Idyllic

That's the general welfare of the U.S. as a nation not the welfare of the people who live in it, that would be life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Funny but that's exactly what this bill is doing to our nation right now, it is threatening the general welfare of these great United States.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

rahl

How are the two any different? A nation is made up of the people in it, otherwise it's just a pile of rocks.

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

dksuddeth

there is zero requirement, no requirement at all, associated with the exercise of any right, including the ownership of a firearm. please show me other wise if you have it.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

rahl

Must be 18 to purchase a firearm, 21 for a handgun. For starters.

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

Derwood

I'm trying to parse the "unambiguous" language of the amendment, which has already proven to be misleading and unclear (regulated meaning trained to start).

So, if the right is for a WELL REGULATED/TRAINED MILITIA, then you have no problem with rules against the owning of firearms for someone who is NOT WELL REGULATED, correct?

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

dksuddeth

where, in the entirety of the consitution, is that age requirement spelled out in document?

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Derwood

Well Regulated

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

Idyllic

Your being facetious now, right? Because I’m having a hard time understanding how someone could compare the sovereignty of a nation and those who work in an attempt to keep it that way with a pile of rocks if we don’t accept mandated health care.

I’m not interested in becoming a welfare nation.

The only thing I am obligated to provide for is the common defense, I am blessed with the liberty won by our founding fathers, which is being threatened today by somebody trying to force me to provide for somebody else’s pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, this does not make me happy at all.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

Derwood

so you see no benefit to having you fellow citizens be as healthy as possible (without going bankrupt)?

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

rahl

what he said

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

dksuddeth

that, in no way, establishes an age.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

rahl

what about highways, police, fire dept, clean water? Who provides those?

---------- Post added at 10:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:11 PM ----------

So you think it's ok for a 4 year old to walk around strapped?

And your right it doesn't establish an age, that's why people have to interprit the constitution. The "infallable founding fathers" didn't think of that one.

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

Derwood

"If a well regulated militia be the most natural defence of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security....A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss." - Alexander Hamilton

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

dksuddeth

PEOPLE, not the courts, which you liberals love to subvert to. and the DID think of that. they expected parents to be responsible.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Derwood

which article of the constitution talks about parental responsibility?

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

dksuddeth

Hamilton lost that argument, if you choose to read the rest of the documents.

---------- Post added at 09:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 PM ----------

it doesn't, because the constitution has no authority over parental responsibility.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Idyllic

I see great benefit for my fellow citsizens to be healthy, and if I have to pay for them to be healthy then I should be able to tell them what they should and should not do to obtain and sustain said health because if they do not follow my health mandates then they will cost me more.

So yes, if you want me to pay for you to be healthy, then stop smoking, eat your vegetables, exercise daily, get at least 6 to 8 hours of sleep, always wear a condom, etc. and if you get sick because you didn't follow my paid for mandate, then I will mandate that you get your own insurance and pay for your health yourself.

The only person I am responsible for insuring their health care is my sons and myself, any one else should be MY DECISION, because then I could have some control over their lifestyle, be prepared, that will come next, mandates on lifestyles that cost the government to much. Don't you all see where this is going.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

Derwood

since "well regulated" isn't defined, I'm doing my best to find what it means. pardon me for not simply trusting whatever you feel like telling me

you just said parental responsibility was implied (re: 4 year olds having guns). I'm asking you to cite this.

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

rahl

sometimes parents aren't responsible, that's why those things need to be regulated.

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

Derwood

how much have you personally paid for other people's health insurance? how much of your own health care has been subsidized in one form or another. why should you personally have a say in how those using subsidies should have to live their lives (when you're so vehemently against the government telling you how to live yours)?

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

rahl

So does Canada, the UK, France, all these places have a dicatorship on what their citizens are/aren't allowed to do based on their healthcare systems?

__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

Idyllic

Precisely my point, other than what I pay in taxes now, that support the myriad institutions of our nation, supported by the government, that I already pay taxes for.... Why now do I have to pay more "taxes" called a health care reform bill.

I do have a say as to where this money goes, it's called voting, I would love for us all to get to vote on this bill. Hell, even the House didn't get to vote on this Bill.

This isn't subsidies this is me being FORCED to pay for insurance, and yours if you don't work, and then paying for your medical care, which I already do in taxes if you don't work, it's called welfare, and it does already exist.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

Derwood

cite the part of the bill that states that those who can afford health insurance will be paying additional taxes to pay for those who can't

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

dc_dux

Actually, the House will be voting on the bill.

And, no. You are not being forced to pay for insurance; you are being taxed, at nowhere near the cost of insurance, if you dont.

Well within the taxing powers of Congress for the general welfare of the "people".

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Idyllic

Don't put words in my text that don't existence and then expect me to explain. I didn't say we would pay More if you don't pay, but you can be assured that the Health Care Reform Bill insurance premiums we will be forced to pay will take into account those they estimate will not be able to pay and we will pick up that tab, one way or another, be it taxes or the premiums, we will be forced to pay it or the nation will go broke trying to pay for the health care.

