then.
The right of free health care. I never said free health care is a constitutional right. You must think it is because if you are flying blind and have a serious illness, someone else will pay for your costs.
Good on you then.There might be light at the end of the tunnel for you.;^)
Maybe life will make you a Conservative, as it has so many.Have a good night. ~Hanzo
Unfortunately, if you are sick, our hospitals must provide you with health services. So your claim you are accepting the consequences of your action is false unless next time you think you are having the big one, take a couple of asprin and go to bed.
"………………… creating the jobs that the rich are hiding".
It's sorta like spitting into the wind,….. only dumb people have a "knack" of doing that, and,…….
rich people,….. you can bet,……sure are not dumb.
I see. Since we are so compassionate it is fine to pick up the tab for the uninsured. But by God, do not expect me to pay one dime for the welfare mamas. Hmmm.
I don't expect anything from anyone, ever.To revel in a sense of entitlement is contemptuous and robs the self of dignity and humility. =Hanzo=
I have a Right to Keep and Bear Arms…
I'm still waiting for the .Gov to send me my M4…
I have a Right to Free Speech…
Still waiting for the .Gov to send me a Bullhorn…
I think we are on the same page there. This whole welfare thing needs a new hard look. It is obvious from the fraud and multiple generations of welfare families that the system is not working and can arguably be said to be doing more harm than good. I believe in something that might be considered 'work-fare'. But whenever the govt. gets involved it gets messed up and money is wasted. Let's get back to the time when personal responsibility was the norm rather than the exception. Pride does not grow in a person who takes handouts.
The 3 amigos in DC.
http://www.narf.tv/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/car...
…… You aren't even making sense. Do you even read the posts or do you just cut and paste talking points from leftwing sites? I was saying that is the philosophy you are putting out there.
My husband's test on whether or not something is an unalienable right is to ask "Would I still have this if I were the only human being living alone and isolated on an island?"
You still have your life.
You still have your liberty.
You still have the freedom to pursue happiness.
With some elbow grease of your own:
You can still have shelter.
You can still have clothing.
You can still keep and bear arms.
You can still have food.
But:
There will be no one to provide you medical care.
There won't be anyone to provide you legal council.
So the first three are sort of freebies. The middle four you are free to seek to provide for yourself. The last two are entirely dependent on others meaning they are not rights.
required charity – sounds like taxes
There are so many ways to say it – and the posters before me have said it very well.
It all boils down to: If if obligates someone else to provide "it" to you, then it's not a right. Rights were defined in Declaration by our very wise Founding Fathers. "The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Ok, one more time for the reading impaired. You said this first:
"Who is paying for your lack of insurance. I am. If you can not afford it, then move to a smaller house, do not eat out, better yet, cry me a river."
Later, you say this in response to another poster:
"The costs total more than $800,000. I do not know to many Americans who can write a check for this amount by forgoing videos and cable TV."
So which is it? Either people CAN make lifestyle changes and afford insurance, or they cant. Even though you are wrong, at least be CONSISTENT in your errors. We both agree about the symptom, we disagree on the cure. You say "MORE GOVERNMENT!" and I say "Less government, less taxes, less bureaucracy, kill minimum slave wages and Capitalism will fix itself. Healthcare will be more affordable, doctors will be more able to offer free clinics for the unfortunate, and *gasp* more money in the people's pockets!!!! It's like an Amazo-insano-blast of logic!
You have the 'right' to take care of your own health.
Yep.
No, the other extreme is un·con·scion·a·ble and against a doctors Hippocratic Oath. The point I'm trying to make (unsuccessfully, apparently) is that the more money private citizens have (via tax cuts, spending cuts, government reduction, and getting rid of minimum slave wage), the more options are open to them. They have more capital to create a business, banks have money to loan, parents can send their children to private schools. The economy will surge and the middle class will edge closer to the upper class at an alarming rate. Check out the 1920's. Pretty interesting how it panned out.
No, I never said all persons must make lifestyle changes to pay for insurance. I simply said to the individual in question who was complaining she did not have the funds to pay for insurance that she should make lifestyle changes rather than depend upon society to pick up her health costs. You know the standard conservative line. As far as depending upon free clinics. Really now. You think money just grows on trees. One day in intensive care averages between $15-20,000 per day. You think by killing the minimum wage, this is going to make these costs go down. All right. I have some land in Florida for sale.
The lack of medical insurance does not mean that one is passing the cost on to others. They are required to pay for their treatment if they are insured or not. A bill will be sent to them. Do not say a bill wont be sent, that is a false arguement. If you are under 40 the odds of needing healthcare are slim and you can save money by not having it. You must understand the risks involved. You don’t throw the money away, you invest it (like Insurance Companies do). When you need medical care you pay out of your pocket. HLB your argument is flawed by ASSUMING that the freedom to choose insurance or not to be insured impacts your wallet. If I am single, I do not need life insurance. If I have children and debts it is a good idea to have it. It is not required, yet. Do I need Auto Insurance if I live in NYC and don’t own a car? Too many people confuse Rights with Privilages. Watch Greece. That is our future.
