Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I got news for you, if the Supreme Court rules Obamcare unconstitution, we might NEVER get a national healthcare system in place. Obama would have pushed your agenda back hundreds of years..
It did not.. According to the CBO it INCREASED the cost of the privatized system.. Why do you keep ignoring reality?
Not so fast quick draw. I would not put much past our partisan SC, but who knows what they would do, look what they did with Citizens. On Health Care, the total effect is not clear, as there are a lot of assumptions made. Here is the most recent CBO Directors report. I prefer to look at that, rather than a FOS analysis telling us what we should think.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,752,651 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Wrong.. federal budgets were passed to enact them, not laws. interstate highways are INTERSTATE, thereby covered under the Constitution, and space rockets are federal spending used to research technology FOR DEFENSE..
Funny coming from an individual who quoted "We the people" and stopped. Lets see you educate me on where Im wrong though, shall we? Lets continue
Lie.. Laws get thrown out CONSTANTLY as unconstitutional, even ones passed by Constitution. One such example was federal laws dictating speed limits.. If they cant write laws dictating speed limits, on roads THEY BUILD, then what on gods earth gives them the authority to demand you buy something?
Not relevant, there is no state laws mandating healthcare be purchased and there is no conflict between two laws..
I'm not saying if the law is constitutional or not, I'm disputing that the healthcare falls under "We the people", the only part you quoted.. But my challenge to the law is indeed going to the supreme court, just like many of the other challenges across this country.. Federal judges said I have legal standing and a valid legal dispute.. So you see, I'll take a federal judges ruling over some anonymous poster on a forum who keep quoting the Gettysburg Address, and claiming its in the Constitution..
First of all the Federal speed limit was REPEALED and not "thrown out" by any court. Secondly the Constitution was wrote over 200 years ago. There were no cars, planes or even TV or radio back then. We cannot be expected to live under something that was written that long ago without adopting it to the reality of the day we live in now. No court in the land is going to say "well freedom of the press only means that things printed on an actual press are covered" even though that is what the Framers intended because that is all they had back then.
The interstate highway system facilitated interstate commerce which is why the Federal government built it and should have jurisdiction over it. The same can be said for healthcare too.
Not so fast quick draw. I would not put much past our partisan SC, but who knows what they would do, look what they did with Citizens. On Health Care, the total effect is not clear, as there are a lot of assumptions made. Here is the most recent CBO Directors report. I prefer to look at that, rather than a FOS analysis telling us what we should think.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,752,651 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
I got news for you, if the Supreme Court rules Obamcare unconstitution, we might NEVER get a national healthcare system in place. Obama would have pushed your agenda back hundreds of years..
It did not.. According to the CBO it INCREASED the cost of the privatized system.. Why do you keep ignoring reality?
The Supreme Court- even if the case gets that far- will rule FOR Obamacare and I predict it will be a 6-3 ruling.
You are the one that said it will increase the cost of the privatized system. I presume you mean it would increase it more so than it would otherwise be increasing. I think there are some things in the Law that would do the opposite of that and certainly there needs to be a great deal more legislation to address what things are causing the rising cost of care.
You are the one that said it will increase the cost of the privatized system. I presume you mean it would increase it more so than it would otherwise be increasing. I think there are some things in the Law that would do the opposite of that and certainly there needs to be a great deal more legislation to address what things are causing the rising cost of care.
Why is it that liberals see the answer to everything as MORE LEGISLATION?
How about addressing the problems of defensive medicine via tort reform? How about allowing competition between insurers rather than the HHS picking the winners/losers?
First of all the Federal speed limit was REPEALED and not "thrown out" by any court.
True, bad example.. Try the line item veto law, internet indecency laws, Gramm Rudman, and various other laws passed ruled unconstitutional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK
First of all the Federal speed limit was REPEALED and not "thrown out" by any court. Secondly the Constitution was wrote over 200 years ago. There were no cars, planes or even TV or radio back then. We cannot be expected to live under something that was written that long ago without adopting it to the reality of the day we live in now.
Thats why we have amendments to the Constitution. Which amendment would change the intent of the Constitution to be concerned about the individual, and not "society"? You dont just get to say, hey, thats an old document, we dont need to follow it anymore. If that was true, then you would lose any right to complain about the Patriot Act, but if I recall, you have indeed opposed it..
Again, where/when has the Constitution been adapted to realities of "today"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK
FNo court in the land is going to say "well freedom of the press only means that things printed on an actual press are covered" even though that is what the Framers intended because that is all they had back then.
Thats because the Constitution is a list of LIMITS on the laws the government can pass.. It says you CANT limit right to bear arms, you CANT infringe upon freedom of speech, etc. The Constitution is NOT a list of items the government must do for YOU..
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK
The interstate highway system facilitated interstate commerce which is why the Federal government built it and should have jurisdiction over it. The same can be said for healthcare too.
Federal government didnt build healthcare. A proper liberal argument which might hold water is if liberals called for the government to OWN hospitals but that isnt what you are calling for. Hospitals might be compared to police, fire, etc, but Healthcare, not even close.
The Supreme Court- even if the case gets that far- will rule FOR Obamacare and I predict it will be a 6-3 ruling.
There hasnt been one challenge to Obamacare turned down thus far to date. Everyone has moved forward. I wonder why that is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom
LOOK at the facts. LOOK at USA costs and life expectancy, then LOOK at Canada costs and life expectancy: World+Health.jpg (image)
Japan has FOUR years higher than USA life expectancy , and LESS THAN HALF the costs of USA.
You listed two countries that have longer life expectancies than ours and try to list them as examples to THE WHOLE WORLD? They have longer lifespans due to lifestyles NOT due to healthcare..
I know someone in Canada who's mother was dying.. Their government sent them home with 24 hour nursing that their CHILDREN paid for. (at a VERY substantial cost). Those costs are not computed into the totals listed for Canada but here they would be because here, insurance would pay the bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob
You are the one that said it will increase the cost of the privatized system. I presume you mean it would increase it more so than it would otherwise be increasing. I think there are some things in the Law that would do the opposite of that and certainly there needs to be a great deal more legislation to address what things are causing the rising cost of care.
The cost of Obamacare was spread out into several bills, you need to add ALL of the costs together, not just pick and choose parts of it and pretend the parts constitute the whole..
LOOK at the facts. LOOK at USA costs and life expectancy, then LOOK at Canada costs and life expectancy: World+Health.jpg (image)
Japan has FOUR years higher than USA life expectancy , and LESS THAN HALF the costs of USA.
Atleast in some countrys their more to life than just profits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
interstate highways are INTERSTATE, thereby covered under the Constitution, and space rockets are federal spending used to research technology FOR DEFENSE.. 
Lets see you educate me on where Im wrong though, shall we? Lets continue
Federal judges said I have legal standing and a valid legal dispute.. So you see, I'll take a federal judges ruling over some anonymous poster on a forum who keep quoting the Gettysburg Address, and claiming its in the Constitution..
