Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Healthcare question

profile picture
SacAttack
Posts: 168 - Karma: 10
yo so im all for heathcare, but say i had some sort of cancer that cost a million dollars to treat.

Instead of getting the million dollar procedure,  could i ask the government to buy me a bugatti veyron instead?

Like think about it. It shouldnt make any difference. I could bomb around in my Veyron for a few years before the cancer got me.

Im not even joking...thats whats funny
Mar 24 2010 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
what? youve lost me.

there are limitation on the government. thats the very essence of our Constitution.

however under the guise of interstate commerce the federal government has gotten its hands into any number of things I do not think it should be involved in.
Mar 29 2010 8:16PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
Word. And I agree, I'm kinda confused where the tax dollars came into play? Your last post was saying how you think it is constitutional for the government to force everyone to buy something? Not sure where the tax dollars came in, not trying to be a dick, just wondering.
Mar 29 2010 8:22PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
By the way that was directed at Jenifa, sorry for the confusion.
Mar 29 2010 8:23PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
no seriously. please, some literature. because honestly, as far as i'm concerned, your constitution was set in place in order to allow your government to better the lives of the majority. and as far as i can see, the majority wanted obama, his change, his healthcare, and i'm pretty sure, the majority of people don't want you spending the tax dollars you're all paying, that your government has initially lent you, which is why you have an economy, to buy a bugatti instead of your cancer treatment, which the op is a dumb ass for asking, because i'm sure if the government paid your cancer treatment, you wouldn't have the money in your bank account ever.
Mar 29 2010 8:24PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Panda
Posts: 17711 - Karma: 564
The way our government was originally set up was a means that the majority could have their voices heard but the government was still there to protect us from ourselves.


And holy run on sentence Batman!
Mar 29 2010 8:29PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
Yup, you're not that familiar with the Constitution or how the country was set up and how it was supposed to run. SkiMinessota and myself are not talking about majority vs. minority in terms of people voting here, we are talking about the constitutionality of a measure like this being passed. It doesn't matter if the majority of people want something if it is completely unconstitutional. The Founding Fathers wanted a very limited government so as to allow for peoples freedom. The government forcing its citizens to purchase a product or service, in this case health care, is completely unconstitutional.

And I'm very confused as to what you are saying in regards to tax dollars and the government lending us money in the form of taxes? Please explain.
Mar 29 2010 8:36PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
read what mr panda wrote.
Mar 29 2010 8:40PM
0 0
profile picture
MitchPee
Posts: 8871 - Karma: 1,509
I think the interpretation of the constitution and founding fathers you guys have is quite funny. You do know that mostly everything is left ambiguous in it for a reason right? There are obviously certain ideals that are important but it's purely laughable that people think it is a viable mean of how we should STRICTLY structure a national assembly today.

We as Americans should honor our history, but at the same time learn from it. That's something this country is really, really bad at. Chill out, they are just arbitrary lines which I'm sure will change eventually like all else has.
Mar 29 2010 8:42PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
I understand that, but it doesn't take away my point that government forcing us to buy health care is unconstitutional.
Mar 29 2010 8:42PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
they're not forcing you to do shit if millions of americans are saying, yes mr government, i want healthcare, it's my right as an american.
Mar 29 2010 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
i want you to point me, directly, to the part of the constitution this bill violates.
Mar 29 2010 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Squid.
Posts: 1904 - Karma: 23
tenth ammendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Mar 29 2010 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Tasche
Posts: 5422 - Karma: 99
I am all for you buying a super car instead of saving your life. I think that should be a definite option, it would do wonders for the American gene pool, not to mention the economy. Although you wouldn't last very long without treatment, cancer is a horrible disease and would put you in such pain that not even the thrill of driving a super car could ease it.
Mar 29 2010 8:46PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
I would not have much of a problem if it was simply an option. But people should not be fined or jailed if they choose not to have health insurance. Yes, that is in the bill.
Mar 29 2010 8:47PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
"The Tenth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to further define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. The amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. These powers include the power to declare war, to collect taxes, to regulate interstate business activities and others that are listed in the articles.

Any power not listed, says the Tenth Amendment, is left to the states or the people. Although the Tenth Amendment does not specify what these “powers” may be, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that laws affecting family relations (such as marriage, divorce, and adoption), commerce that occurs within a state’s own borders, and local law enforcement activities, are among those specifically reserved to the states or the people."

