Seriously man, why the fuck can we not opt out of such a bullshit program?! its whoreshit. I'd rather stuff this cash into my mattress and pray that the dollar doesn't collapse so dam soon that my mattress essentially becomes worth more than the massive amount of $$ that's in it.
Exactly, which is what I said in my first post. Congress cant make you buy anything. Hence why the government went about it in the wrong way trying to institute national healthcare. $15 trill is nothing, we just auction off nebraska or something and we'll be good. Besides you do realize by creating a National Health Insurance company you'd be opening up that many more jobs for Americans to work? And lastly, SSI was a good idea at the time, I mean shit you'd be pretty pissed off if you put your entire life savings into the bank only to get none of it back when you're old because some duchebags thought it'd be a good Idea to bet against the market. And you say that now, but come 65 you're going to wish someone was around to take care of you. Isn't that like the whole point of having a good government? So that when you're in a jam it'll come an help you? The problem is/was no one invests in savings accounts anymore, they just spend their money, thus letting go of the wealth in this country. If half of you who have a checking account opened up a savings account, the wealth would stay in the country, or atleast thats how its suppose to work before banks started creating offshore assets thusly taking wealth out of the country. Why the fuck are so many Americans against universal healthcare? Jesus fucking christ its not the end of the fucking world if the government PROVIDES you with something. For fuck sake it might actually make you realize you have it better then those 15 million starving families in Africa. Their government doesn't do shit for them but its a bad thing if your government wants to give you healthcare? Fuck, move to Africa if thats your thought. You dont have to deal with anyone telling you how to live and i'm pretty sure the "Stand Your Ground" law works in every single part of that continent.
You fail to see the logic (or lack thereof) of fixing prior regulations with more regulations. I know it's hard to grasp, but central planning doesn't work out the way it intends to. Just how you can't impose your will on foreign countries, you can't impose your will on various sectors of the economy either. The notion that a "right to healthcare" exists violates the principle of individual rights because it necessitates that the liberty of doctors and the property of taxpayers be violated to provide for others. Either through price controls or outright nationalization, when governments make prices artificially low, demand skyrockets, and shortages ensue. Politicians react by passing even more regulations to control costs. These regulations drive up costs further, and force healthcare providers out of business, whilst consolidating the market into a few politically connected firms. The end result is to replace capitalism, the greatest wealth-generating system known to man, with a burdensome system of central planning. The state doesn't know how much, when, where, or for that matter what the health needs of it's citizenry are. To pretend that a group of government employees can centrally plan the entire healthcare of the US, is fantasy. What you'll end up with is more prescriptions (and other resources) being consumed by people that don't need them, and shortages for the people that do actually need care.
Thats complete horseshit. You're claiming the sky is falling or will fall when theirs no proof or evidence of that fact. Let me ask you this, if the government cant nationalize healthcare then why does it work so well in Canada? or the UK? or France?, or Italy?, Germany?, Netherlands?, Spain?, Portugal? What is so wrong with Canada that "isnt" so wrong with America? Last time I checked, they were pretty happy with their healthcare system and didn't have very many complaints about it. Or would it just be better if you had to worry about how you're going to pay every time you break your leg or get into an accident where you need medical attention? Sure they wont deny it to you, but you're going to end up having to take out loans to pay for it like you do with school, thus perpetually indebting you. Oh but its okay if the system works like that as long as you're not forced into anything. Like wow, that logic is completely stupid, I'm sorry but it is. We have the means to provide for everyone but once again because you're too greedy and only want to look out for yourself, we wont. And it Will come back to bite you in the ass and when you need the help I'll look at you and say "hey, you voted not to have it, so you're up shits creek with out a paddle, deal with it." This isn't the 1890's, this aint no "rags to riches" fairytale. Don't knock it if you havn't tried it, and stop being so scared of the unknown. Thats un American y'know.
I never used the term the sky is falling, or anything close to the sort. I said that central planning is counter intuitive, which it is. Try to stay on topic, we are talking about the healthcare in the US. I can't speak on behalf of Europeans, and neither can you. Your appeal to emotion is noted.