You may not, but once again, who is picking up the tab for the uninsured? I know and I am tired of paying for other persons mistakes of not having medical coverage.
Any rational person knows that comparing auto insurance to health care insurance
is not only an invalid comparison, it is in fact is an incredibly absurd comparison.
Anyone who makes such an invalid statement exposes their grand ignorance on this issue.
Once again, we all know who is picking up the tab, it's us.All we can do at this time in history is elect representatives who will correct this malfeasance, and I guarantee they won't fly the Progressive flag, or Socialist, or Liberal.They'll be Conservative Constitutionalists. +Hanzo+
http://supreme.justia.com/us/268/5/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Linder v. United States, 268 U.S. 5 (1925)
Linder v. United States
No. 183
Submitted March 9, 1925
Decided April 13, 1925
268 U.S. 5
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. Any provision of an act of Congress ostensibly enacted under power granted by the Constitution, not naturally and reasonably adapted to the effective exercise of such power but solely to the achievement of something plainly within the power reserved to the states, is invalid and cannot be enforced. P. 268 U. S. 17.
2. Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress. P. 268 U. S. 18.
3. Incidental regulation of such practice by Congress through a taxing act, like the Narcotic Law, cannot extend to matters plainly inappropriate and unnecessary to reasonable enforcement of a revenue measure. P. 268 U. S. 18.
more to the point, any 'right' that presupposes an affirmative claim on anyone else's time, money or property is not a right at all.
Well, your right not to purchase health insurance is affecting my wallet because I must pay higher insurance premiums and taxes to cover your medical costs. Remember, the first rule of economics. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Unfortunately, in this society, we must give anyone who seeks it, emergency medical care until they are stabalized. So they only alternative our society has is to either deny medical care unless you can prove you have insurance or follow the current system. If you do not follow the current system, what are you going to do with persons who are in an accident and their insurance documentation can not be found? Leave them there. Please.
Yes he did say that! The government does NOT have the right to force anyone in the USA to but or sell anything!! Health care is a 'good' NOT a right!!
Excellent statement!
I can agree with most all that has been said in this post. I don't want government run health care. They need to scrap this festering turd of a bill. However, we do need to do something. I tend to think the insurance companies are a large part of the problem, but i suppose that is debateable. What isn't debateable is how we can make sure health care is affordable to all. My wife and I combined made 70k this past year. We have a mortage and a daughter, and another one on the way. My premium just went up another 15%. We'll barely make it monthly, but what about the neighbor (hypothetical) next to me who isn't as lucky? Having the government tax all of us to help him out won't work since I believe 1) they tax enough already and 2) I have a feeling a lot of that is going to go to fraud, waste, and abuse. So what's the answer? As Christian, I feel I have an obligation to help everyone–but we cannot throw fundraisers for everyone or expect that there are enough hospitals that are generous enough to give free/discounted surgeries to everyone who cannot otherwise afford it. I think back to Matthew 25:35-40:
" 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
How do I reconcile this?
HLB. I will restate: Because I do not have health insurance does not mean that I am not paying for my medical care. Your argument that the uninsured do not pay for their medical care as a brush stroke is false. “Rusty” paid for his own medical care. He has the means. Most Americans have medical insurance. Those who don’t 1. Know the risks and accept them or 2. Want others to pay for their medical care and are drains upon society. If you have a Pre-Existing Condition you can still get insurance. My B-I-L has one and still found many insurance companies that would cover him. Sometimes the cost is higher, sometimes it may be less.
I applaud your purchase of Medical Insurance. You know the risks and you made your choice. Let others make the choice while they still can. As for those that don’t have insurance and want coverage the costs are minimal. If you live a healthy life you wont even notice the cost. No smoking. No rich fatty foods. No drinking. Ofcourse if you do all that you wont need the insurance anyway. There is a coralation between your personal habits and your health costs. Fat, out of shape, heavy drinkers and smokers have the most health problems. They made their choices. Once the Government runs healthcare they will be punished. The people who advocate Choice are the first to take yours away.
Yes, the left has tried to change the definition of 'rights', as well as 'liberty' and 'justice' …. especially 'justice' and they've been quite successful. Now we have a young generation with the greatest sense of entitlement ever and a mature generation where all too many are willing to sacrifice freedom for 'security'. I must say, the future looks bleaker by the day.
What will it take to convince the captives that "rights" come from God and that "liberty and justice" must coexist or neither is true?
And then He went on to say: "……Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' 44 Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?'
45 He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.'
46 And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life………."
Yes, It's interesting as it's the only time our Lord tells us implicitly what His return will be like.
But we serve Christ by choice because of the gift of free will. We have certain duties to fulfill as Christians that we can never thrust upon anyone but ourselves. We can help and support efforts to help the truly needy, but always within reason.
