Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:20 PM
 
971 posts, read 1,295,601 times
Reputation: 384

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent View Post
For mandates I am inclined to agree though the government has been successful in stopping people from buying things. The only reason it works with Auto insurance is due to state laws. It would be interesting to see what legal back flips the government will try to get the interstate commerce clause to cover this and whether it will be successful.
Mandatory car insurance is a different issue. First, driving is a privilege. Second, one can easily and legally chose not to have car insurance by not owning a car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,795,824 times
Reputation: 3550
As much as I admire Bernie Sanders, many of the progressives knew single-payer didn't have a chance.

I personally hope to see it in my lifetime and I know a lot of people my age are for it. Too bad Congress it out of touch with the people. I can't wait for the people of my generation to take over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:26 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,676,690 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent View Post
For mandates I am inclined to agree though the government has been successful in stopping people from buying things. The only reason it works with Auto insurance is due to state laws. It would be interesting to see what legal back flips the government will try to get the interstate commerce clause to cover this and whether it will be successful.


Driving a vehicle on public roads is a privilege. that is why they can force that. You don't have to drive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:28 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,676,690 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverkid View Post
Mandatory car insurance is a different issue. First, driving is a privilege. Second, one can easily and legally chose not to have car insurance by not owning a car.

I didn't see your post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:30 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,676,690 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleLove08 View Post
As much as I admire Bernie Sanders, many of the progressives knew single-payer didn't have a chance.

I personally hope to see it in my lifetime and I know a lot of people my age are for it. Too bad Congress it out of touch with the people. I can't wait for the people of my generation to take over.

All Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacist, etc.... would have to be Government employees. For it not to be unconstitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,449 posts, read 14,475,331 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverkid View Post
They are two very different things. Do you conflate them out of ignorance or dishonesty?
Both I would imagine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,795,824 times
Reputation: 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
All Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacist, etc.... would have to be Government employees. For it not to be unconstitutional.
How so?

There is nothing unconstitutional with saying health insurance companies can't sell certain products.

Basically it would be illegal for health insurance companies to sell coverage that the national health care system offers.

H.R. 676 FAQ | John Conyers for Congress (http://www.johnconyers.com/hr676faq - broken link)

Last I checked, it isn't unconstitutional for the government to tell certain businesses they can't sell certain things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:45 PM
 
971 posts, read 1,295,601 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
All Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacist, etc.... would have to be Government employees. For it not to be unconstitutional.
How so? I don't see it that way at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 05:50 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,400,054 times
Reputation: 3086
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverkid View Post
Mandatory car insurance is a different issue. First, driving is a privilege. Second, one can easily and legally chose not to have car insurance by not owning a car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Driving a vehicle on public roads is a privilege. that is why they can force that. You don't have to drive.
I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying. The federal government does not force you to buy auto insurance the states do. The idea of federally mandated insurance, other then things that are worked into taxes like social security and medicare, is to the best of my knowledge untested constitutionally and as such it's constitutionality is questionable. Now it is clear that the federal government can constitutionally prevent you from buying thing like certain firearms, and drugs due to court rulings in the 1930s or earlier, but I am not certain if the federal government can force you to buy things constitutionally other then forcing people to pay taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2009, 06:30 PM
 
10,719 posts, read 20,309,308 times
Reputation: 10021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny-Days90 View Post
So this will be yet another failure of Obama's?????
They will pass some type of health care reform even if there is little change from the status quo. Obama doesn't care. He just wants to get re-elected. Whatever reform passes, Obama will support and take credit for so he is going to cite any reform as a "win" for him.

It's a glass is half empty half full thing. You could argue it's a partial victory or a partial failure. He didn't get the public option or the single payer aspect that he wanted. However, he did achieve some reforms that will increase access (and increase the deficit and taxes).

Personally, I was okay with reform, I just didn't want the public option and a complete government takeover of health care. That is not going to happen now. Yes, we will pay more in taxes and add to the federal deficit but the reality is it will inrease access to healthcare for many people although not as many people as Obama suggested. And it will keep premiums from escalating at the ridiculous level it had been going at. And we really owe the people of the United States and grass roots displays at the Town Halls for making this happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top