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.
But you are taking part in the commerce, as I've already shown. And it isn't insurance. It is a system to help you get insurance. The government doesn't provide the insurance. Private insurance carriers do.
It's a sytem to "help" you get insurance?
One of the ways it "helps" you get insurance is by punishing you if you don't, correct?
Ever heard of George Orwell? This sounds like it came from the Ministry of Truth.
One of the ways it "helps" you get insurance is by punishing you if you don't, correct?
Everyone must participate. Otherwise, it doesn't work. Kinda like taxes. What do you think happens to you if you don't pay your taxes?
Quote:
Ever heard of George Orwell? This sounds like it came from the Ministry of Truth.
While these kinds of obtuse comparisons may bring smiles on the faces of certain right wing pundants, they do nothing to further your argument, whatever it may have been.
Actually franchisors are regulated by interstate commerce only if they cross the state line to sell franchises, franchisees and other franchors not crossing state lines are regulated by state registration laws.
Obamacare REQUIRES YOU BUY INSURANCE, something I'm not already doing. I might be taking part in healthcare commerce but I sure in hell am not taking part in health INSURANCE commerce.
Yes, we've established that you're an insurance deadbeat.
My understanding is that the cost for a replacement in Taiwan is about $14,000 including airfare and an extended stay. Some insurance companies will pay for most of it. Some employers encourage it.
Well, forgive me for not wanting to do that. I'd rather be here where I can communicate with the staff and have my family nearby.
It's also no deal for those who have to pay out of pocket, which was the original topic.
I'm not disputing that takes place, I'm only saying the fact that it does is not cause to implement something as horrendous as Obamacare, or any other form of national health plan.
If fact, national health plan is contrary to federalism and the Constitution which established a federal system.
The nature of the US has changed since the time the constitution was drafted and will continue to do so. Today the US is much more of a country than it was centuries ago when it was basically just a couple of states lumped together. That's why I also support updating and modernizing constitutions from time to time.
And why did the federal government feel like it is necessary to implement Obamacare? Probably because they have analyzed the old system and found it did not provide everyone with the health care they needed.
Why not amend the constitution so that universal health care must be implemented by the individual states? That way it would not be a federal system if that is why people dislike so much, which I don't understand anyway. There are all kinds of federal institutions and given the way people are migrating and moving all over the US these days, it makes sense to move stuff from the state to the federal level.
But that isn't happening.
Because the current solution is a bad compromise.
That is an unattainable goal. We're giving Food Stamps to parents, yet children are still starving (according to claims made). The reason they are starving is because the parents are incompetent and make bad life decisions. Giving the family more Food Stamps or more money will not ensure the children won't starve, rather it will only allow the parents to continue make bad decisions.
I think the reason people are still starving is that the food stamp system is far from perfect. People can buy more than just food with those stamps.
People will continue to make bad decisions (that is by far not the only reason why many people are in trouble) regardless whether they get food stamps or health care or what not, simply because they are human.
By definition, you cannot have a right to something that never existed previously.
Since all rights were introduced at some point in time, including those that supposedly have come from gods, I don't share your view. For instance, today we have the right to vote and say what we want, but that was not always the case.
And I've established quite well that you dont understad the difference betwee healthcare, and health insurance.
All Americans pay taxes. No wealthy person is willing to pay the same percentage in taxes as those paid by the poor. NONE.
What's a betwee?
Healthcare markets have near universal participation.
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.
Obamacare REQUIRES YOU BUY INSURANCE, something I'm not already doing. I might be taking part in healthcare commerce but I sure in hell am not taking part in health INSURANCE commerce.
junk argument