"For example, nowhere in the federal Constitution is Congress given authority to regulate local matters concerning the health, safety, and morality of state residents. Known as police powers, such authority is reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment. Conversely, no state may enter into a treaty with a foreign government because such agreements are prohibited by the plain language of Article I to the Constitution."
Mar 29 2010 8:55PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
So doesn't that just prove the point that the states/people should have the right to choose and that it shouldn't be mandated by the federal government?
Mar 29 2010 9:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Squid.
Posts: 1904 - Karma: 23
so? where does it say anything about healthcare?
Mar 29 2010 9:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
i think her point, though incredibly poorly made (as usual i might add), was that its a tax. one can choose not to have healthcare, they just face taxes then.
Mar 29 2010 9:03PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
from what i can see, they can still make you pay taxes, but your state doesn't have to run their health system the same as the next, and frankly, all i see is the tenth amendment being about state sovereignty as far as laws are concerned.
Mar 29 2010 9:04PM
0 0
profile picture
triebby
Posts: 8670 - Karma: 2,190
Right, but then it's not really a choice. I mean yes you can opt out, but then you will be punished for it. That doesn't sound right to me.
Mar 29 2010 9:05PM
0 0
profile picture
BrewskiJr
Posts: 5738 - Karma: 1,478
Click for larger image
Mar 29 2010 9:07PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
well, denying your neighbor the right to an education or healthcare doesn't seem right to me. but that's why you can vote. not everyone will agree, but majority rules.
Mar 29 2010 9:07PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
id also like to ask then. do you suggest that we eliminate medicare and medicaid? and why were they not also struck down due to unconstitutionality?

i have great respect for the constitution, but the fact of the matter is it was written a long time ago. a time when women had no rights, blacks were still 3/5ths of a white person, etc. while it certainly holds weight, society has changed greatly since then. health insurance as we know it today was not even a concept when the constitution was written, so it would be naive to expect the founding fathers to have foreseen its invention.
Mar 29 2010 9:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
this metaphor is overused, but. you are required to buy car insurance if you drive, since if you drive and crash without car insurance you are a drain on the rest of society

now, you cannot really choose to live (well you can but not the point). however if you are alive and crash yourself without insurance, you are again, a drain on the rest of society. you must be treated, regardless of whether you are insured, so it comes from the taxpayers pocket.
Mar 29 2010 9:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
you suck at making a point.
Mar 29 2010 9:11PM
0 0
profile picture
neutralzombie
Posts: 8629 - Karma: 606
k?
Mar 29 2010 9:13PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
here is what i was talking about. HERE is how you amend the Constitution. you dont just deiced that 50% of the country wants something and run with it. that is ASININE

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."


what i also did not touch on, and IMO the way this bill will be deemed constitutional. (dont shit yourself its constitutional, however who knows, maybe the states have a case based on their individual constitutions)

"Section. 8.

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;"


then there is a whole laundry list of powers granted to the federal government. now how this is going rationalized is the "general welfare" which IMO is shoddy. because if the government can do anything for its citizens (IE give them anything) then why list what the government can do after that? the constitution if the founders wanted the government to be able and provide any service could read "the government of the united states can do anything it wants, and give its citizens anything" (you get the point)


however, the Constitution is VERY explicit on what the federal government can, and can not do. the states IMO have free reign to do whatever the hell they want in terms of entitlements, but the federal government IMO MUST slow down.



cliff notes. no i dont think the bill will be overturned on the grounds of it being unconstitutional. there are plenty of things that should have been overturned before this, and this wont blaze a new trail.


Mar 29 2010 10:01PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
o and because you probably wont read, much less fully comprehend what i wrote earlier. /asshole;)

using your rational that if the majority deems something ok. then does that make the enslavement of a race ok just so long as the majority sanctions it?

because it wouldnt be a stretch to rationalize that using your logic.
Mar 29 2010 10:04PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
NO the majority has absolutely no right what so ever to deny rights to the minority.


and just so we dont confuse eachother IMO healthcare is not a right. but we are not debating that in this thread. PM me or create a thread if youde like to know what i think about that.
Mar 29 2010 10:07PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
thats IMO a pretty shaky argument.

yes if you were simply levying a tax for a single payer system. but this legislates that i must purchase a product from a private entity.
Mar 29 2010 10:10PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
true. and i can see where thats coming from (not that i agree), but i just dont see it getting overthrown legally speaking. only time will tell on that one.


at this point there really is not point in complaining about it.