Somebodies got to pay for this, the backs of a already burdened working class will just become more broken as they struggle with this new reduction of their income. This is not the solution for Health care. Raise taxes on smokers, on drinkers, on high fat food restaurants, there are a myriad of places and taxes that could pay this and not force every single person to have to pay for health insurance, this is just ridiculous.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

dc_dux

The recent $1 increase in cigarette taxes pays for SCHIPs that now covers nearly 8 million kids of working class families. IMO, it was a great way to pay for it.

And again.....no one is forced to pay for health insurance...those who dont (maybe 5% of the population) will be taxed a small amount if they dont. Hardly the same thing.

Or just add a small excise tax to the the top 1-2 % of taxpayers; hell, they dont pay FICA taxes on most of their income like the rest of us.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

dippin

The funny thing about these "MY MONEY" rants is that the US has been in deficit for a very long time now, and the main culprits are the military, medicare and social security. In other words, the people outraged at paying other people's welfare checks, etc. aren't actually even paying for the things that they will themselves use (military, ss, medicare).

filtherton

Another interesting thing is that the people who seem most worried about the government forcing them to spend their money to subsidize the health of others already do so via their private insurance.

If you don't want to spend your hard earned cash subsidizing the health of other people, then you shouldn't have insurance at all.

And holy shit, if only the world were so simple and fair that no one ever had to do anything they didn't want to do! I came to terms with the fact that my tax dollars were being used to pay for things that I didn't want them to pay for (in addition to things that I did want them to pay for) when I was an adolescent. The "tax dollars getting spent on things some folks don't like" cat has been out of the bag for a while. It's actually how things have to be.

dogzilla

A (reduced in size) military is a necessity. Social Security and Medicare are both poorly run government programs that I was given no choice in participating in either. If I had taken the same approximately 12% of my pay that the government has taken, and invested it in my 401K, I would have done at least as well as the government has. And I would have the actual money, not a stack of IOUs.

SecretMethod70

Thing is, dogzilla, you're in a conservative minority if you actually want to cut social security, medicare, etc (not to mention an extreme minority among Americans in general)...



Further demonstrating that self-described conservatives not only don't know what to cut, but also lack an understanding of where their money goes, the only item that even comes close to a majority (foreign aid, with 48%) only comprises 1% of the budget!

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

dogzilla

Unfortunately, Social Security is not likely to go away since the government has tied up so much of the people's money in it. I wouldn't want Social Security to be shut down either, unless I had some way to get my money out of it first.

Unfortunately, Social Security is also going to be broke sometime around 2037.

So now we have a government which can't run an efficient Social Security program, and can't run an efficient Medicare program that wants to fund another program to the tune of some $900 billion over the next decade. I don't believe for a second that this program will be run any better, nor do I believe that Obama isn't going to find more ways to raise working people's taxes (A mandatory insurance premium required by the government is a tax)

---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 AM ----------

I used to not care about the taxes on smokers, but now not so much. Smokers have become just another politically acceptable source of increased tax revenues.

Now there is discussion about imposing taxes on 'fat foods' where this has become another politically correct way to raise taxes on people. I happen to like non-diet soda and pizza. I do not like the taste of artificial sweeteners, and at least one gives me headaches. I also have never been overweight. Granted, the tax on soda isn't going to break my budget, nor is it likely to make me give it up, but I resent the government 'punishing' me for something I didn't do.

If Obama wants to impose a national health care plan, let him do it without sticking me with the bill.

Derwood

I find it interesting that everyone who is "sure" that Obama will raise taxes on the middle class ignores the fact that last year's Stimulus Bill had the largest middle class tax cut in history

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

dc_dux

It is amusing how most of those bitching about Obama "tax and spend" dont even know they got that tax cut last year or that tax cuts, not spending, was the largest single component of the stimulus bill.

Those same people keep on insisting that the health reform bill imposes a mandatory insurance premium on the working class...and it does is not.

There is a small tax for those who choose not to purchase insurance.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

pan6467

No, they'll just tax soda, cigarettes, alcohol, potato chips, fast food and so on and claim that it is for the "health of the people".

Sorry. Personal choices and freedoms. I truly do not understand ANYONE in the US that is ok with taxing items so much they become prohibitive to the lower classes. What? It's ok for the rich to eat, smoke and drink whatever they wish but the poor can't? Something is fucked up with the thinking of the far left, when they are ok with that and find reasons why taking away freedoms isn't really that bad, besides they are privileges and fuck what the people want, "we know what's best for you."

It's all about POWER over people and not advancing personal liberties. "Hell, personal liberties are over rated" "people are ignorant" and so on. All about the POWER.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Derwood

you have the choice to not eat fast food or not smoke

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

filtherton

I don't think it's about power. It's more about basic economics. If these activities become more expensive, fewer people will engage in them. If fewer people engage in these unhealthy activities there will be a smaller drain on our health care system and an overall improvement of the well being of the nation.

