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.
You're attempting to use eminent domain as an argument against all taxes. LOL. Good luck with that.
What?
No, they want to tax you and then say it's for a just product. If I die a sudden death and never use any of that service that I was taxed for then it was never justified to tax me in the first place. So all in all they're taxing you for a "possible" use of a product and if you don't pay that tax then you can be fined or go to jail. At least if they take your land they pay you for something you use and already have. If they tax you for gas they tax it at the gas pump and you're using a service. Property taxes, sales tax, income tax, all have a service you use. You may never use your health-care tax. At worst it should be like SS and still pay out to someone like a child or spouse if you never use it but paid into it. Maybe I missed that part of the bill with all the "you're going to jail if you don't pay" rhetoric from Obama and Pelosi.
No, they want to tax you and then say it's for a just product. If I die a sudden death and never use any of that service that I was taxed for then it was never justified to tax me in the first place. So all in all they're taxing you for a "possible" use of a product and if you don't pay that tax then you can be fined or go to jail. At least if they take your land they pay you for something you use and already have. If they tax you for gas they tax it at the gas pump and you're using a service. Property taxes, sales tax, income tax, all have a service you use. You may never use your health-care tax. At worst it should be like SS and still pay out to someone like a child or spouse if you never use it but paid into it. Maybe I missed that part of the bill with all the "you're going to jail if you don't pay" rhetoric from Obama and Pelosi.
Yeah, and you pay taxes that pay for roads that you personally never drive on, National Parks you never visit.
Name a product that the government has told you that you have to buy or you get fined and/or you're going to jail, the federal government.
Auto insurance
Home owner's insurance
Even if you own neither, no one in this country can live their whole lives without giving money to the government, or having money given to the government on their behalf: Income tax and/or inheritance tax and/or gift tax and/or death tax
Even if you own neither, no one in this country can live their whole lives without giving money to the government, or having money given to the government on their behalf: Income tax and/or inheritance tax and/or gift tax and/or death tax
I'm dense tonight. Can you please point to me the federal, meaning the federal government, law that requires car and home owners insurance a number or a bill designating such will be fine. Remember each state is not the federal government and as far as I know the only entity requiring home owners insurance is a lender to insure they'll get paid if it goes up in flames, washes away or in some other way becomes inhabitable or unsellable.
My fear is UHC passing and then it never getting all the problems in it fixed. In 5-10 years a lot of people won't even realize how we got to that point....they won't go back and look at this bill to find a solution to the problems it's caused.
I can agree that a Universal plan that is not properly structured, would be a mistake. It would require input from many sources, including even the Heritage Foundation that G.W. found so influential. The problem we ALL face, is massive. For one point of view to be dismissive of the other, serves absolutely no purpose. In Congress we are painfully experiencing the effects of that right now. As a result, we will likely wind up with a much less effective start to the solution. But we will have a start, not a Universal Health plan, as there is no way that could be even remotely structured well as yet, but a start. It's unfortunate for us, that because of the dismissive attitude on both sides, will have this one sided bill. It will cost us a great deal more money, a large number of lives and many more years to get to an effective solution.
I'm dense tonight. Can you please point to me the federal, meaning the federal government, law that requires car and home owners insurance a number or a bill designating such will be fine. Remember each state is not the federal government and as far as I know the only entity requiring home owners insurance is a lender to insure they'll get paid if it goes up in flames, washes away or in some other way becomes inhabitable or unsellable.
You're right, I was mistaken about HO insurance.
Regarding auto insurance, I don't think it matters, in terms of the outcome effect on citizens.
If health insurance were mandated on a state-to-state basis, the problems would remain the same because the health insurance companies would remain near-monopolies. What needs to change is the fact that Blue Cross Blue Shield, for example, can do business under a different name in every state, and there is no interstate competition.
For one point of view to be dismissive of the other, serves absolutely no purpose. ...It's unfortunate for us, that because of the dismissive attitude on both sides, will have this one sided bill.
Hear hear! The only thing the Republicans are really fighting against is that the Dems have a more acceptable (so far) plan than the plan the Repubs came up with.
They should ALL have input. But there's so much personal and political vitriol, I don't think the real goals of reform were ever in their sights.
Regarding auto insurance, I don't think it matters, in terms of the outcome effect on citizens.
If health insurance were mandated on a state-to-state basis, the problems would remain the same because the health insurance companies would remain near-monopolies. What needs to change is the fact that Blue Cross Blue Shield, for example, can do business under a different name in every state, and there is no interstate competition.
You're missing my point. The federal government mandating health insurance is unprecedented for a reason, It's unconstitutional. Of course that won't stop them from doing it... They'll have to wait till someone is actually in jail or being fined before they can bring the constitutionality of this decision into court. By then it will have changed millions of peoples lives and choices when it'll be found unconstitutional.
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.