HLB, I am glad you asked how I would solve the world’s problems. I would have a dual system. A Capitalist system for those who wish for better things in life and believe they can achieve them with hard work and perseverance and a Socialist system for those that have come under hard times and need a hand. The Capitalist system is as we have now, minus all the welfare programs and government interferance. The Socialist system is made up of self imposed Gulags. Everone who enters will work for the collective. Food, Housing, Medical will be provide. You will exist. You will not Thrive. You will receive education. You will receive skill training. You will not be allowed to sit idly while work can be done. The goal of the collective is to get out of the collective. Make it de-humanizing. Instead of food stamps there is the kitchen where healthy yet bland meals are served. Instead of subsidized housing, open bay barracks for singles, single rooms for families. The medical care will be on par with what the UK has to offer. No one will be allowed to fail. We will not turn our backs on the poor. They will do their best to not have to enter the Collective. It will save lots of money and may be self sustaining. Random Drug testing and lots of security. This is the governments property, not the residents. No smoking, no drinking, no drugs. Any damage, any failure to comply as a CHOICE they made, and the violator will be kicked out. No safety net for them until they comply with the rules.
Harsh? Only to those that CHOOSE to enter the Collective and wish to stay there. For those that receive education and skill training while there it will save their lives and they will be better for it.
My right to not purchase health insurance hasn't affected your wallet one bit. I believe in personal responsibility–a founding principle for both conservatives and libertarians. If I or my husband need medical care, we do something that seems apparently unthinkable–we pay for it ourselves
We don't carry insurance because we can't afford the monthly premiums, but if medical care is necessary, we pay for it. In fact, we're still paying every month for an emergency room visit from *two years ago* when my husband had kidney stones. That's a debt we owe, and we will pay it. That's what personal responsibility means, and if we have to forgo things like renting videos and cable TV for a while until we pay it off, then that's what we have to do.
I am a hypocrite? Now that is a good one. Who wants to stop payments to the welfare mamas, but pass down the costs of their medical care to other persons. IMLMAO. So big boy, how do you propose to stop persons from scamming the system by having other parties pick up their health care costs? This should be good. I cannot wait.
And what is your solution?
How do you propose to pay for "welfare mamas" under your brilliant scheme?
Will they sponetaneously become wealthy enough to afford insurance on their own when the plan you support is enacted?
The answer of course is no. For them to have insurance other parties will have to pick up the health care costs. You want to change us from a system where others pay for the uninsured, which you declare is unconscionable, to one where other pay for the uninsured, which is the height of social justice and political perfection.
It reminds me of that old joke from Mad Magazine:
Two Soviet citizens are discussing political theory. One of them notes that "Under capitalism, man exploits man, but under communism it is the other way around."
Your solution is "the other way around". Congratulations on proposing governing according to outdated Mad Magazine jokes.
Let's see, Jennifer. I have a son who was the picture of health. There are fewer than 1,000 children who develop brain cancer in America each year. No one knows why, but they do. Unfortunately, he developed a medulloblastoma. We hope and pray he is cured. The costs total more than, $800,000. I do not know to many Americans who can write a check for this amount by forgoing videos and cable TV.
And when things get more insane after Nov. 2010, then what?We will try the vote, then we will stop the money flow…
Really, I have been "schooled". I see from someone so smaaaart they had to resort to name calling. Hmmm. Anyway, it is time for me to have dinner with my 5 children. Oh, by the way, they are all with my first and only wife. In the meantime, I suggest you look into a mirror and ask yourself, if most Americans do not have health insurance, who is picking up their tab. Then go to all the economists you love to quote and find the one who said "There is no such thing as a free lunch".
We understand. Did you even read the article? I know it's simplistic, but what you are saying boils down to this:
"To be free and obtain individual liberty, we need government to tell us what to buy and how much of it to buy, because we ourelves cannot make rational choices, nor accept the consequences of our actions."
Yes and guess what? I did not rely on any governmental hand out or program to pay for his care or expect others to foot the bill because I have had health insurance everyday of my life because I know bad things can and will happen to good people.
[...] Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ [...]
Do you have "Rights" if you break into a country, by the millions, illegally, and pres.obama suddenly finds himself with a free Voting-block that he panders to, and will give them the gift of citizenship instead of deporting them or consulting with "We The People?" Do they have that "Right" or ANY "Right?" or is it just helping pelosi/obama/reid stay in power?
Well, well, well, we seem to have a legal scholar. Let me help you out. When you take the bar exam and they ask you a question regarding the Commerce Clause and/or the income tax amendments, do not base your answer on cases which were handed down prior to 1940 or so because it will be wrong. Since 1940 there has been a significant shift in constitutional interpretation involving these issues.
I will even go one step further. When your next mortgage payment is due, why don't you write a letter to the company informing them that you are canceling you home owners insurance. After all, there is nothing in the constitution which requires you to be financially responsible. Oh, I know you will scream it is a contract, so it has to be honored. But you see, I am for individual responsibilty. I am not in favor of passing the costs of my expenses down to society or the government. That is why I am in favor of mandatory automobile insurance laws and health care, too.
