It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump calls for repealing Obamacare without replacing it

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: MOMof3
And in any event, the phrase, "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," are noted unalienable rights, but in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Only one of those is a governing document of the United States of America.



Thank you SO much for pointing that out. All over this site people refer to the Declaration of Independence as if it had legal weight and conflate it with the Constitution, not even realizing their mistake. Maybe this will clarify for some.




posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3
The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness simply means that no one can take those things from you. You can't just kill me--that would be taking away my right to life. But you don't have to buy my groceries and provide me with shelter so that I can HAVE life either. See the difference? The same is true of liberty--you can't imprison me or restrict my travel, but you don't have to provide me with a car an gas money so that I can travel where I want, either. And as for pursuit of happiness--you can't ban me from the movies, or from seeking the job I want, but you don't have to buy my movie ticket or hire me for the job either. It's the difference between "right" and "entitlement."



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: riiver
a reply to: MOMof3
The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness simply means that no one can take those things from you. You can't just kill me--that would be taking away my right to life. But you don't have to buy my groceries and provide me with shelter so that I can HAVE life either. See the difference? The same is true of liberty--you can't imprison me or restrict my travel, but you don't have to provide me with a car an gas money so that I can travel where I want, either. And as for pursuit of happiness--you can't ban me from the movies, or from seeking the job I want, but you don't have to buy my movie ticket or hire me for the job either. It's the difference between "right" and "entitlement."



So when did all of the entitlement begin and whose idea was it?

The entitlement is imo a trojan horse...

Once everyone is forced to become dependent on the government, it would be an easy thing to enslave those dependent on the system. It's like an animal trap... put a carrot in and once the rabbit has the carrot pull the string locking the rabbit inside. The rabbit is then at the mercy of the trapper.

Government is no different.
edit on 30-6-2017 by AkontaDarkpaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

Those who receive money from a system they actively paid into, such as Social Security and Medicare, aren't on "entitlements" in my opinion. They're harvesting the fruits of their labors.

The rest of it, no. That includes Medicaid, for what it's worth... I don't believe the government should be in the business of charity or hand ups or outs. Charity starts and stops with individuals. Far less corruption and far less opportunity for glad handing when it doesn't go through people who are dependent on votes to retain their positions.


So you're suggesting scrapping all of the "goodwill" work of the government?

That's some massive cutbacks right there...

How much money does the gov dole out for all the programs?

Perhaps they should be scrapped. As far as i understand it, they were originally created in order to jumpstart a dying economy and since then have become a burden on everyone. Remove all government funded programs and reevaluate what's really "good" and what's only good on the surface but is really just a turd dipped in gold.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye


Everything subsidized by government becomes more expensive.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ares2493

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I am at the end and my husband has cancer and another disease after 40 years of pouring concrete. I know about life. And I want better for the future.

Taking away medical coverage to give to the rich is wrong is my point. They will be hated more than they are now. And its rich people deciding our future, Trump said he didn't trust poor people. Goes both ways.





If your husband worked all his life paid taxes he deserves it. I have a problem with putting perfectly healthy leeches of society on Medicaid which should only be reserved for retirees. Ps Medicaid isn't funded by the rich but by everyone paying taxes.


I worked for many years and now i'm temporarily disabled. I paid into medicaid or medicare but i can't work right now but i'm far too young to retire. In your opinion (and i am interested to know) would i be a leech or would i be "rightfully" recouping the fruits of my labor while working on getting my health back?
edit on 30-6-2017 by AkontaDarkpaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

The federal government has only 3 mandates:
1. Defend the nation against foreign enemies
2. Ensure the sanctity of interstate commerce
3. Uphold the Constitution.
None of those 3 involve welfare or wealth redistribution.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Premiums and deductibles are so high that people may as well not be insured in the first place.

Nuke it from orbit. Full repeal. What we had before was not perfect but was better than the dung heap we have now.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xeven
a reply to: allsee4eye


Everything subsidized by government becomes more expensive.


Everything that interacts with government, from soda to cars, is more expensive due to government red-tape and regulations.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

The federal government has only 3 mandates:
1. Defend the nation against foreign enemies
2. Ensure the sanctity of interstate commerce
3. Uphold the Constitution.
None of those 3 involve welfare or wealth redistribution.


Then why aren't we screaming for all of the welfare/wealth redistribution to be repealed?

Our founding fathers WANTED a smaller government so when are we going to turn back the government clock?

There's more of us than there are of those in power so of we really wanted to make a change... it's feasible. The question is how many of us would actually support that drastic of a change?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: AkontaDarkpaw

originally posted by: Ares2493

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I am at the end and my husband has cancer and another disease after 40 years of pouring concrete. I know about life. And I want better for the future.

