Healthcare Ruling: Individual Mandate Ruled CONSTITUTIONAL, entire law upheld.

page: 90
74
<< 87  88  89    91  92 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


So theft is OK, so long as we run the amount of it by you and get that amount approved for the heist?


You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....




posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming


Since you do not understand why past presidents matter I am with you. The moment the next president is a Republican, I am on your side 100%. I am not gonna wanna hear any crap about some past guy named Obama though.


So long as it is not used as an excuse for one thing or another.

Bush's decision for The Patriot Act and such was deplorable.
But, 0bama has compounded all problems 10 fold.

I do understand, very well why they matter.
I am just tired of hearing excuses from 0bama about how nothing he does works to correct the issue. He takes absolutely no responsibility for his actions. Kind of like how he wants people to act. Just go about, doing things, because it feels good, and then blame others when it goes wrong.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming


You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....


War, in defense of, is what the Fed Govt is supposed to do.
Not provide for every want and whim of the Citizen.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Golf66
 


Do you realize what the amount of money it is that you are bitching and moaning about???

Let's say you can sell your property for 600,000....you would pay 3,800 in tax....that is 1.52% of your yearly income...and it is a one time tax.



One does not crap out a 500K for a piece of property....

I bought a piece of property over 20 years ago and paid it off with portions of my military salary (which probably according you would make me rich as well) over all that time I improved it, built on it and made it into my dream. Please tell me again why I should somehow then be grateful give a portion of the profit of my labor and planning to the government so that idiots who can't manage to take care of themselves can have cheap healthcare... No my responsibility to finance failure.

By government decree this size/value of property is ruled something a "rich" person would have therefore subject to a rich person tax. Which is what makes it unfair...that it is not levied on all sales of properties.

Also, I know how much 3800.00 is when I write a 3800.00 check for anything my stomach does a little flip. Incidentally that is about half of the cost of my daughter's braces bill but I should be happy to pay for the health care of others - sure... Because you know they help me with mine.

Because healthcare is a right...I mean it's not governed by normal rules of life that to get it one must then have something of value to the person rendering it. What I hope is that Doctors refuse to take patients unless they are willing to pay the difference between the low ball payouts from these "insurance pools" and what it costs them to render the service. I know I wouldn't sell my product to certain people for more than it costs so that I can provide it to certain others who will only pay 40% of the cost. I sell it at one price - want it buy it, if not leave.


Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I love people who try to profile me...it's cute.


As much as I love it when someone declares me as being too wealthy after working my ass off for going on 30 years now to build my wealth. Usually the young who have yet to achieve anything (OWS etc.) bitching about me making 200k a year is rich. I am in the peak of my earning years, pinnacle of earning power - sorry college grads don't start at 100k a year - in my experience they are worth paying the same as most HS grads since schools accept everyone now and are happy to exchange dollars for degrees with no standards. I personally can't tell the difference.

Also, people who demand I should be happy to be bent over a barrel "because it's for the children, the poor, and the unfortunate" whatever... I give to charities that have good records of actually helping those in need.

The US government has a very poor record of fiscal management. I can imagine what my banker would say if I owed 10x what I made in a year already and spent about 2x my annual income if I asked for a loan....

I'm sure I'd walk out with a collection letter instead…



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

Originally posted by nenothtu
Governing. That is what is best left to governments. Not running charities, governing. That is why they call them "governments", and not "charities".


I cannot believe you think this passes as an answer.
And just what do you believe "governing" entails?


My bad. I keep forgetting that they don't teach civics in school any more, and kids these days don't know what "governing" is any longer.

"Governing" is keeping Knothead A from infringing Knothead B's rights, and providing a remedy when they are unsuccessful at that. As an example, they're there to keep you all from murdering one another, and failing that, meting out punishment to the murdering party. They're there to either prevent or remedy assaults, thefts, and the like, things that one person does which infringe on another.

They are NOT there to facilitate the theft. They are NOT there to prop up private businesses artificially when that business will fail under poor management. They are NOT there to operate charities. They are NOT there to be your mommy, wipe you nose, bandage your knee, or hug you when you fall.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


So theft is OK, so long as we run the amount of it by you and get that amount approved for the heist?


You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.


So the answer is to steal MORE?

No money has been stolen from me to fund a war, but it seems they have plans to steal from me to NOT provide any health care, too. Good luck with that theft - I'll be waiting for the enforcers.



That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....


"We both" and "only I..." WHAT? Lose your train of thought there?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

"Governing" is keeping Knothead A from infringing Knothead B's rights, and providing a remedy when they are unsuccessful at that. As an example, they're there to keep you all from murdering one another, and failing that, meting out punishment to the murdering party. They're there to either prevent or remedy assaults, thefts, and the like, things that one person does which infringe on another.