So your solution to the debt problem is to sell a state to China every few years? Sounds like a solid plan dude. Absolutely not! The role of a good government is to uphold individual rights. Not to dole out goodies to bribe the masses. Of course no one saves. Our monetary and fiscal system is designed to discourage savings and encourage debt and consumption. Why would anyone save and watch inflation wipe out the purchasing power of their money? Thank government for that as well. We have principles. The government doesn't "provide" anything, ever. They have no wealth of their own and they don't create any. Government destroys resources and wastes the wealth it confiscates from the people. It can never do anything other than that.
Well I can speak on behalf of Italians in 2008 when I was there for a year and saw firsthand how much less of a shitshow healthcare was over there then it is here. Let me tell you the story. My friend matt's brother broke his knee, yet again from playing soccer. So Matt's older bro Tom can't really move around much, he has to stay at home. So after getting himself all bandaged up, he's told he needs to get a prescription from his doctor for some medicine to take for his pain. Tom is stuck at home, so he charges me and Matt to go get his prescription after Matt gets out of school. We go to his local clinic, where the family doctor is. We wait maybe 30 minutes before Matt can go see the family's doctor to get the proper prescription his brother needs. All the doctor asks to see before writing the prescription is Tom's "Italian National Health Insurance" card, a blue card I recall. Matt shows the doc this, as well as his ID to make sure Matt is indeed his brother, and writes the prescription. We then go to the Pharmacy, which are all locally owned, sort of mom & pops stores, not big chains like CVS or Walgreens. Once again we go to the Pharmacist, show him the prescription, he asks for Tom's blue "Italian National Health Insurance" card, the Pharmacist swipes it to make sure its still valid, then gives Matt the drugs his brother needs. No question of "How would you like to pay for this?" And what really astounded me was that "Italian National Health Insurance" card is given to everyone at birth and renewed every couple of years. Ever since I saw that happen I just cannot believe the "Greatest Country in the World" can't come up with a system similar to this. Pain free, don't worry about how much money is in your bank account. Nope, just pay your taxes and you're entitled. Fucking Italians can do it and they're worse off then we are. Where did we go so wrong?
Dude I'm sorry but thats crazy. Your only principle is to let someone get further into debt so you can save an extra $20 every year to buy that bag of weed you want meanwhile I'm stuck paying for someone hitting me in an illegal right-hand turn while I was on my moped. You're a pessimist to think that the government can only destroy the wealth the people have given it. We wouldn't be here today if we never invested in infrastructure to begin with. Cities would be disgusting, you'd catch a disease every day from no proper plumbing. You have created the greatest most wealthy government on this planet, why in the world wouldn't you want to share that wealth with your fellow citizen, who has also help to create said government? You're not an American if you think that everyone should fend for themselves. If that was the case we would have never gotten out of the Great Depression. Selling a state to China was a shot at sarcasm, not ment to be taken literally. And the role of the government may have been to uphold individual rights back in the 18th century. Yes, and the government can still, will, and should do such. It Is a balancing act. But providing said wealth for the sake and well being of the nation is in no way a bribery to the masses. Its the progressive movement forward and the next logical step to once again having a government established For the people & by the people. Thus since we now have the power and the means, and by that logic, I am a firm believer that providing healthcare is an Individual Right. Same goes for Education. Lastly then Housing. It's the 21st century we're talking over phone lines relaying across the world in a matter of seconds. Get with the program dude. Thats why the Constitution was designed to be Amended. It wasn't perfect and still isn't. Thats why we were charged with the ability to change it when need be for the better of the people. For some reason providing healthcare to the people isn't beneficial? What world do you live in? Thats Absurd! If thats your reasoning then I hope you vote for candidates that don't expand on public infrastructure projects. Watch as your cities crumble and your population dies of disease because of no plumbing. And thus your 'Country' would never be as prosperous as it had the potential to be. Ciao.
You do realize the U.S. is $15,000,000,000,000 in debt? That's not exactly what I call "most wealthy".
