Like I said before and I will say it again.
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
Like I said before and I will say it again.
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
i will take that bet. and again learn the difference between leftist, marxist, and stop generalizing.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Like I said before and I will say it again.
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
Singing what tune? a larger deficit? Which is projected to hit 20 trillion by the end of the decade? Is this all because of the Leftist?
sorry i just read this post and jumped in-
Can you do me a favor and leave "socialism" out of the discussion as it has zero place in it to begin with. It's merely scare and fear tactics. We aren't nor will ever be socialist. This program isn't socialist anymore than the post office.
If people want socialized medicine in this country WITHOUT a constitutional ammenment, THEN YOU NEED TO LOOK TO THE STATE LEVEL FOR YOUR SOCIALISM.
I'm not necessarily against it. In fact you would probably have my blessing (along with that of Adam Smith, who certainly accepted and even endorsed the efficiency of a municipal government in the administration of large infrastructure utilities\services, like gas, electricity, and possibly medicine).
BUT FOR GODSAKE QUIT SUBVERTING YOUR OWN GODDAMN FOUNDING DOCUMENT WHICH GRANTS YOU THE VERY LIBERTY TO BE SO ASININE IN YOUR "LOGIC"!
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Please understand the terms you use before screaming them at everyone. "progressive" isn't a political leaning or philosophy. And I suggest you read and understand Marx before calling all left such things. If you did so, you'd clearly know you're making a fool of yourself by lack of understanding them.
Like I said before and I will say it again.
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
i will take that bet. and again learn the difference between leftist, marxist, and stop generalizing.
it allows him to not listen ...
in any case - i consider myself a leftist and i totally believe in socialized health care ... however, much to Drifting's post above - I do feel that the general populace is being hoodwinked in a way ... partly by the Corporate structure of America but also because ultimately America is a divided nation with a huge divide ...
so many people are paralyzed into partisan idealogues that you end up with a solution that is good for only a small percentage of the people ...
All the bills go by
And initiatives are taken up
By the middle
There ain't gonna be any middle any more
Actually, I think I bring up the exact opposite point. That capitalism is not at play at all in health care anymore. That we've allowed the remote control of insurance to allow all the players in health care - doctors, medical professionals, pharmaceuticals, etc. - to screw us over.
With my example of groceries, the answer is the market doesn't allow it because we are shopping for food on our own. We don't stand for the shenanigans the health care industry is pulling on us.
Do you think grocery prices would be what they are now if we had our employers pay and deduct money from our checks automatically to cut checks for the food we buy at stores where the prices aren't even on the shelves?
actually ... hahaha
you corroborate my point about the form of capitalism that exists in america ... because the "rules" are formed to allow for corporations/industries to do these kinds of things ... so, it isn't really a free market type of situation ... which is one of the problems and the other of course is whether or not services such as health care and education should be open to these conditions to begin with ...
Double Post
Post edited by know1 on
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Actually, I think I bring up the exact opposite point. That capitalism is not at play at all in health care anymore. That we've allowed the remote control of insurance to allow all the players in health care - doctors, medical professionals, pharmaceuticals, etc. - to screw us over.
With my example of groceries, the answer is the market doesn't allow it because we are shopping for food on our own. We don't stand for the shenanigans the health care industry is pulling on us.
Do you think grocery prices would be what they are now if we had our employers pay and deduct money from our checks automatically to cut checks for the food we buy at stores where the prices aren't even on the shelves?
actually ... hahaha
you corroborate my point about the form of capitalism that exists in america ... because the "rules" are formed to allow for corporations/industries to do these kinds of things ... so, it isn't really a free market type of situation ... which is one of the problems and the other of course is whether or not services such as health care and education should be open to these conditions to begin with ...
These rules aren't forming themselves, though. PEOPLE have allowed this to happen. I don't think you and I are so far apart on this one, though.
I know there are debatable parts of my hypothetical example, but I'll go back to this:
What would the cost of food be today if we had allowed employers to use a portion of the money they would be paying us in addition to automatically deducting a portion for our premiums and then paying bills submitted to them by grocery insurance companies for goods that the people just went out and bought without knowing the price? We'd be paying 10 times what we are now.
My point is, I think if we want reform, we need significant amounts people to stand up and take themselves out of this corrupt system they've allowed to happen. In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
The answer is NOT for the government to force more and more of us to participate in a broken, corrupt system. The answer is for us to break the cycle.
If my company would just give me the $500 per month it is paying for my health insurance, I'd walk out and do a dance in the parking lot. I could buy the same policy for half. But I wouldn't do that. I'd buy a catastrophic policy with an extremely high deductible, sock the rest away and pay cash for medicines and doctor's visits.
If my employer had given me $500 per month for the 15 years I've been in the work force, I'd conservatively be sitting on $200K today that I could use as my own insurance. By retirement, we'd probably be looking at about $750K.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Can you do me a favor and leave "socialism" out of the discussion as it has zero place in it to begin with. It's merely scare and fear tactics. We aren't nor will ever be socialist. This program isn't socialist anymore than the post office.
And can you explain to me how being PENALIZED (via taxation) BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for NOT ACCEPTING COVERAGE falls:
a. within the constraints of the Federal Government's EXPRESSED POWERS
b. within the category of "NOT a Violation of Personal Liberties"
?
If the Federal Government is acting
a. OUTSIDE ITS CONSTITUTIONALLY EXPRESSED AUTHORITY (which it NO DOUBT IS)
and
b. AGAINST MY EXPRESSED RIGHTS (this whole tax penalty for the uninsured is a logical violation of my rights, but it is a moot point because Income Tax itself is a scam put upon us to ENABLE such unconstitutional practices by "sleight of hand")
then your goddamn right, it violates my rights.
And SUBSIDIZING AND SHARING COSTS EQUALLY AMONGST UNEQUAL USERS sure as hell sounds like SOME form of Socialist policy to me.
Whether you care to acknowledge it with your semantic arguments or not,
I'm not here to play semantics, and i don't really care to try.
Look.
We can pretty much drop the whole Income Tax portion of the equation, since it is a FUCKED argument to begin with ... because FORCED income tax is a blatant violation of the ORIGINAL INTENT of the constitution.
But we don't need that.
Let's just stick with
A. IF YOU CAN NOT PROVE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE EXPRESSLY MANDATED AUTHORITY TO ENACT THIS LEGISLATION, THEN IT IS DE FACTO A VIOLATION OF MY RIGHTS.
The Federal Government is, BY DEFAULT, in breech of contract, AND THAT IS A BLATANT VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BE GOVERNED BY A CONSTITUTIONALLY RESTRICTED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
So.
Here is YOUR question. WHERE in the constitution do you see ANYTHING resembling the following:
"Congress is given the privilege and authority to mandate and regulate health and medical expenses for the people."
You would SERIOUSLY have to pervert "general welfare" to get this to jive with what the constitution authorizes. But i'm guessing you have NO problems making that leap, do you?