Left wing sites? I am LMAO. Tell me one left wing site which is in favor of individual responsibility for persons actions, including but not limited to the responsibility for individuals paying for their own health care.
HLB, Each state determines its requirement for owning and operating a motor vehicle. Not the Federal Government. If I do not like the laws of one state, I can move to another. This is what is called “States Rights”. Owning a car is not a requirement for citizenship. You cannot force me to buy auto insurance if I don’t own a car. However, if the state determines that for the benefit of THOSE I MAY injure due to an accident, they require me to purchase liability insurance. They do not require me to insure my car for damage, ie health insurance for my car. They do not require I have comprehensive insurance to take care of the people in my vehicle. They usually only require I take care of those people I accidentally hit while operating my car in a careless manner. Using this logic the state should require me to provide medical insurance for someone if I step on their toe or sneeze on them, but not for any ilness or injury that falls upon me. Some home insurance does cover injuries occured to someone that is hurt on your property. However there is not requirement, yet, for homeowner insurance. If you have a loan, your bank will require insurance, but that is for their protection.
Your Government Mandated insurance becomes a requirement of citizenship. Not having a car does not make me less of a citizen. Not “contributing” to the government health care makes me a felon. Where does it end? Again, I point to Greece. And Rome. Once the Mob realizes it can legislate the confiscation of money from one group to another society will fail. That is why we have a Republic not a Democracy. We should expect our representatives to be smarter, but why should they, they are after all Politicians.
I will go one better. Indentured servitude is against the 13th Amendment to our Constitution. Requiring doctors to work for free because their patients do not have the ability to pay is nothing but indentured servitude.
HLB, HLB, HLB, Home and Auto insurance in the forms you talk about, those that are required either by law or a financial institution, are for the protection of others due to your actions. If you drive your car into another car, you, through your LIABILITY insurance will pay for the repairs to the other vehicle and any medical care for those injured. If your house burns down your homeowners insurance will prevent the bank from losing money due to this trajedy. You will be without a home and pennyless but you will be out of debt. Unless you cover your property for the cost of replacement for all your possessions. That is above the minimum requirement for the bank. They just want you to cover their interest in the house. You do not have to have Homeowners insurance. Just don’t buy a house. Or get the loan from your Brother-in-Law. Too easy.
I have the right to deny you my monies.
I heard a few pols on the left justify forcing us to have health insurance because we are already forced to have auto insurance. I understand your points about the differences between health and auto insurance, but youre not forced to have house insurance and i live in a row house and if my neighbors house catches on fire it could easily spread to mine and endanger me, yet hes not forced to have insurance. On a side note I read an article by Ludwig von Mises on health insurance and he argues that people who have health insurance become sicker than those who do. check it out
It seems to me the govt. is controlled by the insurance companies, and theses private sector companies would be most favorable to having the power of the govt. to collect their revenue streams, especially if you have experienced with how the govt. can exceed the private sector legal limit for penalties and fees that is currently in place in the private sector.
you said…"The question of course is whether you consider the premiums too high in respect to the risks",..health insurance for someone with a pre-existing condition can easily consume an individuals total revenue and put them in debt, just to have insurance, they cant have food, shelter, clothing, nothing but go further and further into debt.
I havent read any Heinlein but will check out that book, thanks. One of the most interesting articles i read on health insurance was by Ludwig von Mises. He argues that people with health insurance become sicker than those who dont. Mises seems to be similar to Heinlein
My rule is that if your "right" will cost me money, then it is a leftist right and bogus.
Hey Rad, I never ever stated in any of my posts I wanted government to pay for it all. I simply have said there is no such thing as a free lunch and I am tired of picking up the tab for the uninsured. By the nature of your post, I assume you are for individual responsibility, which of course includes paying for your own medical bills. Last year, 1.5 million people filed bankruptcy. Of those, over 60% filed because of medical costs. Hmmm. Why do you think they filed bankruptcy due to medical bills? Hint- they probably did not have insurance and who is picking up the tab. The insured and the government. So if you are not in favor of some form of mandatory insurance, then you must be a progressive because you expect the government or someone else to pay your freight.
You are living in a dream world. Last year there were 900,000 bankruptcies filed due to medical bills. So who do you think is picking up the tab? You are single and do not need insurance? OK big boy. The next time you get into an accident, and I do not care who is at fault because they may not have the ability to pay, do not go to the hospital that I am paying for through my higher health insurance premiums. I have never said health insurance is a right. I have simply said, there is no such thing as a free lunch and you expect others to pick up your tab. After all, bad things do happen to good people. That is why we have insurance.
You are absolutely correct. The uninsured are costing you money because you are paying higher insurance costs because the hospitals pass the cost down to you or the government is picking up the tab.