Yes, and Italy is in such great financial health at the moment, so much so that they need the rest of Europe to create a bailout fund for them not if, but when need be. Where does the ECB get the money from? Out of thin air, that's sustainable. In the meantime they impose austerity measures so that they may be able to make interest payments on their government bonds, yes, a bright future facing Italy indeed, you've sold me on the cost sustainability. I often find myself going back to Bastiat, it needs repeating: The state cannot provide prosperity for all, it can only take from some and give to others. The government doesn't produce goods or services, it only takes.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ95_H5D7iw]"Constitutional Thunderdome": Day Two of Obamacare Oral Arguments - YouTube[/ame]
I retract my previous statement. After reviewing your argument based on the theories of Bastiat, I leave you with this. You're arguing that government taking control and providing healthcare is inherently socialism. I would beg to differ. By definition yes, but in practice and considering the circumstances, I would say not so. Is it the governments duty to enforce the rights of the people, yes? Therefore i would argue that by enforcing the peoples rights to life, liberty, and property, providing healthcare would fall under 'life'. After all what does healthcare do? It allows you to live does it not? Therefore if the government had the means to save your life, but insted put your life in the hands of a private institution, the government would then no longer be defending your right to 'Life.' Then the question would be 'who pays for it?' By asking any person to provide their own profits for your benefit would yes, be socialism. But as well to not save you if you're injured then the government would not be doing its job to protecting your right to life. As well as enforcing another person to pay for your 'saving' or 'treatment', government would thus be violating the same principles it were established to uphold. A bit of a conundrum we have facing ourselves here....
The law loses it's morality if the state is allowed to undertake actions that it prohibits individuals from enacting against one another. Allowing the state to take your income and redistribute it to the benefit of others, whatever it may be for, is theft. You undermine the free will of doctors and the property of tax payers by implementation of universal healthcare, because you are dictating onto others without their voluntary consent. Healthcare is not 'life'. Life is the free will of humans, and their freedom to be left alone specifically. Healthcare is a service, and people do not have a right to services, as that implies the right of an individual to the property of others. Rights are not given unto you by the state, you are born with them, your only rights are to be free and left alone from the coercive acts of others. I cannot come into your home and take your assets for my or any other individual's benefit, and neither should the government be capable of doing so.
Actually, the word Liberty only appears in the constitution 3 times. So the US government can promote healthcare, but not require it, according to that pesky constitution.
Um...parts of the legislation went into action earlier this year, and I do believe, though I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm mistaken, that other portions of it kicked in last year. I've read some pretty interesting things over the last couple of days, by some very very very smart legal minds. I believe certain sections will be struck down, however, much of it will remain intact. There is, believe it or not, quite a bit of precedence for the mandatory insurance section.
Now you are dictating to me what my principles are? How authoritarian of you. My principles are that of classical liberalism. The non aggression axiom, free markets, anti war, friendship and free trade with all nations equally, and most importantly individual liberty. It is the only moral system in existence imo. I say government destroys wealth because it destroys wealth. Businesses in the private sector, individuals in the private sector, comprise the real economy. Government taxation and regulation in the market, and other interventions like the Fed setting interest rates and bailing out banks, only serve to weaken the economy as a whole. It's the entire reason we are in such bad shape now, the government is far too big and it's become an unbearable strain on capitalism. The free market elements of our economy can no longer fight of the fascist/interventionist/Keynesian destructive elements and it's crumbling apart. If laissez faire unrestricted capitalism were allowed to work there never would have been a Great Depression. It would have simply been known as the panic of '29 or some such title because it would have been a normal, quick, short depression like the one in 1920-21, when intervention wasn't attempted and the depression, which was severe, was over in about 18 months. For more info on the 20-21 depression. The Forgotten Depression of 1920 - Thomas E. Woods, Jr. - Mises Daily So what's your serious answer to our unpayable debt? No. That's always the only proper role of government. Without the stifling interventions of government in the economy we would be much, much more prosperous and wealthy as a whole society today. We had the industrial revolution when government was extremely limited. The fastest growth ever seen in any nation was in the late 1800's when economic freedom was far greater and government was far smaller.
I believe that they've enacted the part to insure that people can remain on their parent's health insurance until they're 26 years old, you can't be turned down for pre-existing conditions, etc. but the main thing, which is choices of affordable health care individual policies, is not in place yet. If I'm wrong, corrections are welcome and appeciated. If prisoners have the right to get free healthcare, then those of us who want it should, at the very least, be able to buy our own.
I just want to know how much I will owe the government in fees if I don't get health insurance. The mandate is not going to make it easier to pay another $100 a month when I'm scraping by as is.
I know, I know...cnn [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SiF0SWdypw]"This Is A Train Wreck For The Obama Administration!" Jeff Toobin On Healthcare Supreme Court - YouTube[/ame]