:(
Post edited by DriftingByTheStorm on
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
My point is, I think if we want reform, we need significant amounts people to stand up and take themselves out of this corrupt system they've allowed to happen. In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
The answer is NOT for the government to force more and more of us to participate in a broken, corrupt system. The answer is for us to break the cycle.
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress [SEE HOW FAR OFF THE MARK WE ALREADY ARE !?!].... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
- James Madison, "Father of the Constitution", Primary Author of Aforementioned, & 4th President Of The United States
Think he was qualified to expound on the topic of "general welfare" and the ORIGINAL INTENT therein !?!
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
These rules aren't forming themselves, though. PEOPLE have allowed this to happen. I don't think you and I are so far apart on this one, though.
I know there are debatable parts of my hypothetical example, but I'll go back to this:
What would the cost of food be today if we had allowed employers to use a portion of the money they would be paying us in addition to automatically deducting a portion for our premiums and then paying bills submitted to them by grocery insurance companies for goods that the people just went out and bought without knowing the price? We'd be paying 10 times what we are now.
My point is, I think if we want reform, we need significant amounts people to stand up and take themselves out of this corrupt system they've allowed to happen. In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
The answer is NOT for the government to force more and more of us to participate in a broken, corrupt system. The answer is for us to break the cycle.
If my company would just give me the $500 per month it is paying for my health insurance, I'd walk out and do a dance in the parking lot. I could buy the same policy for half. But I wouldn't do that. I'd buy a catastrophic policy with an extremely high deductible, sock the rest away and pay cash for medicines and doctor's visits.
If my employer had given me $500 per month for the 15 years I've been in the work force, I'd conservatively be sitting on $200K today that I could use as my own insurance. By retirement, we'd probably be looking at about $750K.
the problem with your food analogy is that the food system has also been corrupted ... but it's way harder to make people pay say $20 for an ear of corn than say $50 for pills ...
as for your personal choice - the problem lies in a multitude of factors ... in using your specific example ... what if the money you have socked away couldn't pay for the medicine you require? ... it doesn't change anything except take out insurance companies out of the picture ... your still left with a corrupt system favouring industry ...
the real issue ultimately is whether or not you believe that the health of the populace is something worth addressing at any level outside of the individual ...
These rules aren't forming themselves, though. PEOPLE have allowed this to happen. I don't think you and I are so far apart on this one, though.
I know there are debatable parts of my hypothetical example, but I'll go back to this:
What would the cost of food be today if we had allowed employers to use a portion of the money they would be paying us in addition to automatically deducting a portion for our premiums and then paying bills submitted to them by grocery insurance companies for goods that the people just went out and bought without knowing the price? We'd be paying 10 times what we are now.
My point is, I think if we want reform, we need significant amounts people to stand up and take themselves out of this corrupt system they've allowed to happen. In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
The answer is NOT for the government to force more and more of us to participate in a broken, corrupt system. The answer is for us to break the cycle.
If my company would just give me the $500 per month it is paying for my health insurance, I'd walk out and do a dance in the parking lot. I could buy the same policy for half. But I wouldn't do that. I'd buy a catastrophic policy with an extremely high deductible, sock the rest away and pay cash for medicines and doctor's visits.
If my employer had given me $500 per month for the 15 years I've been in the work force, I'd conservatively be sitting on $200K today that I could use as my own insurance. By retirement, we'd probably be looking at about $750K.
the problem with your food analogy is that the food system has also been corrupted ... but it's way harder to make people pay say $20 for an ear of corn than say $50 for pills ...
as for your personal choice - the problem lies in a multitude of factors ... in using your specific example ... what if the money you have socked away couldn't pay for the medicine you require? ... it doesn't change anything except take out insurance companies out of the picture ... your still left with a corrupt system favouring industry ...
the real issue ultimately is whether or not you believe that the health of the populace is something worth addressing at any level outside of the individual ...
You know why it's harder to make people pay $20 for an ear of corn? Because they are doing it out of their own pocket and they know the price. That doesn't happen with health insurance.
I realize that the health of the populace should be dealt with on some level outside of the individual, but I do not believe that people should be making remote control, forced payments out of their paychecks to pay for goods and services for which they do not know or have any say in the price.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
The Constitution does not consent of many programs and policies which over the course of our history have been bent, broken or ignored. Whether it's declaration of war powers, tax laws or even the national bank. And to bring this argument full circle, if you'd like to interpret the document by the letter of the law, do so all the way through.. not just the parts you disagree with currently. So let's break-up most of the federalist system, give everyone equal rights (even gays), outlaw lobbying and all the similar. Secondly, if we do live in this manner, our healthcare will soon enough resemble that of a nation from when that document was written... so go ahead and have your way - it merely under-minds what the people of our nation and those pesky founding fathers actually intended our nation to be.. . a better place for everyone in it. But now we seem to become a better place, but just not on my buck, in my backyard and not on my time, or effort. Everyone has misconceptions about what you've got until the shoe is on the other foot, and then you slowly realize it's all a scam to begin with. I do rather enjoy the sense of entitlement everyone has in our nation. Everyone is a constitutionalist when something they don't want put into policy is on the table, but the reverse is also true. And if we're all so heavily involved upon this document, maybe our society should actually live up to their end of "we the people".. instead of merely being entitled to anything.
Can you do me a favor and leave "socialism" out of the discussion as it has zero place in it to begin with. It's merely scare and fear tactics. We aren't nor will ever be socialist. This program isn't socialist anymore than the post office.
And can you explain to me how being PENALIZED (via taxation) BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for NOT ACCEPTING COVERAGE falls:
a. within the constraints of the Federal Government's EXPRESSED POWERS
b. within the category of "NOT a Violation of Personal Liberties"
?
If the Federal Government is acting
a. OUTSIDE ITS CONSTITUTIONALLY EXPRESSED AUTHORITY (which it NO DOUBT IS)
and
b. AGAINST MY EXPRESSED RIGHTS (this whole tax penalty for the uninsured is a logical violation of my rights, but it is a moot point because Income Tax itself is a scam put upon us to ENABLE such unconstitutional practices by "sleight of hand")
then your goddamn right, it violates my rights.
And SUBSIDIZING AND SHARING COSTS EQUALLY AMONGST UNEQUAL USERS sure as hell sounds like SOME form of Socialist policy to me.
Whether you care to acknowledge it with your semantic arguments or not,
I'm not here to play semantics, and i don't really care to try.
Look.
We can pretty much drop the whole Income Tax portion of the equation, since it is a FUCKED argument to begin with ... because FORCED income tax is a blatant violation of the ORIGINAL INTENT of the constitution.
But we don't need that.
Let's just stick with
A. IF YOU CAN NOT PROVE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE EXPRESSLY MANDATED AUTHORITY TO ENACT THIS LEGISLATION, THEN IT IS DE FACTO A VIOLATION OF MY RIGHTS.
The Federal Government is, BY DEFAULT, in breech of contract, AND THAT IS A BLATANT VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BE GOVERNED BY A CONSTITUTIONALLY RESTRICTED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
So.