Now, it could be argued that it isn't the government's place to promote the general welfare in such a way. It could also be argued that people will always act in unhealthy ways and that it is futile to try to tax unhealthy behaviors into oblivion. Either of these arguments is more persuasive and realistic than decrying some sort of power mad beauracracy.

It isn't about rich or poor, it's about shifting the average in the direction of "more healthy."

Derwood

actually, it makes perfect sense to tax unhealthy behavior in order to subsidize the effects of said behavior

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

Idyllic

Culmination of thoughts reviewed, personal observations and opinions, but why I feel the way I do about this bill.

Here’s a small example of what this change you’ll be paying for will buy you and your neighbors, enjoy;


But wait, there’s more, how about what a Dr. who already has knowledge of government regulated healthcare has to say about this bill;

Today, if this bill passes, will be the end of American Exceptionalism. We will watch as our nation slowly follows along the lines of old world thinking and eventually end as a nation of underachievers tired of working for “The Man.”

Believe what you will, this has been tried and tried again by previous presidents and has not passed because it is not based on American Constitutional Values. If this is what they really want, in this manner, then let the states individually decide to implement it, at least that way I can MOVE to another state that won’t force this bull shit on me.

Here’s a taste of your new neighbors, good luck America, we are going to need a miracle to get us out of this mess, Thanks a lot Obama, Thanks for nothing.


Yes, entitled, that’s how all are children will grow up, entitled to sit on their asses and be taken care. Way to go America. Way to instill that American way of work for success, create your own future, become something more that average.

Why should they work hard when average will just be so much easier and less complicated. When the necessity to fight for survival, or even achievement, past the mundane is removed, we will all be like sheep, easily controlled.

Eventually, even the people who do want success and struggle so hard for the reward of their efforts to achieve success realize that most of their hard fought for income goes to supporting the average, people will stop trying. Excellence in America will become a rare commodity, you can just start calling us The United Kingdom of the American States, under the thumb of our master, the new monarchy of Big Government. Of the Big’ Brother’

But at least Obama will go down in history, as the 1st Black/white President, and the man who changed it all. I can barely contain my excitement.

Potus, mabus, alpha omega. Just an observation, not that crazy, yet, I'll save that till were all bleating.

__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

roachboy

after reading whatever that is above, i went outside on my deck and looked up and sure enough the sky was not falling. things continued to unfold. it was amazing.

i find it incomprehensible that anyone can seriously argue that the current discriminatory medical service delivery system is desirable as an ethical matter not to mention a political one.
i would have preferred something stronger something that went further.
i would have preferred a more structured and coherent debate about the underlying ethical and political problems that attend the american medical system, which is a form of routinized class warfare.
i would have preferred the right had been marginalized earlier and more decisively.

but things are as they are. i have not seen a single coherent critique from a conservative position.

i just went out onto my deck again. the sky continues not to fall.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

filtherton

Perhaps you'd feel differently if you chose objective, non conjecture-based sources of information upon which to base your perspective.

Really. Your first link is someone asking to see the actual bill so they can compare it with a shockingly specific list of things supposedly in the bill. If they haven't seen the bill, where did they get this list? I imagine it was pulled out of someone's ass. And yet you present it like it's fact.

Your quote from Workforce Management is full of innuendo, doesn't really link anything in Mass to anything that will happen under the current bill. Though it does say "Look at how things are bad for some folks in Mass. It is possible that things might be bad for similar people on a national scale if the bill currently under consideration passes." It also says that some people are opting to work less to qualify for benefits. Odd that it doesn't give any sort of number to quantify how many people are actually working less to qualify for benefits.

And the last part about the lady who has to work multiple jobs is occuring everywhere around the country right now. That means that it isn't an "example of what this change you’ll be paying for will buy you and your neighbors." It's actually an example of the status quo.

And, an op-ed from one doctor doesn't mean anything. Especially one who relies so heavily on meaningless anecdotal evidence like "I believe most physicians – all those I have spoken with – oppose a new government health plan because, if designed like existing government plans, we likely have many restrictions, rationing of care and denial of coverage for studies and other support physicians need to provide first-rate care."

"All the physicians" he has spoken with isn't really a reliable source of evidence. What if he's only spoken to three physicians? Especially when "all the physicians'" criticisms of a government plan are true of the status quo.

Last I heard, the entire American Medical Association was on board with this thing, and I bet they've spoken with more physicians than Kevin Kennedy.

I mean, it's clear that you're going to believe whatever you want to believe based on whatever the phrases "American Exceptionalism" and "American Constitutional Values" mean to you and whatever random assortment of rhetorical flourishes appeal to your preconceived notions.

I have no illusions that the current bill will solve all our problems. I am fairly certain that it won't destroy our nation, though I will admit that if the bill passes, I expect there will by a great deal of hysterics from the opposition and it wouldn't surprise me a bit if some of more unhinged resort to violence of some sort.