Taking away medical coverage to give to the rich is wrong is my point. They will be hated more than they are now. And its rich people deciding our future, Trump said he didn't trust poor people. Goes both ways.





If your husband worked all his life paid taxes he deserves it. I have a problem with putting perfectly healthy leeches of society on Medicaid which should only be reserved for retirees. Ps Medicaid isn't funded by the rich but by everyone paying taxes.


I worked for many years and now i'm temporarily disabled. I paid into medicaid or medicare but i can't work right now but i'm far too young to retire. In your opinion (and i am interested to know) would i be a leech or would i be "rightfully" recouping the fruits of my labor while working on getting my health back?


Because you worked and paid into the Medicare trust fund, you're rightly entitled to every benefit that the Medicare disability program offers. FULL benefits if enough credit-hours were accumulated...which is not hard to do.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: AkontaDarkpaw

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

The federal government has only 3 mandates:
1. Defend the nation against foreign enemies
2. Ensure the sanctity of interstate commerce
3. Uphold the Constitution.
None of those 3 involve welfare or wealth redistribution.


Then why aren't we screaming for all of the welfare/wealth redistribution to be repealed?

Our founding fathers WANTED a smaller government so when are we going to turn back the government clock?

There's more of us than there are of those in power so if we really wanted to make a change... it's feasible. The question is how many of us would actually support that drastic of a change?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw
I think my last sentence up there might have been badly worded. My point was that a lot of people take the idea of a "right" much further than it actually goes. As in, reading "the right to life" as "having what I need for life provided for me" rather than "no one is allowed to deliberately take my life from me."

And I absolutely agree with everything you said. In fact, I think that's exactly where we're at not. ...Look at all the people screaming about their "right" to healthcare.


edit on 30-6-2017 by riiver because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: AkontaDarkpaw

originally posted by: Ares2493

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I am at the end and my husband has cancer and another disease after 40 years of pouring concrete. I know about life. And I want better for the future.

Taking away medical coverage to give to the rich is wrong is my point. They will be hated more than they are now. And its rich people deciding our future, Trump said he didn't trust poor people. Goes both ways.





If your husband worked all his life paid taxes he deserves it. I have a problem with putting perfectly healthy leeches of society on Medicaid which should only be reserved for retirees. Ps Medicaid isn't funded by the rich but by everyone paying taxes.


I worked for many years and now i'm temporarily disabled. I paid into medicaid or medicare but i can't work right now but i'm far too young to retire. In your opinion (and i am interested to know) would i be a leech or would i be "rightfully" recouping the fruits of my labor while working on getting my health back?


Because you worked and paid into the Medicare trust fund, you're rightly entitled to every benefit that the Medicare disability program offers. FULL benefits if enough credit-hours were accumulated...which is not hard to do.


That makes me feel better. I really don't want to be part of the problem!



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw


I've been around for a few years. The only people I know who receive entitlements are 65+ , disabled , mentally ill. You should report the cheaters, if you know any.

You have decided seeking medical care is for the privelege. That's your right. I believe it is a right and important for our national security.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Premiums and deductibles are so high that people may as well not be insured in the first place.

Nuke it from orbit. Full repeal. What we had before was not perfect but was better than the dung heap we have now.




posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Logical . Let it Die on the Vine , then Force the Republicans to Enact it's Replacement Post Haste , or Feel the Wrath of Uninsured American Voters come 2018 .



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Medicaid has expanded to cover the middle class. The middle class don't want to buy that kind of health insurance. Insurance makes money by duping the middle class. Insurance companies hire lots of people. The only way to pay the salaries of their employees is by duping their customers.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Premiums and deductibles are so high that people may as well not be insured in the first place.

Nuke it from orbit. Full repeal. What we had before was not perfect but was better than the dung heap we have now.


35 year old before ObamaCare in Illinois (Income $45,000)
1,500 Deductible...then 100% of all medical costs, including prescriptions paid by Insurance.
Cost $185 a month. And, 25% of that $185 is deducted from taxable income.

35 year old after ObamaCare in Illinois (Income $45,000)
$1,700 Deductible...then you pay 20% of medical costs until you have paid $3,300 out-of-pocket.
Cost $566 a month. No income tax benefits.


REPEAL OBAMACARE and this 35 year old will be very happy! Chances are, he's forgoing health insurance right now, paying the IRS penalty, and praying for ObamaCare to "go the hell away".



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

You were forced to buy health insurance and get fleeced by insurance companies. IMO, Obamacare is unconstitutional.
edit on 30-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join