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.
How do you have the right to police protection even when you're not paying any taxes?
how do you have the right to use public side walks and send kids to a public school?
use your brains, bud
No, you explain it.
Come on, tell me how I have a right to make a doctor, nurse, lab tech, drug researcher, etc, all work for my benefit.
Come on. Explain it. If you cannot, retract your argument.
Why did you tell them? Now, they will work to abandon public education in favor of home schooling, with creationism instead of biology.
I home schooled my child in some of his latter primary grades and I am not a Christian. That's a stereotype that all homes schoolers do not learn the sciences and that they are Christian only.
There are a lot of atheists home schooling their children too. Why, because public schools suck and private schools are a financial rip off for the lower grades, exploiting the fact that public schools suck.
I do think the Federal Department of Education should be abolished though. Redundancy at its finest. Which brings us back to a single payer
Have a single payer and get rid of all the other programs that do the same thing; pay the health care bill. Keep it smart and simple
Throw in a car, house, wardrobe, and food too by that logic.
No, because having a car might not be in the general welfare of everyone. You might be a drunk who drives drunk and could be a nuisance and danger on the road. Or you might be blind.
Health care is NOT a commodity. If we break out with the bubonic plague, folks are not thinking, Geez, I wonder if we should let this linger and work itself out
Food, I'm thinking if we had a National dust bowl, the government might kick in some dried beans and rice. What do you think?
At least the welfare clause is IN the Constitution. Here are those exact words:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
Without a national health care system with a single payer, paid for by a Medicare tax by all, the United States is at jeopardy of keeping its strength. Because a sick people, is a non productive people, and a non productive people do not work and contribute....
Who is the "United States"?
Who are "The People"?
Who are the "States"?
The Constitution (without amendments) has 54 (I believe) uses of the term "United States" and not one of them is a reference to "the people".
You're wrong, and your argument is less than grammar school quality.
Eventually, the ACA will be turned into a Single Payer System. It's just gonna take time.
Curious, do you think any Democrat will run on that as an issue in the upcoming Presidential
election. You know, actually come out and say, I want to have a single payer system now.
And if so, who will that be?
The federalist papers are not the constitution. Although important in our history, they were essays to help promote the ratifying of the Constitution by others. According to historian Richard B. Morris, they are an "incomparable exposition of the Constitution".
The Federalist papers are not the constitution, but the purpose of the Federalist papers was to explain the constitution for the purpose of convincing "the people" to ratify it. Basically, the federalist papers were the the equivalent of "constitutional advertisements". The people who voted to ratify the constitution, were ratifying the constitution on the basis that what James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were saying in the Federalist papers about the constitution was actually the truth.
Basically, without the Federalist papers, the constitution never would have been ratified to begin with. In that sense, the people who ratified the Constitution did so on the basis that the interpretations of the Constitution that are espoused in the Federalist papers were the proper explanations/interpretations of the Constitution.
It doesn't seem proper for James Madison to tell people before they ratified the Constitution that it means one thing, and then as soon as the Constitution is ratified, he turns around and says it means something else. That would be "false advertising", or more specifically, "fraud".
If you continue with your position on the constitution; You would have to be saying that Alexander Hamilton and James Madison(among many other framers/founders) committed fraud against the American people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin
Without a national health care system with a single payer, paid for by a Medicare tax by all, the United States is at jeopardy of keeping its strength. Because a sick people, is a non productive people, and a non productive people do not work and contribute....
This is a very common fallacy. There is an assumption that "if the government doesn't do it, it won't get done". In truth, people have been getting healthcare long before the government ever got involved. And people would continue getting healthcare even if government didn't exist. And this is true about everything.
Look at it like this, if there wasn't a law that made murder illegal, does that mean everyone would be murdering people all the time? Or even, without a law protecting people from murder, that there would be no consequences for people who murdered people? It doesn't make any sense.
The government is not the people, the people are the people, and the people are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.
If you want you want to pay extra for health insurance to make sure others can afford it. Why do you need government for that?
Curious, do you think any Democrat will run on that as an issue in the upcoming Presidential
election. You know, actually come out and say, I want to have a single payer system now.
And if so, who will that be?
No, liberals believe in deception to achieve their ends.
The Constitution (without amendments) has 54 (I believe) uses of the term "United States" and not one of them is a reference to "the people".
You're wrong, and your argument is less than grammar school quality.
No. You are wrong
It was the exact argument used for Medicare. Except the flaw there, is it did not
apply to everyone.
Any reasonable interpretation of the taxation for general welfare, gives power to set up programs that provide for "general welfare" of the citizens of the United States. Congress has the power to collect taxes to promote the general welfare. They don't just collect money, they spend it on a "program".
Under section 8, clause 18, the power to pass any laws "necessary and proper" to use its powers granted by the constitution.
So I guess everyone in the 1960's in Congress at the time, didn't go past the sixth grade
"THE CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR MEDICARE
Congress designed Medicare to promote the general welfare of the United States. The program's financing mechanisms proceed under the taxing and spending powers, together with the commerce clause. Although some groups have challenged various features of the law, no litigant has challenged the Constitutional basis of the act as a whole."
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.