Life is Dangerous. Know the risk. Take responsibility for YOUR actions. Do not covet what is not yours. Do not ask for others to provide for you that you can provide for yourself.
You own a house, Insure it.
You own a car, Insure it.
You have children, teach them about personal responsibility and hold them accountable. They will surprise you with how fast they learn.
Yes, get your family health insurance
Get Life insurance
Buy stocks
Live within your means
Get Plenty of Exercise
Eat right.
Take the Stairs
Ride a bike
Visit National Parks and Monuments
Vote
Pay your taxes
Live well.
Did I miss anything? These are things that YOU do for you. You are not forced to do them (except the taxes thing but we all have to pay for our Defense), but you should.
Finally…stop whining about taking care of the “Children” “the Poor” “the downtroden” If you are so concerned then empty YOUR bank account and take care of them. Teddy Kennedy did nothing for the sick or the poor out of his own pocket. Neither does most of Hollywood and the other Socialist elites. If the government truly cared about them then half the Bills run through Congress would not have been passed. Let me think…pay for some chemo therapy or find out about why pig poop stinks? Guess which one got paid for, yep, the poop study. Do we need that? Do we need midnight basketball? Lets get our priorities straight before we destroy our economy any more than we have already.
I understand Obama is already forming a blue ribbon bipartisan commission to reform the deeply flawed and unsustainable health care reform after it passes. Any Stern of the service workers union and Megan McCain will be in charge.
Five years from now, Chelsea Clinton and Ted Kennedy's drunken kid will co-sponsor legislation for the "final" reform of the reform of health care reform (the reform to end all reforms…). Then we'll have another blue-ribbon commission…..
Et cetera. Ad infinitum….
[...] Visit link: Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of "Rights" [...]
The commerce clause applies to 'commerce' not to individual citizens.
I would love to see just one case anywhere in case law that says the government has the 'right' to force a citizen to purchase anything.
By insisting that a citizen purchase an "approved product" under a penalty issued by the Federal Government for failure to do so in effect denies that citizen all of their constitutional rights.
This bill attempts to do just that and that is why people a very pissed off at it
Remember poll taxes?
I know your argument is the 'driver license' and auto insurance but driving is NOT a right it is a 'priviliege' just like health care is a 'privilege and that argument is very feeble.
Got case law?
The main problem with auto insurance is the insurance company's make millions and MOST people don't EVER file a claim!! It should NOT be mandatory that you have auto insurance, as the states get their marching orders from the federal government!! So therefore the auto insurance co. make millions…sound familiar??
Really, the Commerce Clause does not apply to individual citizens? Better look up the case of Ollie's Barbeque. It applies to any situation affecting interstate commerce and people who do not have insurance are affecting my health rates and taxes because I am paying for them. As far as your driver's license point, so because driving is a privilege, you can have mandatory insurance laws, but because health insurance is a privilege, you can not. Hmmm. I am missing something there.
Yes, the irresonsible will always cost the responsible money. It is the way that it is, just like with auto insurance. I think our disagreement is most likely in the solution that you propose, which is mandating that everyone buy health insurance, which I believe to be unconstitutional. I do not want to put words in your mouth however, so if that is not your proposition, then I am sorry. I have absolutely no faith that this government will come up with a solution that will make things better.
Who is determining our Rights? The Unions and The Progressives, or "We the People?"
While in prison Creamer wrote a lengthy political manual, "How Progressives Can Win" (Seven Locks Press, 2007) In the book, Creamer draws lessons from decades of experience on the radical left, including the teachings of arch-radical Saul Alinsky, and several episodes from Rep. Jan Schakowsky’s political career. He also lays out a "Progressive Agenda for Structural Change," which includes a ten-point plan for foisting universal health care on the American people in 2009.
1: We must create a national consensus that health care is a right, not a commodity; and that government must guarantee that right.
2: We must create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis.
3: Our messaging program over the next two years should focus heavily on reducing the credibility of the health insurance industry and focusing on the failure of private health insurance.
4: We need to systematically forge relationships with large sectors of the business/employer community.
5: We need to convince political leaders that they owe their elections, at least in part, to the groundswell of support of [sic] universal health care, and that they face political peril if they fail to deliver on universal health care in 2009.
6: We need not agree in advance on the components of a plan, but we must foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus.
7: Over the next two years, we must design and organize a massive national field program.
8: We must focus especially on the mobilization of the labor movement and the faith community.
9: We must systematically leverage the connections and resources of a massive array of institutions and organizations of all types.
10: To be successful, we must put in place commitments for hundreds of millions of dollars to be used to finance paid communications and mobilization once the battle is joined.
The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern, the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House, and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer's tome "provides a blueprint for future victories."
Yet another example of how the loss of the War On Semantics has cost us so dearly. The US is not, never has been and never should be run as a Democracy. Liberalism has nothing to do with "progressive" thought or the modern day liberal, the acceptance of somethings as being implied by or inferred with the Constitution has now overtaken the relevance of a 5-4 scotus decision based on what the Constitution actually and plainly states … Pretty sad but not nearly as sad as those people who wallow in their ignorance all the while praising the fall into communism by the greatest experiment in the politics and history of humankind!