They are NOT there to facilitate the theft. They are NOT there to prop up private businesses artificially when that business will fail under poor management. They are NOT there to operate charities. They are NOT there to be your mommy, wipe your nose, bandage your knee, or hug you when you fall.


Indeed - not one of the enumerated powers includes they right to levy a tax against citizen A so that citizen B could have a safety net. However, levy taxes to raise an Army - yep, it's in there.

Taking money from one citizen because it is determined that he has "too much" to give it to another who is determined to have "not enough" is not one of the roles of the government. People who chose to do so give to charity and they help those who do not have enough.

Also not one of the roles - leveling the perceived playing field through regulation and laws that empower minority groups with extraordinary status under the law.

If a citizen's rights are infringed upon by another there is already remedy allowed under the law we don't need special statuses for groups. All that does is cause division and strife. Everyone should be equal under the law. Murder is murder murdering a minority is a "hate crime"...um is this really necessary?

edit on 12/7/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


I've never grasped the whole concept of "hate crime". Crime is crime. Re-labeling a murder as a "hate crime" does nothing to help or hurt the victim - it can't make them any deader, nor can it bring them back to life.

making a "hate crime" a special classification is about as useful as tits on a crowbar. It actually detracts form the heinousness of the crime, and makes the criminal "special".

As you correctly write, forced "redistribution of wealth" is robbery. If you or I do it, we go to jail, if the government does it, it's somehow magically "right"? Nah, I ain't buying it. The same applies to government-run lotteries. if you or I do it, they call it "running numbers", and we go to jail. If the government does it, they call it a "lottery" and it's magically OK.

We've got a lot of jailbirds running the show these days. it gives new life to the old saying about how "the lunatics are running the asylum".

The "healthcare" law is more of the same, along with all the taxes attached to it. They call it "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", yet it does nothing to address health care, only the insurance lottery, which is NOT health care - it's a private, for-profit enterprise that the government is attempting to give a windfall by forcing us to play that lottery. They are "redistributing our wealth", by threat and intimidation, to private corporations, but since Obama did it, then it's magically OK with the Obamabots. It actually provides health care to NO ONE - other than being life support for private, for profit corporations... the same sorts of corporations that these same people claimed to stand against last fall with the OWS madness.

Now they love them and want us ALL to feed them!

How much health care do I get if I pay the penalty? None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. That ain't "healthcare", it's nothing more than government-sponsored extortion by private companies. that sir, is the very definition of "fascism".

They can bite me. It ain't gonna happen in my sphere of influence. Not while I'm still breathing, that is.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by habitforming


Since you do not understand why past presidents matter I am with you. The moment the next president is a Republican, I am on your side 100%. I am not gonna wanna hear any crap about some past guy named Obama though.


So long as it is not used as an excuse for one thing or another.

Bush's decision for The Patriot Act and such was deplorable.
But, 0bama has compounded all problems 10 fold.

I do understand, very well why they matter.
I am just tired of hearing excuses from 0bama about how nothing he does works to correct the issue. He takes absolutely no responsibility for his actions. Kind of like how he wants people to act. Just go about, doing things, because it feels good, and then blame others when it goes wrong.




No, you do not understand. Go back and read that list again. All you said was you did not like Obama because of items 1-whatever and each of those items was here LOOOOONG before Obama. So all you said is you did not like Obama because you apparently do not like America. Go back and read it again. Try actually answering what I asked. See what logic can do for you.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by habitforming


You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....


War, in defense of, is what the Fed Govt is supposed to do.
Not provide for every want and whim of the Citizen.



I am and have been paying for war for a long time and yet to see a war that is "in defense of."
But I am paying for it and you are paying for it.
I would rather pay for medicine.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
My bad. I keep forgetting that they don't teach civics in school any more, and kids these days don't know what "governing" is any longer.

"Governing" is keeping Knothead A from infringing Knothead B's rights, and providing a remedy when they are unsuccessful at that. As an example, they're there to keep you all from murdering one another, and failing that, meting out punishment to the murdering party. They're there to either prevent or remedy assaults, thefts, and the like, things that one person does which infringe on another.

They are NOT there to facilitate the theft. They are NOT there to prop up private businesses artificially when that business will fail under poor management. They are NOT there to operate charities. They are NOT there to be your mommy, wipe you nose, bandage your knee, or hug you when you fall.


Does not really sound like you know what you think it means either. All of that is pretty narrow and extremely opinionated. How about defense of the country? Are they there for that?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
So the answer is to steal MORE?