either it will
a) continue on as now legislated
b) get overturned due to unconstitutionality
c) get overturned by republicans come november elections

none of those that we really have control over, with the exception of voting for whoever you think stands for what you believe in.
Mar 29 2010 10:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Squid.
Posts: 1904 - Karma: 23
"general welfare of the united states" as discussed in the constitution pertains to the general welfare of the federal government, an attempt to avoid the problems that arose under the articles of confederation
Mar 29 2010 10:35PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
oh wow. and you addressed the constitutionality thing already. reading FTW lol.
Mar 29 2010 10:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Squid.
Posts: 1904 - Karma: 23
/thread
and
/all threads on healthcare

i wish
Mar 29 2010 10:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Panda
Posts: 17711 - Karma: 564
Stop cutting your 4th grade reading class Ben.
Mar 29 2010 10:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
hahah thats some wishful thinking. dont worry, the idiocy will continue. i dont plan on participating though.
Mar 29 2010 10:40PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
so really just A.
Mar 29 2010 10:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
hahahahaha yeah basically.
Mar 29 2010 10:44PM
0 0
profile picture
skiminnesota
Posts: 9093 - Karma: 429
if i were a betting man yes.

if C i believe it was, were to happen its YEARS down the road. both houses congress and the white house controlled by the GOP years down the road.
Mar 29 2010 10:45PM
0 0
profile picture
babujib
Posts: 5039 - Karma: 104
if youre joking, its not very funny.
if youre serious, your ignorance is astounding.
Mar 29 2010 10:46PM
0 0
profile picture
pmills
Posts: 7162 - Karma: 59
by the time the GOP has the power to repeal, my guess is, the public will be in such strong support of the system that the GOP wont.

If it turns out that it was a horrible mistake, as bad as fox tried to make it seem, you won't have to wait for repubs to take power... but i still don't see how we can go back to where we came from.


Mar 29 2010 10:54PM
0 0
profile picture
H8CH
Posts: 2709 - Karma: 218
From a British point of view- i think you are all better off now. What about child cancers? What about terminally ill kids your age? They didn't ask for that hand, they just want the fairest chance of living over dieing.... Irrespective of their family background. How many of you give a dollar or two to charity? Or leave food / clothes out for homeless folks at Christmas? Why all the objection to helping people because it's done through the government, with the soul intention of bettering the country and all of it's citizens? Fuck me- some Americans are acting like Obama himself broke into their house and pissed on their kids. I live here now, and I'm fucking glad that stupid ass pre existing conditions thing has gone. I don't understand the whole constituion thing so I'm swerving that issue, but seriously- as long as I live here, I'm gonna pay taxes and make sure I have health coverage- whether I need to or not.... It's a no brainer. Health care here is insanely good. You put a man on the moon, surely you can figure out how to save sick kids without congratulating them with a lifetime of debt for the privelage of living? Fuck its insurance companies holding everyone to ransom-not the government in my probably less then understanding of the whole situations opininon... I'm just seeing the laymans point of view. And that shit about taking care of yourself..... For the least healthy, most obese country on the planet that can't be a bad thing right?
Mar 29 2010 11:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Wis_Skier_23
Posts: 2263 - Karma: 245
bugatti veyron or million dollar cancer treatment, either way were FUCKED

Click for larger image

Click for larger image
Mar 29 2010 11:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
except there is no public option, so those are irrelevant. but they sure do make good talking points.
Mar 30 2010 12:17AM
0 0
profile picture
CypressGrove
Posts: 1116 - Karma: 12
for the love of nsg stop bumping this thread
Mar 30 2010 12:18AM
0 0
profile picture
Delphi
Posts: 3748 - Karma: 36
hahaha the parentheses made me LOL!

I can't get through many of her posts, I need a sparknotes for every sentence.
Mar 30 2010 12:19AM
0 0
profile picture
dreadyboy
Posts: 2306 - Karma: 34
cool story. bro.
Mar 30 2010 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
Tasche
Posts: 5422 - Karma: 99
Even if I agree with everything she is saying, I have this urge to argue every point. Something about the writing style... It's the way I imagine a really arrogant 5th grader wording sentences.
Mar 30 2010 10:10AM
0 0
profile picture
shredables
Posts: 647 - Karma: 19
this really made my morning, thanks dude
Mar 30 2010 10:23AM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Panda
Posts: 17711 - Karma: 564
Or just a douchebag?
Mar 30 2010 2:11PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)