Here is YOUR question. WHERE in the constitution do you see ANYTHING resembling the following:
"Congress is given the privilege and authority to mandate and regulate health and medical expenses for the people."
You would SERIOUSLY have to pervert "general welfare" to get this to jive with what the constitution authorizes. But i'm guessing you have NO problems making that leap, do you?
:(
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Like I said before and I will say it again.
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
i will take that bet. and again learn the difference between leftist, marxist, and stop generalizing.
Ok well see in 3 1/2 years and
I know theres difference between thoes ideologies I mentioned... But a lot of people especially on the left like things from all of them...
Ok well see in 3 1/2 years and
I know theres difference between thoes ideologies I mentioned... But a lot of people especially on the left like things from all of them...
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
The Constitution does not consent of many programs and policies which over the course of our history have been bent, broken or ignored. Whether it's declaration of war powers, tax laws or even the national bank. And to bring this argument full circle, if you'd like to interpret the document by the letter of the law, do so all the way through.. not just the parts you disagree with currently. So let's break-up most of the federalist system, give everyone equal rights (even gays), outlaw lobbying and all the similar. Secondly, if we do live in this manner, our healthcare will soon enough resemble that of a nation from when that document was written... so go ahead and have your way - it merely under-minds what the people of our nation and those pesky founding fathers actually intended our nation to be.. . a better place for everyone in it. But now we seem to become a better place, but just not on my buck, in my backyard and not on my time, or effort. Everyone has misconceptions about what you've got until the shoe is on the other foot, and then you slowly realize it's all a scam to begin with. I do rather enjoy the sense of entitlement everyone has in our nation. Everyone is a constitutionalist when something they don't want put into policy is on the table, but the reverse is also true. And if we're all so heavily involved upon this document, maybe our society should actually live up to their end of "we the people".. instead of merely being entitled to anything.
Are you familiar with the expression
TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT?
(But Two Wrights Make An Airplane)
I will NOT agree with you on ANY measure of erosion of the constitution, REGARDLESS OF MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE MEASURE otherwise withstanding.
LIKE I SAID:
socialized medicine is probably not the worst idea ever suggested.
But doing it IN AN ILLEGAL FASHION REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY OTHER ILLEGAL MEASURES WERE PREVIOUSLY ENACTED
still pisses me off!
You could count me in favor of overturning EVERY SINGLE ONE of those iterated instances that Madison had a gripe with, from Federally pimped out Churches, to Federally funded public schools, to Welfare for the poor, straight on in to Federally funded and overseen local and state law enforcment agencies, and to your NEW ADDITION: SOCIALIZED medicine!
Why do i say that?
Because i am some heartless right wing son of a bitch? (hardly)
No, because it ERODES OUR PERSONAL LIBERTY, MAKES US DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT, AT ITS MERCY, AND IT PUTS US IN JEOPARDY OF FURTHER EROSION OF LIBERTIES AT THE INSISTENCE OF AN UNPRINCIPLED CLAMORING PUBLIC arguing in much the same way you are that, "well we've done it before, why not do it again?"
If you're so much in favor of the intent of our forefathers to have a great nation,
why don't you stop running the last of its remaining eternal principles in to the ground for the gain of immediate benefits? This is what i don't understand about people with arguments like yours.
It's not even like you are ignorant of the principles to be upheld, or of the rule of law in play.
NO.
YOU SEEM FULLY AWARE.
But just as you accuse me of picking and choosing when i want to obey those laws (which i assure you i would never intentionally do, and if i did, call me on it and i will immediately revert to proper constitutional principles) YOU SEEM TO PICK AND CHOOSE WHEN YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW, AND WHEN IT SUITS YOUR PARTICULAR CAUSE YOU DO, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT, arguing all along that YOURS is the true way to liberty, and ours is nothing but a hollow protest on biased partisan grounds.
No sir.
Again, if you want your healthcare bill, and you want to MANDATE MY PARTICIPATION, DO IT BY CONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES
not by means which subvert, at a most fundamental level, the very freedoms you claim to be arguing for.
:(
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yes I know and agree with you on many accounts, but do not actually believe we are a nation that holds to or enables these standards our country was attempted to be built upon. Call me a realist, call me negative, call me a cynic, but I have no faith in mankind and especially in my fellow countrymen to get us back on the right track. We live in an imperfect world and nothing will ever work to a t', but in this instance, I feel it is better to attempt, even in this manner, to alter our healthcare system for the greater good, then to ignore it any longer. You say things like your rights are being infringed upon, but in my opinion, it's a very minor complaint compared to the vast amount of citizens who are priced out of this necessity (and yes healthcare is a necessity in which every citizen should have access too). So a few people complain about taxes or potential fines are a mere drop in the bucket compared to the many this reform helps. It's for the greater good of all of us, and that is why I have no problem with it. Our society and system is not gonna change overnight nor are the methods which put them in place going to evaporate. We live in an ever-changing world in which flexibility is mandatory, to not bend will lead to breaking and is merely a reflection of our society's impractical expectations. People think they give and give, yet don't follow or know what they contribute too. Everyone is entitled and innocent.... it's always everyone else taking away and guilty. We are our government, system and laws. We are guilty...so perhaps when people look to find out things the way they are, they'll look in the mirror rather than merely pass out blame.
you familiar with the expression
TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT?
(But Two Wrights Make An Airplane)
I will NOT agree with you on ANY measure of erosion of the constitution, REGARDLESS OF MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE MEASURE otherwise withstanding.
LIKE I SAID:
socialized medicine is probably not the worst idea ever suggested.
But doing it IN AN ILLEGAL FASHION REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY OTHER ILLEGAL MEASURES WERE PREVIOUSLY ENACTED
still pisses me off!
You could count me in favor of overturning EVERY SINGLE ONE of those iterated instances that Madison had a gripe with, from Federally pimped out Churches, to Federally funded public schools, to Welfare for the poor, straight on in to Federally funded and overseen local and state law enforcment agencies, and to your NEW ADDITION: SOCIALIZED medicine!
Why do i say that?
Because i am some heartless right wing son of a bitch? (hardly)
No, because it ERODES OUR PERSONAL LIBERTY, MAKES US DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT, AT ITS MERCY, AND IT PUTS US IN JEOPARDY OF FURTHER EROSION OF LIBERTIES AT THE INSISTENCE OF AN UNPRINCIPLED CLAMORING PUBLIC arguing in much the same way you are that, "well we've done it before, why not do it again?"
If you're so much in favor of the intent of our forefathers to have a great nation,
why don't you stop running the last of its remaining eternal principles in to the ground for the gain of immediate benefits? This is what i don't understand about people with arguments like yours.
It's not even like you are ignorant of the principles to be upheld, or of the rule of law in play.
NO.
YOU SEEM FULLY AWARE.