They protect your "right" to everything they deem as a "right", except for your "Right" to believe in another God who also grants "Rights", (Inalienable ones)!!! They insist all must believe in the pagan "Rights" that empower the new god (Them)!!! The gods (People who Grants the right of movement, to the people it governs) that becomes bloated by the gifts taken from its congregation, tithing through taxation, control (Governing) through regulation!!! They feast upon the submission of others!!!!
Ecuador has chipmunks?
Liberals think everything is a 'right'. That is how they circumvent any argument. It's a play on feelings and no thinking is involved.
Well said!
Let's see, you are going to change 20% of our nation's economy by giving out free health care paid using doctors and medical students working off the costs of their education. Well, assuming you can get the doctors and medical students to go along, who will pay for the costs of the buildings, etc. Please remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
I noticed he can't site any cases for you. Like you did for him. Hes just another scumbag kool aid drinker. Be nice to hear just one of them that could back up what they said with law. But they can't and will never be able to because its illegal
Hey Hauling, look up Ollies Barbeque before you claim I did not cite any cases.
Absolutely right!
Did you notice the immediate switch to i.e. "that's old law and it shouldn't matter"?
He's full of hollow arguments and retort, just like the rest of the people that come here from the Huffing-paint Post…
This is what happens when the criminally insane lead the mentally ill…
These people are just a big contradiction. I would honestly rather be dipped in chocolate and laid on an ant mound then having to listen to his dribble.
Were do these pansies come from? Its makes me sick to have to listen to someone twist our constitution. Do these idiots really think that the U.S. government can run anything and save money? If so I would really like some examples?
Its an unconstitutional, socialistic bill that will just start a war in this country. The good news for the silent majority is were almost all gun wners and were the majority. On top of that most of the states will go with the people. This is never going anywhere even if they do pass it. If they do it will just create a mess until its abolished.
I did not cite any cases? Hmm. Go read Ollie's Barbeque which I did cite. Oh and by the way, you must like drinking koolaid with the welfare mama's. See, you have something in common, you both feel someone else should pay your bills.
Again I can cite specific cases, where are yours?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-518.ZO.h...
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 93-518
FLORENCE DOLAN, PETITIONER v. CITY OF TIGARD
on writ of certiorari to the supreme court of oregon
[June 24, 1994]
Again I can cite specific cases, where are yours?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-518.ZO.h...
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 93-518
FLORENCE DOLAN, PETITIONER v. CITY OF TIGARD
on writ of certiorari to the supreme court of oregon
[June 24, 1994]
I get so tired of listening to these people twist our Constitution. I would rather be dipped in chocolate and laid on an ant mound then to have to listen to his dribble.
Its unconstitutional socialistic legislation that will only start a war in this country. The only good news on that front is were almost all gun owners and were the majority. On top of that most of the States will go with the people. This is never going anywhere even if they do pass it. If they do it will just create a mess until its abolished.
I also wonder if anyone can name me one government program that saves us money and is run well? Christ they can't even deliver mail without a huge deficit. And now were supposed to give them 1/5th of the economy.
And then theres always common sense.
http://crosssection.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/nanc...
Government has specific "enumerated limitations" and they are invariably upheld time after time.
If this abomination passes and it may, there will be tens of thousands of cases filed around the US immediately based on it and nearly every portion of it will be struck down.
The progressives in Congress are spinning their wheels and they know it, so why bother try to squash individual liberty to begin with?
Because of the camel's nose under the tent theory of Saul Alinsky and they think they can "nudge" the court to their ideology.
Not gonna happen.
Missy +118 husker -50 enough said.
By all means donate as much time and money to help those you desire. you are free to do, or not do, as you see fit. Why then, do you think you have the right to have the government, under threat of arrest or violence, to compel people into serving others?
This is especially ironic, and hypocritical considering that studies prove that the conservative "cold-hearted a-holes" like you find on this site donate far money and time then the so called compassionate liberals who so readily call for government mandates to force people into support.
And please spare us the "what about fireman" cliche. Most people readily accept a minimum level of taxes for those things. Of course, my nieghborhood is served by a VOLUNTEER FD.
Let me help you out because you have cited a land use case based upon state law. You have Congress make a factual finding that persons who do not have health insurance are not paying their fair share of the costs associated with their health care. This should not be too difficult because there were 900,000 bankruptcies related to medical costs. You see when people file bankruptcy, someone else has to pick up their tab. Congress then makes another factual finding that a voluntary system has failed and that the problem is getting worse because more people are dropping insurance. They then pass an excise tax to ensure everyone in the United States must either pay a tax or prove they have insurance. This is done under the auspices of Commerce Clause and the income tax amendment. It is about 1st year law school.
