What If ObamaCare is Found Constitutional
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
InCognition
Active Member
Yup, save some lives at the cost of everyone else. That's no more ethical than the next solution. Then again, what's new in America... the self-entitlement aura perpetuating in this country is truly mind boggling. Enough so to make a retard enter a more pronounced stupor, than the one their currently entangled in.
Unless your paying the doctor's mortgage, student loans, and business bills, no one has the right to health care... not even if the government thinks that they can dictate that everyone does have this right. Especially when the cost comes off the backs of others, even more so than it currently is.
The hilarious thing is the talks going on among people, about inserting this "health care" fantasy into the taxes, and defending it under "welfare", thus trying to somehow circumvent the underlying basis of what this bill amounts to... theft, coercion, and extortion. A tax law isn't a law, nor a tax, if it's premise is unconstitutional theft, and the outright breech of constitutional law foremost... it's just illegal.
I also heard that if imposed, this bill will make it a non-enforceable tax penalty if you decide not to pay. Last time I checked, taxes are very enforceable, because the coppers will come haul you off to tax-prison. This is the coercion aspect that they're blatantly trying to disguise in this bill, by simply stating it's non-enforceable. You will see people locked up for not paying the tax penalty on this, if this thing goes through....
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
relief for the poor is not about entitlement
It is about aggregate demand. Welfare checks don't just go to the poor, the poor spend the money in America. The money trickles up. Hate the system all you want to, but at least understand it. You just sound selfish, like you want the money to trickle up the same as it does, just skip the poorest people.
Labor creates wealth, increasingly, the industries are streamlined, requiring less labor. When an Iphone app takes your job, should you starve?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
tell me about it.
we got psychopathic mooches like you who feel that they should get to enjoy all the benefits of this nation but need not share in any of the costs.
then they talk about watching poor people die as the righteous thing to do.
do mommy and daddy beat you up when they find your awesome micro grows that produce 3 grams of bud over the course of four months? call CPS on them, us taxpayers foot that bill to keep kids like you safe.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Sounds real warm a fuzzy for the people who pay little if any income taxes, wait until they start taking near 50% of your money in state and federal taxes, I'll bet you sing a different tune.
Isn't it so just to be generous with other people's money!
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
I know what you were doing. It's an emotional issue with you, I know. Maybe if you felt a little more confident about yourself, you wouldn't have to run down others.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Who are you talking to?also, you're going to have to change that avatar pretty soon, your savior is getting redistricted and is too unpopular to try to retain his seat.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
not really, i just get a kick out of pointing out chicken little fear mongering from triangle hat wearers like yourself.
my bad, i meant signature pic. your savior is too unpopular to win the newly districted 14th, so he's just quitting and going home to fuck some turtles.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
I know, I know, it's called schizophrenia.
Oh my, how will I ever recover from this vicious attack.
InCognition
Active Member
Relief for the poor is not about entitlement, but that is what is amounts to, especially when the government tries to tell people it's their right to receive health care. You must not know any doctors...
I have a doctor in my family who has to treat people who walk in off the street, and when they leave he gets a check that is 1/4 of what he is due, and takes a loss on providing his service to a patient. He has things to pay for, and when someone is told by the government that it's their right to receive these services, at a resulting loss to the doctor who provided it, that is what amounts to self-entitlement, again... especially when the government tells people it's their right to receive these services.
How you can deem me as selfish, and not come to the realization that one who thinks health-care is a right, is not selfish, is the epitome of hypocrisy. One's belief that they have a right to health care is selfish, and nothing else.
When an Iphone app takes someone's job, that person should find another job, because they just got replaced. The proceeds of that job, then go to the person who figured out how to electronically circumvent the physical job with an electronic device. This is America.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you having paranoid schizophrenia would explain why you think people would get the death penalty for refusing to pay a penalty that carries no civil or criminal penalties.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
because you are a mooch who wants to enjoy the benefits of our nation without sharing in any of the costs.
i mean, you are the definition of selfish mooch. do you even tip?
what am i saying, mommy and daddy pay the tab whenever you go out to eat.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Always the same hyperbole for its own sake. Firstly, we happen to live in a coummunity, this is not a nation of self sufficient individuals and it really never was. We pay now for the health or sickness of others and we pay more than we have to - and. there is nothing you can do about that unless you want to alter our entire culture for the worse.