But just as you accuse me of picking and choosing when i want to obey those laws (which i assure you i would never intentionally do, and if i did, call me on it and i will immediately revert to proper constitutional principles) YOU SEEM TO PICK AND CHOOSE WHEN YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW, AND WHEN IT SUITS YOUR PARTICULAR CAUSE YOU DO, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT, arguing all along that YOURS is the true way to liberty, and ours is nothing but a hollow protest on biased partisan grounds.
No sir.
Again, if you want your healthcare bill, and you want to MANDATE MY PARTICIPATION, DO IT BY CONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES
not by means which subvert, at a most fundamental level, the very freedoms you claim to be arguing for.
:(
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Hey instead of volleying back and forth (and besides, its time to cook dinner, mmm, chicken tacos!)
here is an article which i think most accurately addresses this issue.
And you are right, it is not "socialism", although for practical purposes at the lay, it is.
That is, it IS a redistribution of wealth under the "guise" of the control of the methods of wealth distribution by "the people" (ie. "the government"). But the reality is probably more like this fellow asserts, this "socialism" is just a modern version of fascism, wrapped in the pageantry of "socialism" ... but i do digress. really, it's all semantics to start labeling anything an "ism" ... what matters is that you and i, and the world at large, understand the motivations that lie UNDERNEATH those "isms".
Healthcare Reform or the Fleecing of our country by Special Interests: The Beneficiaries Behind the Curtain
History was unquestionably made Sunday night with the passage of HR 3590, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." Since the inception of FDR's "New Deal" there have been promises of grandiose realities in which there will be free healthcare for all. However, like the New Deal, these were simply grants-in-aid planned ostensibly to reallocate the nation's wealth for social justice, but intended in fact to reduce American citizens into submission.
It is a debatable issue whether or not socialized medicine can work. This article is not about that. I will, however, state my personal moral philosophy in a few sentences just to put the rest of this article into perspective. The short of the story is that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Healthcare is a service. It requires a human being's labor to provide said service. This human being gets paid for his labor and, therefore, claiming that human being's labor as a right or entitlement renders said human being a slave. Also, a monetary exchange is involved in these medical transactions. Therefore if one cannot afford his "right" of healthcare, then money must be stolen, by force, from others to finance this. The bottom line is that, ethically, the government should not use force to impose the wants of some men on the wallets of others. There are reasonable arguments for socialized medicine; however, none of those were made in the passage of this bill.
For starters, this bill would not be so deplorable if it actually was socialized medicine. You will hear the talking heads from the supposed right wing media calling this "socialized healthcare" or a "government takeover of healthcare." They are lying. This bill does not contain any remnants of a public option or single payer option. It does NOT provide free care to all Americans. Despite what you will hear from the talking head proponents in the supposed left wing media, it is not and never was designed to benefit Joe Sixpack on Main Street. This bill is for a lot of things, but none of them are you. What this bill is for is the further depredation of our Constitution. It is for negating the very moral principles that this country was founded upon. It was the straw that broke our Republic's back.
Some will call this "Obamacare" and point their fingers at the President, because that is who the people at FOX news told them was responsible. Rightfully so, some will blame the Democrats in the House because it was 219 of the so-called Democrats that voted this bill into law. However, if they were truly principled Democrats then they would have voted against this bill. Why? Because Democrats and Republicans alike are supposed to be opposed to giveaways to special interest groups and multinational corporations. These are the REAL beneficiaries of healthcare reform. Why else would former Louisiana Congressman turned Big Pharma lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, pledge $80 billion to sit in on the construction of such a bill? Well, because the giant drug lobby Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association doesn't want you or the government importing any of those "extremely dangerous" (code for way cheaper) foreign drugs.
If Obama supporters and cynics alike could open their eyes wide enough to see that he ran on a campaign that was completely opposed to the drug companies' influence over Washington, we would be in a much better situation. People would realize the real problems that we face, and this distraction of left and right bickering would be no more. But the people do not see this, which is why they believe Obama when he spouts off rhetoric of how insurance companies screw Joe Sixpack over and he is here to put a stop to that. Why then have the insurance companies taken an active role in helping pass this legislation? Why have they spent $133 million lobbying our representation in order to pass this healthcare reform? Why, since the begging talk of this supposedly injurious legislation, have the shares of these multinational insurance companies' stocks gone UP? If what Pelosi and Obama have been saying is true and this healthcare reform bill passes, then it would force the big insurance companies to halt their normal ominous ways and actually help out Main Street. Why would any industry in their right mind not only support, but lobby for, legislation that is detrimental to their own existence? They are either high on corporate crack or the establishment is lying to you. I'll take "The Establishment is lying to you" for a thousand, Alex.
The lies are so thick in the media as well. There are propaganda pieces from Good Morning America to the Washington Post's piece calling this bill the "Twilight of the interest groups" to NPR's all things considered. Tuesday's episode of All Things Considered, had Robert Seigel interviewing the current CEO of Cigna Corp. NPR played the fake left role and David Cordani, Cigna Corp's CEO, played the fake right role. Cordani talked about how terrible it is that this bill passed and how they will have to pass the extra fees to their customers. Despite the White House saying this will drive down insurance premiums, Cordani said on the program that "premiums will probably go up." It seemed as if Cordani was opposed to the passage of this bill at first and then, in some Orwellian double speaking manner, after playing victim he goes on to support it, saying that it "shows significant opportunity" and that "repealing [the bill} is not in anybody's best interest." Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??!!
This bill, while having a few partially obliging fragments, is a giant giveaway to special interests. It is welfare for the rich. It is a version of corporate welfare unlike this country has ever seen. It turns 30 million more American citizens into their customers. In contrast to the bailout of Wall Street, where our government paid the money to the big banks, this now sets the precedent of taxes paid directly to corporations. Gone are the days in which the government dishes out subsidies to multinational corporations which they have taken from your paycheck. Now the corporations use the government to directly impose their own taxes on the people. It is now the law that you purchase health insurance from one of these companies that helped to pass the very law that mandates you as one of their customers. It is a reverse catch 22. It is a direct tax on you and your family that you will be forced to pay to private companies that your government has been selected to represent.
Who will enforce this new law of the land and require that you purchase this potentially substandard, overpriced, and fascist product? Well none other than the good ole IR of S. That's right, contained in this lovely package of corporatism and tyranny are 16,500 brand new IRS personnel whose sole purpose will be to "collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the reconciliation' bill," according to Congressman Kevin Brady of the 8th District of Texas. This will lead to your medical information being a matter of public property with the US Government. Goodbye privacy, hello despots.
All in all this is not a step in the right direction; in fact it is the complete opposite. It will lead to the reduction in pay for many Americans whose employers pay their health insurance because of rising costs of mandates. It will undoubtedly lead to many small businesses going bankrupt because of insurance premiums they are mandated to pay. It will also unfortunately lead to a very large number of people being laid off in order for companies to cover the cost of their "affordable" mandated insurance, some 5 million jobs according to Congressman Ron Paul. It will be a nail in the coffin of bankruptcy that this country will soon be buried in.