A tragically overlooked aspect on the war against freedom. Thank you for writing on this topic. By yielding the power to define words to the enemy, we allow ourselves to be defined by them, and to start our every effort of the defensive.
By defining the terms, liberals take the high ground to shape every conflict before it even begins.The fight to put America back on the path of freedom must put a stop to this. We will never start making serious headway until this issue is dealt with. Breitbart's refusal to be labeled at CPAC is an inspiring example of how to put a stop to this.
For the want of a nail, the battle can be lost.
Actually Bo the fact is that this case affected personal liberty, land use law, eminent domain and constitutional limitations under the tenth amendment, maybe you should read it a second time.
Your argument implies that the state reserves a right imminent domain over an individual's rights, they do not.
Insurance is a contractual agreement of association which the state cannot force you to enter into. Similarly, it amounts to placing a condition upon all of your civil rights based upon the purchase of a commodity ordered by the state.
Do you pay taxes to speak, to live, to practice a religion?
It is the exact same concept and the courts will strike it down handily within days of passage.
It's been fun playing with you but I have family responsibilities to attend to now.
Maybe we'll play again later…
And pray tell, just how is requiring someone to be financially responsible to drive a car any different than to be financially responsible for their health care? I eagerly await your response.
Where do I sign up for my right to a new car every two years. As an American I can not be seen driving crap therefore it is the right of all Americans to have a new car provided by the govt. Since all those evil corporations and rich folk fat cats will be footing the bill, make mine a V-12 Mercedes in black please.
I am surprised by the timidity of so many Conservatives and Tea Party people. Don't question Obama's citizenship or we might be called "birthers." Don't call Obama a Socialist or we will be called "racists." And, the latest, Don't call Obama a Muslim or we will be labeled "nuts" or "kooks" or any of the long list the liberals use. They insist that only fact, reason and tolerance be used lest someone disagrees with us. Well, how has that worked so far… I thought so.
"Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules." Recognize that? Look it up.
Obama and his progressive supporters want to change the Constitution of the US and THEY ARE SUCCEEDING! If you understand that and still think reason and tolerance will work, then you should prepare for the Socialism they will ram down your timid throat.
Barack Obama is a Muslim!
http://usataxpayer.org/?0019422256
Will you tolerate progressive plans for your children?
http://usataxpayer.org/?0092081630
We can go round and round about the constitutionality of requiring everyone to buy a product, or hide that fact by calling it a tax, but this one size fits all approach by the federal government will be an absolute disaster. There are solutions to fix a lot of the problems without this massive federal government intrusion. As far as the constitution goes, we will see once, and if, this plan gets passed. The challenges will come from all angles, and it will be the Supremes that will decide.
Fundamental rights are those rights which all people can simultaneously claim without forcing someone to serve their needs.
It seems that the only safe place from the government intervention is a woman's uterus. And the child in that uterus has no protection at all.
What ever happened to personal freedom? Oh, that's right – - Obama is Emir.
Napolitano said that? I can't believe she's still on the team. 'Bet she won't do THAT twice.
"Based on good ol' conservative principles"….followed by "it can begin with MANDATING companies either pay for their employees…etc.." You have incorrectly identified a conservative principle. If you want to kill small business, start mandating that they pay for their employees health care.
Bo don't know! Hey pal, read my original post above… You and all of the other progressives that want to "fundamentally change America" to the (Union Socialist States of America) or USSA will be contributing 70% of your income to the "Cause".
You will go to the free clinics and recieve free care by students and MD's that are working off the tuition that you paid for thru your 70% taxation..".but wait, say's Bo, this isn't free at all since I'm paying 70% of my income for this crappy socialized medicine"
All of you lazy folks want something for nothing….you give up your rights to the Gov for socialized medicine or you give up your cash for private medicine…I prefer the latter
Okay, help me out here; there was an interview a couple of years ago with an MD in, I think NYC, that was charging folks a flat fee on an annual basis for their health care and got into a world of shit for insurance fraud by the Richard Head NYC AG or some Gov Agency of some sort. The man was doing the right thing and dramatically cut the cost of health care, but got his chops busted for thinking outside of the box.
Continued…….
Continued….
Did he cut out the vampire-like Health insurer? yes… Were the patients happier and healthier? Yes…
I most likely have the facts of the story wrong, but the idea is sound and takes us to a simpler solution;
allow people to deal directly with their health care provider in some sort of a provider pool that charges an annual fee for all available services which they pay for themselves. People can then buy catastrophic insurance to pay for big health issues and recieve a tax credit at the end of the year if below an income threshold.
If people recieve a tax credit, they must pay for it thru volunteering…I hear the USPS is in dire straights due to 85% of it's budget going to overpaid union workers and the outlandish retirement benefits… that would be a perfect solution don't you think? Heck, postage would go down to about .15 cents a letter!
Judge Andrew Napolitano- not HSC Janet Napolitano.