Secondly, very few go to tax prison for refusing to pay - I know this furthers your narative but it simply isn't true.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Your philosophy stinks of egoism. Did you have nothing else to replace God with when you converted to gnostic atheism and adopted logical positivism? Ayn Rand was a selfish cunt who collected social security. Social Darwinism is not the same as civilization. You describe a human being, and yet you fail to follow his example.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying that to try to preach, I'm an agnostic atheist, it doesn't matter anyway, but what you are describing is such a common load of crap and way of arguing. You write well, except that you are assuming others share your perception of the world. You are seeking to justify entering a market and expanding your wealth with minimal effort, decreasing the value of effort, then berating others who achieve what you seek, all the while ignoring the benefit that we all receive in the form of a more active market. Your family member who heals people at a net cost, well, I just flat out don't believe you. If that is the case, he would be better off working at Starbucks.
InCognition
Active Member
I don't necessarily think, that not having to pay more for the health and sickness of others, would be changing the culture for the worse. I think it would in fact do the exact opposite.
The only way it would change culture for the worse is by causing a horde of people to cry out that "it's not fair". Well it's also not fair to get a service without paying your proper dues. When the government is paying on behalf of an individual, it's also not fair to take that due, off the backs of many others, some of whom wish to not participate in the program entirely. It goes deeper when you get into the government's inability to efficiently regulate such a program as well, which drives costs up even more, all of which are unjust costs to begin with.
Sadly the more a system like this is perpetrated, the higher the ratio of unhealthy and sick people there will be, as they are sparred their lives via the governments coercive agenda. This leads to an exponential rise in costs, thus does not solve the core fallacies of such a system. From a philosophically financial standpoint you could correlate the fallacies of this healthcare mandate, to that of the prison system. It will only lead to an exponential, financial inefficiency at solving a moral issue.
As long as doctors have to buy groceries, shelter, water, pay their tuition loans, and pay for business expenses to do such, no entity will have the justified right in telling people their entitled to that service that the doctors provide. It's more immoral in doing such to a doctor, than it is a doctor's right to deny someone a service.
I was going to mention before, in my above post, the right of the insurance companies to deny someone coverage. They want to make that right null. It ties along the same lines of what's said above. Whenever I hear someone discuss how it's unfair that an insurance company can deny a person coverage for existing conditions, I want to slap them. Unless you own the insurance company, you're taking the financial hits and gains, no entity can tell a company who they must or must not ensure at what cost. It's the company's decision only.
InCognition
Active Member
And your apparent philosophy stinks of self-entitlement. Why you're bringing spiritual/religious garbage up, I have no idea. If you really want to know I'm Agnostic (not atheist). What bearing does that have on this though?
I describe a human being but I don't follow his example? Not really too sure on what you mean. I do follow a human being who tries my best to logically view both sides of the fence in regards to any subject.
When you compare a "right" to health insurance you also have to logically view the doctor's position as a human being, as well as the human being who thinks it's their "right" to be serviced.
The doctor who has his own set of bills to pay in order to live, must not be shorted on his self-set rates, due to another entity or person obligating him to accept less for the same service, especially if the lesser compensation results in a net-loss for the doctor. Would you go to work to have your bank account debited instead of credited? No you wouldn't.
The fact that any one person, can possibly think it's their right to show up in a doctors office, to receive care, potentially against a doctor's will, and/or causing a net-loss to the doctor financially, is ridiculous. People can argue for the morality of health care all they want. The fact is, when an individual thinks it's their right to receive any service against another human being's will, it's more immoral than just leaving that "self-entitled" person by the wayside. It's harsh and people can argue that, but again, it's also harsh to obligate a human being in performing a service they may not wish to perform for any reason, especially financially.
What's more harsh or immoral? Killing the slave master, or the slave master enslaving their slaves?
What more harsh or immoral? Letting a patient die who thinks they are entitled to a service, or making the doctor take a loss and/or provide a service against his will to that patient? Same general analogy.
Of course there are many fundamentals you get into with healthcare, I'm just making a very general analogy.
InCognition
Active Member
If you don't believe me regarding the doctor issue, that's fine, but it doesn't mean you're correct. It just further proves my point that you don't know any doctors personally.
The doctor in my family continually has taken net-losses on people who just walk into his facility, of whom he cannot decline to service them. Believe it or not, this is what happens. Is it hard to believe that the same immorality is happening to the doctors as it is the patients?
I'm not seeking to justify anything.... In fact the only thing is seek is pummeling with those who justify immorality with immorality. Unfortunately those who think that justifying immorality with immorality, can't or refuse to logically view both sides of the fence in regards to most subjects.
JustAnotherHead
New Member
Invite liberals over for dinner, add Cyanide to recipe. Give out 2nds. Laugh.