There is a bright side to this incursion of the Corporatocracy. It will make more people question their rulers. There are no checks and balances left within our government. I believe that society, when faced with a certain austerity and plight, will rise to the occasion as checkers and balancers and ask, "How the hell did we let it get this bad?" It will awaken this sleeping beast known as America, and from this deliberate bankruptcy of our nation will raise a tsunami of anger and contempt for the thieves and liars and complacency that got us into this mess. My only hope is that the people will rise to peaceful action and not stoop to the level of the establishment by glorifying violence and turning the overlords into martyrs. For, in essence, it is your fault, your neighbors fault, and my fault that we have gotten into this position in the first place because of our complacency and obsession with irrelevant issues. This entire dilemma can be solved by simply being aware. Call your Congressman, your Senator, and your President, hell, call your grandmother, and tell them, "I am mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" I will end with a quote from Andrew Jackson as he addressed Congress in 1829 about the situation of the special interests and banking cartels' ever expanding grip on government, and why it is important to take interest in what your government does in the open and behind closed doors: "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning." [Andrew Jackson, elected Grand Master of the Tennessee Masonic Lodge in 1822. ]
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Correct me if Im wrong,but I think I recall you saying that you have what is considerd one of those cadillac Ins plans tha are going to be taxed at 40% (tax on the value of plans above $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families)when 2018 rolls around. If so how do you feel about that.
...
Who is saying that? Tea Partiers. They chant, but don't seem to give a fuck about anyone other than themselves and their damn taxes. Crying about 'Government Run Health Care as bad'... yet accepting MediCare with open arms.
And yes... I DO have a great Health Care Plan here at work... I've had it for 3 decades and have hardly had to pay anything for it. I SHOULD be taxed on it because I recognize its value as a benefit that has monetary worth. I don't mind paying my share of taxes if it helps my fellow Americans get coverage. I've been riding the gravy train fo a long, long time.
Apparently, the major difference between you and me... I care more about my countrymen (than my bank account), than you do.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Hey look.
I don't have a problem with MOST of what this bill is attempting to achieve.
My largest concern comes with any attempt to MANDATE COVERAGE.
In other words,
I'm a healthy 30yr old male
who hasn't been to the doctor in almost a decade.
I RARELY EVER get the flu or anything more than a 1 day bug.
I don't have coverage, can't really afford it, and more importantly
DO NOT WANT TO PAY FOR IT.
If this plan ever ends up becoming a:
You Pay For Coverage or You Pay A Tax To NOT Be Covered
then THAT is where i have a MAJOR ISSUE with it,
because it is at that point where it starts to go against my constitutionally protected rights.
You can tax a service, you can tax an activity,
but how the fuck can you tax a NON-Activity?
I hear that South Dakota is short on residents,
perhaps we should TAX WOMEN WHO AREN'T HAVING CHILDREN so we can use the proceeds to fund fertility drug prescriptions in that state? See how silly that sounds? And absolutely offensive to the "subject" being taxed it seems?
Again,
i'm not even sure that 2% tax bit made it in the bill,
but i find it abhorrent if it did.
...
Can you insure the fact that you will NEVER have an accident that requires extensive medical care? That you will NEVER get Cancer... heart disease... brain aneurysm? You may be able to take pre-cautions to avoid getting V.D., or avoid smoking and watching what you eat... and exercising regularly... but, can you guarantee that you won't get in an auto accident? Slip on the wet floor and bash your head on the sink?
And if something should happen... should you be denied medical attention?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
In my opinion this article merely dances around the issues and topics rather than take them on directly and blames Obama and the healthcare instead. You could have written the same exact article about lobbying, the recent Supreme ruling about campaign financing, the military industrial complex and the corporate agenda and not mention Obama or healthcare in any manner. To me it sounds more like a rant about "just tell us what we're getting" compared to rationalizing and then dismissing the healthcare plan. Yes we live in a oligarchy and have for quite some time, Obama and the healthcare plan are far from the "last straw that broke the republic" or anything similar.
Hey instead of volleying back and forth (and besides, its time to cook dinner, mmm, chicken tacos!)
here is an article which i think most accurately addresses this issue.
And you are right, it is not "socialism", although for practical purposes at the lay, it is.
That is, it IS a redistribution of wealth under the "guise" of the control of the methods of wealth distribution by "the people" (ie. "the government"). But the reality is probably more like this fellow asserts, this "socialism" is just a modern version of fascism, wrapped in the pageantry of "socialism" ... but i do digress. really, it's all semantics to start labeling anything an "ism" ... what matters is that you and i, and the world at large, understand the motivations that lie UNDERNEATH those "isms".
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
Hey look.
I don't have a problem with MOST of what this bill is attempting to achieve.
My largest concern comes with any attempt to MANDATE COVERAGE.
In other words,
I'm a healthy 30yr old male
who hasn't been to the doctor in almost a decade.
I RARELY EVER get the flu or anything more than a 1 day bug.
I don't have coverage, can't really afford it, and more importantly
DO NOT WANT TO PAY FOR IT.
If this plan ever ends up becoming a:
You Pay For Coverage or You Pay A Tax To NOT Be Covered
then THAT is where i have a MAJOR ISSUE with it,
because it is at that point where it starts to go against my constitutionally protected rights.
You can tax a service, you can tax an activity,
but how the fuck can you tax a NON-Activity?
I hear that South Dakota is short on residents,
perhaps we should TAX WOMEN WHO AREN'T HAVING CHILDREN so we can use the proceeds to fund fertility drug prescriptions in that state? See how silly that sounds? And absolutely offensive to the "subject" being taxed it seems?
Again,
i'm not even sure that 2% tax bit made it in the bill,
but i find it abhorrent if it did.
...
Can you insure the fact that you will NEVER have an accident that requires extensive medical care? That you will NEVER get Cancer... heart disease... brain aneurysm? You may be able to take pre-cautions to avoid getting V.D., or avoid smoking and watching what you eat... and exercising regularly... but, can you guarantee that you won't get in an auto accident? Slip on the wet floor and bash your head on the sink?
And if something should happen... should you be denied medical attention?
A man did just that, a former NFL player then pilot and suffered memory loss. I mean his entire memory of everything was eraced just like that. He was 53 married with two teenage kids and his memory is like a newborn with pictures and video of his past. So we can't gaurantee a damn things these days cause one slip on a restroom floor and you or I could end up like that man, just like that.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Who will enforce this new law of the land and require that you purchase this potentially substandard, overpriced, and fascist product? Well none other than the good ole IR of S. That's right, contained in this lovely package of corporatism and tyranny are 16,500 brand new IRS personnel whose sole purpose will be to "collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the reconciliation' bill," according to Congressman Kevin Brady of the 8th District of Texas. This will lead to your medical information being a matter of public property with the US Government. Goodbye privacy, hello despots.
and I was told I was full of shit when this news first came out before the bill was passed.