More?
How do you do math?
You wanna pay for war and no medicine.
I wanna pay for medicine and no war.
x+w-m=y
x+m-w=y

No money has been stolen from me to fund a war, but it seems they have plans to steal from me to NOT provide any health care, too. Good luck with that theft - I'll be waiting for the enforcers.

What exactly does that mean?
You do not pay taxes or you pick and choose what each and every penny goes to?



"We both" and "only I..." WHAT? Lose your train of thought there?


Why so many blank spaces at the ends of your posts? Are you trying to make them longer?
No, I did not lose my train of thought. I wrote exactly what I meant and the first part of this response right here pretty much solidifies it for me.
You have two sets of standards in your America. One for you and one for me.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66
Indeed - not one of the enumerated powers includes they right to levy a tax against citizen A so that citizen B could have a safety net. However, levy taxes to raise an Army - yep, it's in there.

Taking money from one citizen because it is determined that he has "too much" to give it to another who is determined to have "not enough" is not one of the roles of the government. People who chose to do so give to charity and they help those who do not have enough.

Also not one of the roles - leveling the perceived playing field through regulation and laws that empower minority groups with extraordinary status under the law.

If a citizen's rights are infringed upon by another there is already remedy allowed under the law we don't need special statuses for groups. All that does is cause division and strife. Everyone should be equal under the law. Murder is murder murdering a minority is a "hate crime"...um is this really necessary?

edit on 12/7/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)


Social Security proves all of your points wrong.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by habitforming
 

How about defense of the country? Are they there for that?
ummmm, NO ... that is why we "raise an army" or did you skip that part on purpose ??

governing has nothing to do with "providing" anything other than a means of negotiation between parties ... always has, always will.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
ummmm, NO ... that is why we "raise an army" or did you skip that part on purpose ??


Ummmmmm, no. The last time I checked, the US is not protected by your private army so you must be mistaken.


governing has nothing to do with "providing" anything other than a means of negotiation between parties ... always has, always will.



So who is raising that army?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by habitforming
 
sure is ... ever been to a base state-side ??
to think we aren't protected is just plain foolishness.
raising an army and utilizing it are two very different things.

militias are raised in the State in which they reside.
they are raised and supported by the citizens of that state.

the army was Constitutionally created/crafted and financially supported by the citizens (although the method has been warped and abused).

did you think they were the same thing?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

No, you do not understand. Go back and read that list again. All you said was you did not like Obama because of items 1-whatever and each of those items was here LOOOOONG before Obama. So all you said is you did not like Obama because you apparently do not like America. Go back and read it again. Try actually answering what I asked. See what logic can do for you.


I don't need to go back and re-read. I know what you are getting at.
Yes, other Presidents have made bad choices.
But, here we are, with a Goober in Chief that not only makes MORE bad choices, but compounds all the bad choices made before him 10 fold. And then has the nerve to blame everyone else but himself. That is the issue.

Not only is he one of the worst to ever hold the Presidency, he is one of the biggest liars to hold it as well.

If he wants single payer health care, be bold. Come out and say it and then press forward with the plan as such. Not cloaked in something else and then pushed through using every backhanded way there is.
I am a Conservative Libertarian, and I WISH that Clinton was in office over 0bama. Not that I loved Clinton, but at least you knew what you getting with him.

Hope and Change huh? Again, another lied pitched, and the American People swung and whiffed.
edit on 13-7-2012 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

I am and have been paying for war for a long time and yet to see a war that is "in defense of."
But I am paying for it and you are paying for it.
I would rather pay for medicine.


Well, that is another topic all on it's own.

But, the Govt operating as such is how it was created and designed. Not to provide every want and whim for the citizen.
Oh, and we do pay for medicine. You just want it paid for everyone, with the Govt controlling it.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

Social Security proves all of your points wrong.


And how is Social Security doing these days?

Set for insolvency I believe.
More Govt run amok with false hopes and lies.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
so, just how much more $$ do we need to toss at this train-wreck to prevent events such as this ... shine.yahoo.com... ... but, wasn't treating such "emergencies" with care supposed to be the first priority ??

this story doesn't indicate if they were insured or not but i'm guessing they were considering the hospital and it's location.
www.med.nyu.edu...

US News - Best Hospitals 2011-2012 issue / rates it #1 in NY & #8 in Rehab.

now, since attention cannot be bought (for any price), what does ObeyMeCare do to correct it ?? how many lives will be forfeited before sanity returns to the assylum ??





top topics
 
74
<< 87  88  89    91  92 >>

log in

join