A solution to this problem exists:
Force all illegals out of the country (allow re-entry based on existing immigration law)
Create health care clinics all across the nation based on demographics
Staff them with Medical Students and Doctors working off the cost of tuition
Those Americans that do not have access to Medical insurance due to preexisting conditions or fall below an income threshold are required to utilize those facilities only
Set up a repay system based on volunteering at local, State or Fed Gov. facilities
Stop insurance companies Anti-trust exemption allowing interstate free market competition
Allow portability
Tort reform
Create pooling based on industry
And, while we are at it, reduce the size of Federal Government by 50% and abolish labor unions.
That Bo, would make a serious dent in the issue and quite possibly solve it
Let's see. It works in Japan. You see, everyone will be playing on the same playing field, won't they. So your solution is to let the small businesses who do not provide their employees with health insurance to continue to scam the system. Oh, and by the was I am a small businees owner and the annual cost of my insurance is $220,000 per year. It has doubled in the past 6 years because hospitals keep passing down the costs of the uninsured.
Again with your hollow retort…
The only logical conclusion to your argument is that all of your 'rights' come from 'government', does that sound even remotely logical?
There are such things as 'natural laws' and this bill violates all of them.
I can 'choose' whether or not to drive a car just as I can 'choose' whether or not to eat potatoes tonight with dinner.
Should the 'government' also be able to have a ham handed decision in my dinner plans tonight?
Should I be forced to pay for 'auto insurance' which IS a product, because I choose not to drive, isn't that illogical at its core?
Can you 'choose' where to live or does the government get to do that as well?
Can you 'choose' whether or not to send your kids to a public school or home school them?
I choose to buy what "I" want to buy, not the government.
If this argument of yours is followed to its logical conclusion then your beloved 'government' could also tax you to speak, whether on not to practice a specific religion or how long your life is.
These are all violations of 'self evident' laws which you seem to support.
The government levels all types of taxes. All you have to do is pass a law requiring someone to have health insurance or pay a tax for the privilege of not having health insurance. It is that simple and very, very constitutional.
Fabtum Now you a tattle-tail?
You done posted this same damn post like 5x now
You now the cut and pasre fantum..Haha
You reminds me of an old coot, sittin on the front porch of his shack in KY, wit a shotgun on his lap..
We do free clinics now. Are you now against charity? What is wrong with low income people using a charitable free clinic to prevent more serious illness, thus saving them from intesive care? Minimum wage is government controlled inflation. Inflation is a hidden tax. The more dollars it takes to buy something, the more tax revenue comes in. Without minimum wage, your ability rather than the government determines your wage. I'm sorry I cannot convince you that more government is bad policy.. However at least we agree on indetured servitude.
[...] March 8, 2010 by mayrant Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ [...]
In the leftist sense of the word, though, a “right” is something very different. In fact, it’s not a “right” at all: it’s a handout provided to you by government, often at exorbitant costs to society.
I think they just get confused with "rights" and "privileges".
Right to Free Speech? Sure, as long as you're toeing their line. Right to Bear Arms? Sure, as long as… actually, no, they don't like that one at all.
[...] [...]
What they call a "right", I call "slavery". At what point will I be considered a "slave"? When over 50% of my income is taken to pay for someone else's "right"?
So you're saying that taxpayers already pay for those uninsured, right? So we need to scrap the system so that tax payers can pay for those uninsured?
'Sorry about that–guess I'm to accustomed to seeing Janet's name everywhere these days and comnpletely missed the word "judge."
[...] of Common Sense comes a proposed constitutional amendment to cap federal… 2 Tweets » Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ – Big Governm… 2 Tweets Mark Steyn: Obamacare worth the price to Democrats | health, care, [...]
[...] » Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ – Big Go… [...]
Exactly what I was thinking and you said it first!
Get a New and Used Car Loan for Bad Credit…
Learn about how to get car loan for new and used car even your credit is bad….
fasting to lose weight fast is fasting for weight loss wise…
weight loss tea essentials…
trends of weight loss with lipobind…
are you willing to know more about diet pills…
fastest weight loss diet fastest weight loss dietfast weight loss diets…
get genuine dinitrophenol pills at buydinitrophenol online…
are you prepare for liposuction…
reasons why you must use acai burn…
SECRETS OF YOGA…
SECRETS OF Yoga Awakening Meditation Collection 21-day Trial Now!!!…
Proactol For Easy Weight Loss…
Proactol like a healthy way of making it easier to take charge of your easy weight loss and eating habits. …
title: string…
you blog have a think. i will text….
free best fat loss supplements…
the best fat loss training cardio programs and supplements,fitness bodybuiding rapid fat loss excercise muscle gain diet plans and tips….
Free and Fast Easy Health Weight Loss Diet Ideas…
How To Fast Easy Health Weight Loss and good Ideas for Diet,Let’s Go Start Losing Weight Now!…
Fat Loss Supplement Holland and Barrett…
Fat Loss Supplement Holland and Barrett…
You must be logged in to post a comment.