Why have they spent $133 million lobbying our representation in order to pass this healthcare reform? Why, since the begging talk of this supposedly injurious legislation, have the shares of these multinational insurance companies' stocks gone UP? If what Pelosi and Obama have been saying is true and this healthcare reform bill passes, then it would force the big insurance companies to halt their normal ominous ways and actually help out Main Street. Why would any industry in their right mind not only support, but lobby for, legislation that is detrimental to their own existence? They are either high on corporate crack or the establishment is lying to you. I'll take "The Establishment is lying to you" for a thousand, Alex.
Correct me if Im wrong,but I think I recall you saying that you have what is considerd one of those cadillac Ins plans tha are going to be taxed at 40% (tax on the value of plans above $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families)when 2018 rolls around. If so how do you feel about that.
...
Who is saying that? Tea Partiers. They chant, but don't seem to give a fuck about anyone other than themselves and their damn taxes. Crying about 'Government Run Health Care as bad'... yet accepting MediCare with open arms.
And yes... I DO have a great Health Care Plan here at work... I've had it for 3 decades and have hardly had to pay anything for it. I SHOULD be taxed on it because I recognize its value as a benefit that has monetary worth. I don't mind paying my share of taxes if it helps my fellow Americans get coverage. I've been riding the gravy train fo a long, long time.
Apparently, the major difference between you and me... I care more about my countrymen (than my bank account), than you do.
Chant exactly what ???? :?
More power to you if you can afford it...
Well let me ask you this.. as far as medicare goes don't they have a right if they were promised they would be taken care of if they payed into it ? Seniors that is...
Do you think we should ween future generations of Medicare.
and as far as your last comment goes. WTF does that have anything to do with. :? I care about my fellow man also , but guess what My felow man isn't going to pay my rent next month,buy my groceries this week, or put gas in my car. so call me greedy then if I say I care more about what's in my bank acct... I think when it comes down to it people are going to more concerned about their own survival for them and their family especially if you are on a really tight budget like most famalies are.
and as far as your last comment goes. WTF does that have anything to do with. :? I care about my fellow man also , but guess what My felow man isn't going to pay my rent next month,buy my groceries this week, or put gas in my car. so call me greedy then if I say I care more about what's in my bank acct... I think when it comes down to it people are going to more concerned about their own survival for them and their family especially if you are on a really tight budget like most famalies are.
I'll tell you a story: During the Great Depression, my great-grandmother and her family were dirt poor. But she would never turn away anyone who was hungry; she would always share what little she had. Her house was even marked by hobos so the others would know it was a friendly house where they could get a little food. She was able to be on a "tight budget" and still care for her fellow man. And guess what? She and her family survived.
The moral: The need to survive on a tight budget does not preclude caring for one's fellow man. (One might even argue that survival is dependent upon it.)
In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
That's great in theory, but the most people can't afford to do that.
They can't? Have they tried? The only reason they think they can't is because everyone is paying over-inflated prices designed to keep the health insurance industry afloat.
Do you think if everyone suddenly stopped using insurance and offerred to pay in cash that the doctors would just close up shop because nobody could afford them? I don't.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Comments
Just wait until around 2014 when this bill kicks into over fucking drive.
all you progressive,Marxist,Leftist (it's all the same to me) are going to be singing a different tune guaranteed.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Singing what tune? a larger deficit? Which is projected to hit 20 trillion by the end of the decade? Is this all because of the Leftist?
sorry i just read this post and jumped in-
Also, please let me know about this.. I'm excited to hear the answer (http://forums.pearljam.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=129838&start=15#p2931499)
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
it allows him to not listen ...
in any case - i consider myself a leftist and i totally believe in socialized health care ... however, much to Drifting's post above - I do feel that the general populace is being hoodwinked in a way ... partly by the Corporate structure of America but also because ultimately America is a divided nation with a huge divide ...
so many people are paralyzed into partisan idealogues that you end up with a solution that is good for only a small percentage of the people ...
All the bills go by
And initiatives are taken up
By the middle
There ain't gonna be any middle any more
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
These rules aren't forming themselves, though. PEOPLE have allowed this to happen. I don't think you and I are so far apart on this one, though.
I know there are debatable parts of my hypothetical example, but I'll go back to this:
What would the cost of food be today if we had allowed employers to use a portion of the money they would be paying us in addition to automatically deducting a portion for our premiums and then paying bills submitted to them by grocery insurance companies for goods that the people just went out and bought without knowing the price? We'd be paying 10 times what we are now.
My point is, I think if we want reform, we need significant amounts people to stand up and take themselves out of this corrupt system they've allowed to happen. In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.
The answer is NOT for the government to force more and more of us to participate in a broken, corrupt system. The answer is for us to break the cycle.
If my company would just give me the $500 per month it is paying for my health insurance, I'd walk out and do a dance in the parking lot. I could buy the same policy for half. But I wouldn't do that. I'd buy a catastrophic policy with an extremely high deductible, sock the rest away and pay cash for medicines and doctor's visits.
If my employer had given me $500 per month for the 15 years I've been in the work force, I'd conservatively be sitting on $200K today that I could use as my own insurance. By retirement, we'd probably be looking at about $750K.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
And can you explain to me how being PENALIZED (via taxation) BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for NOT ACCEPTING COVERAGE falls:
a. within the constraints of the Federal Government's EXPRESSED POWERS
b. within the category of "NOT a Violation of Personal Liberties"
?
If the Federal Government is acting
a. OUTSIDE ITS CONSTITUTIONALLY EXPRESSED AUTHORITY (which it NO DOUBT IS)
and
b. AGAINST MY EXPRESSED RIGHTS (this whole tax penalty for the uninsured is a logical violation of my rights, but it is a moot point because Income Tax itself is a scam put upon us to ENABLE such unconstitutional practices by "sleight of hand")
then your goddamn right, it violates my rights.
And SUBSIDIZING AND SHARING COSTS EQUALLY AMONGST UNEQUAL USERS sure as hell sounds like SOME form of Socialist policy to me.
Whether you care to acknowledge it with your semantic arguments or not,
I'm not here to play semantics, and i don't really care to try.
Look.
We can pretty much drop the whole Income Tax portion of the equation, since it is a FUCKED argument to begin with ... because FORCED income tax is a blatant violation of the ORIGINAL INTENT of the constitution.
But we don't need that.
Let's just stick with
A. IF YOU CAN NOT PROVE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE EXPRESSLY MANDATED AUTHORITY TO ENACT THIS LEGISLATION, THEN IT IS DE FACTO A VIOLATION OF MY RIGHTS.
The Federal Government is, BY DEFAULT, in breech of contract, AND THAT IS A BLATANT VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BE GOVERNED BY A CONSTITUTIONALLY RESTRICTED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
So.
Here is YOUR question.
WHERE in the constitution do you see ANYTHING resembling the following:
"Congress is given the privilege and authority to mandate and regulate health and medical expenses for the people."
You would SERIOUSLY have to pervert "general welfare" to get this to jive with what the constitution authorizes. But i'm guessing you have NO problems making that leap, do you?
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
YES.
YES AND YES.
YES YES YES!
and i may add, AND TRICK US IN TO TRAMPLING OVER OUR VERY OWN CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AGAINST GOVERNMENT USURPATION OF POWER.
What a scam!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
- James Madison, "Father of the Constitution", Primary Author of Aforementioned, & 4th President Of The United States
Think he was qualified to expound on the topic of "general welfare" and the ORIGINAL INTENT therein !?!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
the problem with your food analogy is that the food system has also been corrupted ... but it's way harder to make people pay say $20 for an ear of corn than say $50 for pills ...
as for your personal choice - the problem lies in a multitude of factors ... in using your specific example ... what if the money you have socked away couldn't pay for the medicine you require? ... it doesn't change anything except take out insurance companies out of the picture ... your still left with a corrupt system favouring industry ...
the real issue ultimately is whether or not you believe that the health of the populace is something worth addressing at any level outside of the individual ...
You know why it's harder to make people pay $20 for an ear of corn? Because they are doing it out of their own pocket and they know the price. That doesn't happen with health insurance.
I realize that the health of the populace should be dealt with on some level outside of the individual, but I do not believe that people should be making remote control, forced payments out of their paychecks to pay for goods and services for which they do not know or have any say in the price.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Ok well see in 3 1/2 years and
I know theres difference between thoes ideologies I mentioned... But a lot of people especially on the left like things from all of them...
Roughly speaking...
http://esl.fis.edu/vocab/images/politicalSpectrum.gif
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Are you familiar with the expression
TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT?
(But Two Wrights Make An Airplane)
I will NOT agree with you on ANY measure of erosion of the constitution, REGARDLESS OF MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE MEASURE otherwise withstanding.
LIKE I SAID:
socialized medicine is probably not the worst idea ever suggested.
But doing it IN AN ILLEGAL FASHION
REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY OTHER ILLEGAL MEASURES WERE PREVIOUSLY ENACTED
still pisses me off!
You could count me in favor of overturning EVERY SINGLE ONE of those iterated instances that Madison had a gripe with, from Federally pimped out Churches, to Federally funded public schools, to Welfare for the poor, straight on in to Federally funded and overseen local and state law enforcment agencies, and to your NEW ADDITION: SOCIALIZED medicine!
Why do i say that?
Because i am some heartless right wing son of a bitch? (hardly)
No, because it ERODES OUR PERSONAL LIBERTY, MAKES US DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT, AT ITS MERCY, AND IT PUTS US IN JEOPARDY OF FURTHER EROSION OF LIBERTIES AT THE INSISTENCE OF AN UNPRINCIPLED CLAMORING PUBLIC arguing in much the same way you are that, "well we've done it before, why not do it again?"
If you're so much in favor of the intent of our forefathers to have a great nation,
why don't you stop running the last of its remaining eternal principles in to the ground for the gain of immediate benefits? This is what i don't understand about people with arguments like yours.
It's not even like you are ignorant of the principles to be upheld, or of the rule of law in play.
NO.
YOU SEEM FULLY AWARE.
But just as you accuse me of picking and choosing when i want to obey those laws (which i assure you i would never intentionally do, and if i did, call me on it and i will immediately revert to proper constitutional principles) YOU SEEM TO PICK AND CHOOSE WHEN YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW, AND WHEN IT SUITS YOUR PARTICULAR CAUSE YOU DO, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT, arguing all along that YOURS is the true way to liberty, and ours is nothing but a hollow protest on biased partisan grounds.
No sir.
Again, if you want your healthcare bill, and you want to MANDATE MY PARTICIPATION,
DO IT BY CONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES
not by means which subvert, at a most fundamental level, the very freedoms you claim to be arguing for.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
That's great in theory, but the most people can't afford to do that.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
here is an article which i think most accurately addresses this issue.
And you are right, it is not "socialism", although for practical purposes at the lay, it is.
That is, it IS a redistribution of wealth under the "guise" of the control of the methods of wealth distribution by "the people" (ie. "the government"). But the reality is probably more like this fellow asserts, this "socialism" is just a modern version of fascism, wrapped in the pageantry of "socialism" ... but i do digress. really, it's all semantics to start labeling anything an "ism" ... what matters is that you and i, and the world at large, understand the motivations that lie UNDERNEATH those "isms".
SO here is that rant:
Healthcare Reform: The Beneficiaries Behind the Curtain
Written by ActiveInChange
Lafayette, LA
Healthcare Reform or the Fleecing of our country by Special Interests: The Beneficiaries Behind the Curtain
History was unquestionably made Sunday night with the passage of HR 3590, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." Since the inception of FDR's "New Deal" there have been promises of grandiose realities in which there will be free healthcare for all. However, like the New Deal, these were simply grants-in-aid planned ostensibly to reallocate the nation's wealth for social justice, but intended in fact to reduce American citizens into submission.
It is a debatable issue whether or not socialized medicine can work. This article is not about that. I will, however, state my personal moral philosophy in a few sentences just to put the rest of this article into perspective. The short of the story is that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Healthcare is a service. It requires a human being's labor to provide said service. This human being gets paid for his labor and, therefore, claiming that human being's labor as a right or entitlement renders said human being a slave. Also, a monetary exchange is involved in these medical transactions. Therefore if one cannot afford his "right" of healthcare, then money must be stolen, by force, from others to finance this. The bottom line is that, ethically, the government should not use force to impose the wants of some men on the wallets of others. There are reasonable arguments for socialized medicine; however, none of those were made in the passage of this bill.
For starters, this bill would not be so deplorable if it actually was socialized medicine. You will hear the talking heads from the supposed right wing media calling this "socialized healthcare" or a "government takeover of healthcare." They are lying. This bill does not contain any remnants of a public option or single payer option. It does NOT provide free care to all Americans. Despite what you will hear from the talking head proponents in the supposed left wing media, it is not and never was designed to benefit Joe Sixpack on Main Street. This bill is for a lot of things, but none of them are you. What this bill is for is the further depredation of our Constitution. It is for negating the very moral principles that this country was founded upon. It was the straw that broke our Republic's back.
Some will call this "Obamacare" and point their fingers at the President, because that is who the people at FOX news told them was responsible. Rightfully so, some will blame the Democrats in the House because it was 219 of the so-called Democrats that voted this bill into law. However, if they were truly principled Democrats then they would have voted against this bill. Why? Because Democrats and Republicans alike are supposed to be opposed to giveaways to special interest groups and multinational corporations. These are the REAL beneficiaries of healthcare reform. Why else would former Louisiana Congressman turned Big Pharma lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, pledge $80 billion to sit in on the construction of such a bill? Well, because the giant drug lobby Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association doesn't want you or the government importing any of those "extremely dangerous" (code for way cheaper) foreign drugs.
If Obama supporters and cynics alike could open their eyes wide enough to see that he ran on a campaign that was completely opposed to the drug companies' influence over Washington, we would be in a much better situation. People would realize the real problems that we face, and this distraction of left and right bickering would be no more. But the people do not see this, which is why they believe Obama when he spouts off rhetoric of how insurance companies screw Joe Sixpack over and he is here to put a stop to that. Why then have the insurance companies taken an active role in helping pass this legislation? Why have they spent $133 million lobbying our representation in order to pass this healthcare reform? Why, since the begging talk of this supposedly injurious legislation, have the shares of these multinational insurance companies' stocks gone UP? If what Pelosi and Obama have been saying is true and this healthcare reform bill passes, then it would force the big insurance companies to halt their normal ominous ways and actually help out Main Street. Why would any industry in their right mind not only support, but lobby for, legislation that is detrimental to their own existence? They are either high on corporate crack or the establishment is lying to you. I'll take "The Establishment is lying to you" for a thousand, Alex.
The lies are so thick in the media as well. There are propaganda pieces from Good Morning America to the Washington Post's piece calling this bill the "Twilight of the interest groups" to NPR's all things considered. Tuesday's episode of All Things Considered, had Robert Seigel interviewing the current CEO of Cigna Corp. NPR played the fake left role and David Cordani, Cigna Corp's CEO, played the fake right role. Cordani talked about how terrible it is that this bill passed and how they will have to pass the extra fees to their customers. Despite the White House saying this will drive down insurance premiums, Cordani said on the program that "premiums will probably go up." It seemed as if Cordani was opposed to the passage of this bill at first and then, in some Orwellian double speaking manner, after playing victim he goes on to support it, saying that it "shows significant opportunity" and that "repealing [the bill} is not in anybody's best interest." Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??!!
This bill, while having a few partially obliging fragments, is a giant giveaway to special interests. It is welfare for the rich. It is a version of corporate welfare unlike this country has ever seen. It turns 30 million more American citizens into their customers. In contrast to the bailout of Wall Street, where our government paid the money to the big banks, this now sets the precedent of taxes paid directly to corporations. Gone are the days in which the government dishes out subsidies to multinational corporations which they have taken from your paycheck. Now the corporations use the government to directly impose their own taxes on the people. It is now the law that you purchase health insurance from one of these companies that helped to pass the very law that mandates you as one of their customers. It is a reverse catch 22. It is a direct tax on you and your family that you will be forced to pay to private companies that your government has been selected to represent.
Who will enforce this new law of the land and require that you purchase this potentially substandard, overpriced, and fascist product? Well none other than the good ole IR of S. That's right, contained in this lovely package of corporatism and tyranny are 16,500 brand new IRS personnel whose sole purpose will be to "collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the reconciliation' bill," according to Congressman Kevin Brady of the 8th District of Texas. This will lead to your medical information being a matter of public property with the US Government. Goodbye privacy, hello despots.
All in all this is not a step in the right direction; in fact it is the complete opposite. It will lead to the reduction in pay for many Americans whose employers pay their health insurance because of rising costs of mandates. It will undoubtedly lead to many small businesses going bankrupt because of insurance premiums they are mandated to pay. It will also unfortunately lead to a very large number of people being laid off in order for companies to cover the cost of their "affordable" mandated insurance, some 5 million jobs according to Congressman Ron Paul. It will be a nail in the coffin of bankruptcy that this country will soon be buried in.
There is a bright side to this incursion of the Corporatocracy. It will make more people question their rulers. There are no checks and balances left within our government. I believe that society, when faced with a certain austerity and plight, will rise to the occasion as checkers and balancers and ask, "How the hell did we let it get this bad?" It will awaken this sleeping beast known as America, and from this deliberate bankruptcy of our nation will raise a tsunami of anger and contempt for the thieves and liars and complacency that got us into this mess. My only hope is that the people will rise to peaceful action and not stoop to the level of the establishment by glorifying violence and turning the overlords into martyrs. For, in essence, it is your fault, your neighbors fault, and my fault that we have gotten into this position in the first place because of our complacency and obsession with irrelevant issues. This entire dilemma can be solved by simply being aware. Call your Congressman, your Senator, and your President, hell, call your grandmother, and tell them, "I am mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" I will end with a quote from Andrew Jackson as he addressed Congress in 1829 about the situation of the special interests and banking cartels' ever expanding grip on government, and why it is important to take interest in what your government does in the open and behind closed doors: "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning." [Andrew Jackson, elected Grand Master of the Tennessee Masonic Lodge in 1822.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Who is saying that? Tea Partiers. They chant, but don't seem to give a fuck about anyone other than themselves and their damn taxes. Crying about 'Government Run Health Care as bad'... yet accepting MediCare with open arms.
And yes... I DO have a great Health Care Plan here at work... I've had it for 3 decades and have hardly had to pay anything for it. I SHOULD be taxed on it because I recognize its value as a benefit that has monetary worth. I don't mind paying my share of taxes if it helps my fellow Americans get coverage. I've been riding the gravy train fo a long, long time.
Apparently, the major difference between you and me... I care more about my countrymen (than my bank account), than you do.
Hail, Hail!!!
Can you insure the fact that you will NEVER have an accident that requires extensive medical care? That you will NEVER get Cancer... heart disease... brain aneurysm? You may be able to take pre-cautions to avoid getting V.D., or avoid smoking and watching what you eat... and exercising regularly... but, can you guarantee that you won't get in an auto accident? Slip on the wet floor and bash your head on the sink?
And if something should happen... should you be denied medical attention?
Hail, Hail!!!
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
A man did just that, a former NFL player then pilot and suffered memory loss. I mean his entire memory of everything was eraced just like that. He was 53 married with two teenage kids and his memory is like a newborn with pictures and video of his past. So we can't gaurantee a damn things these days cause one slip on a restroom floor and you or I could end up like that man, just like that.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
and I was told I was full of shit when this news first came out before the bill was passed.
:idea:
Chant exactly what ???? :?
More power to you if you can afford it...
Well let me ask you this.. as far as medicare goes don't they have a right if they were promised they would be taken care of if they payed into it ? Seniors that is...
Do you think we should ween future generations of Medicare.
and as far as your last comment goes. WTF does that have anything to do with. :? I care about my fellow man also , but guess what My felow man isn't going to pay my rent next month,buy my groceries this week, or put gas in my car. so call me greedy then if I say I care more about what's in my bank acct... I think when it comes down to it people are going to more concerned about their own survival for them and their family especially if you are on a really tight budget like most famalies are.
I'll tell you a story: During the Great Depression, my great-grandmother and her family were dirt poor. But she would never turn away anyone who was hungry; she would always share what little she had. Her house was even marked by hobos so the others would know it was a friendly house where they could get a little food. She was able to be on a "tight budget" and still care for her fellow man. And guess what? She and her family survived.
The moral: The need to survive on a tight budget does not preclude caring for one's fellow man. (One might even argue that survival is dependent upon it.)
They can't? Have they tried? The only reason they think they can't is because everyone is paying over-inflated prices designed to keep the health insurance industry afloat.
Do you think if everyone suddenly stopped using insurance and offerred to pay in cash that the doctors would just close up shop because nobody could afford them? I don't.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.