In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Health Care: Do we have a leg to stand on?
Rack Ops
Member Posts: 18,597 ✭✭✭
Allow me to play devils advocate for a bit:
Much of the opposition to Obamacare comes from the folks who want to protect America from socialized medicine. Unfortunately, they appear to be fighting a battle that was lost decades ago.
America has socialized medicine. Medicare and Medicaid are socialized medicine, plain and simple. We have, in our generosity (or foolishness, whichever you prefer), created a system where the elderly, the extremely poor, an the disabled receive free or heavily subsidized medical care, while the rest of us pay full price.
We've created, in essence, a separate class of citizen with special "rights" to go along with it. If you are over the age of 65, or otherwise meet the requirements, you have the "right" to low cost medical treatment, subsidized by the same taxpayers who are being crippled by insurance costs.
I cannot find, nor have I heard, any interpretation of the Constitution which would allow such a thing.
Medicare ain't going away. My question is: Does our Constitution allow for the system we have in place now?
If not, what are the alternatives?
Much of the opposition to Obamacare comes from the folks who want to protect America from socialized medicine. Unfortunately, they appear to be fighting a battle that was lost decades ago.
America has socialized medicine. Medicare and Medicaid are socialized medicine, plain and simple. We have, in our generosity (or foolishness, whichever you prefer), created a system where the elderly, the extremely poor, an the disabled receive free or heavily subsidized medical care, while the rest of us pay full price.
We've created, in essence, a separate class of citizen with special "rights" to go along with it. If you are over the age of 65, or otherwise meet the requirements, you have the "right" to low cost medical treatment, subsidized by the same taxpayers who are being crippled by insurance costs.
I cannot find, nor have I heard, any interpretation of the Constitution which would allow such a thing.
Medicare ain't going away. My question is: Does our Constitution allow for the system we have in place now?
If not, what are the alternatives?
Comments
No
quote:If not, what are the alternatives?
I'm not really sure, to be honest.
Gentlemen, it is not only the easy Constitutional questions we must deal with, but also the hard ones.
I deliberately posted this in the Constitutional Law forum for a reason....this issue isn't a political one, but a question of how big a role government should play in the lives of its citizens.
I'll briefly outline my thoughts, with the provision to expand and flesh out detailed concepts later.
The Constitution clearly does not allow for the collectivist system that we now have.
Taken in the context of the founding documents, the debates during the creation and ratification of the Constitution and the text of the Constitution itself, which strictly limits the Federal Government to eighteen specific, delegated or enumerated powers, there is no honest argument in support of socialized medicines constitutionality, as I see it.
Alternatives are tough now, since we have travelled far down the road toward total dependency of our citizens.
I believe that a phased approach to weaning dependent citizens off these programs would be necessary, with clear and firm milestones for opting out and ultimately, being cut off.
The States should develop and implement (or not if they choose) plans to foster a climate in which private entities could affordably step in to fill the gaps with limited coverage. Benevolent organizations, charities, churches and private individuals would, I believe, begin to fill the gaps also, but only 'if' there were truly and demonstrably to be a phased close-out of programs.
The Fed would be required to get its hand out of our pocket so we had sufficient money to provide for ourselves in this area.
Bottom-line, there is a price for living in a free society and I am quite sure that gaps and inadequate coverage would result for some. The temptation would be for government to step in, again, and provide that which they are prohibited from providing.
A certain amount of 'leap of faith' would be required to believe that private entities, charities and civic-minded organizations would develop and step up for those who could not provide for themselves and their families, but living in a Republic has a price.
Glaring choices to be sure, but, well, it is what it is.
Rack,
I'll briefly outline my thoughts, with the provision to expand and flesh out detailed concepts later.
The Constitution clearly does not allow for the collectivist system that we now have.
Taken in the context of the founding documents, the debates during the creation and ratification of the Constitution and the text of the Constitution itself, which strictly limits the Federal Government to eighteen specific, delegated or enumerated powers, there is no honest argument in support of socialized medicines constitutionality, as I see it.
Alternatives are tough now, since we have travelled far down the road toward total dependency of our citizens.
I believe that a phased approach to weaning dependent citizens off these programs would be necessary, with clear and firm milestones for opting out and ultimately, being cut off.
The States should develop and implement (or not if they choose) plans to foster a climate in which private entities could affordably step in to fill the gaps with limited coverage. Benevolent organizations, charities, churches and private individuals would, I believe, begin to fill the gaps also, but only 'if' there were truly and demonstrably to be a phased close-out of programs.
The Fed would be required to get its hand out of our pocket so we had sufficient money to provide for ourselves in this area.
Bottom-line, there is a price for living in a free society and I am quite sure that gaps and inadequate coverage would result for some. The temptation would be for government to step in, again, and provide that which they are prohibited from providing.
A certain amount of 'leap of faith' would be required to believe that private entities, charities and civic-minded organizations would develop and step up for those who could not provide for themselves and their families, but living in a Republic has a price.
Glaring choices to be sure, but, well, it is what it is.
+1, the only reasonable approach I see. As you said, freedom has /risk/price. It is worth it.
Alternatives are tough now, since we have travelled far down the road toward total dependency of our citizens.
Unfortunately, I think we have gone much too far down that road to ever come back.
Medicare is not just a sacred cow for the liberal wing of the democratic part....It is viewed as a right.
How much of the opposition to Obamacare came from geezers who were scared/pissed that the President dared to propose cuts to their health insurance?
Even if by some miracle you could have the entire program declared Unconstitutional by the court system, I can just about guarantee that the backlash would be so severe that the Constitution would be amended specifically to bring it back.
ONLY out of chaos do we stand a chance of bringing back a Republican form of government.
There are entirely too many encroachments for there to be a prayer of a chance to return it piecemeal.
I watched `Surrogates' over the weekend.
That seems to be the only answer ..a major asteroid, a major economic collapse, the present administration hamstringing the military till some foreign government dares to bomb us into the Stone Age...
Do I WANT this to happen ? Nope.
But I prefer slavery even less.....
Begin to understand why I feel a total collapse is the only answer ?
ONLY out of chaos do we stand a chance of bringing back a Republican form of government.
There are entirely too many encroachments for there to be a prayer of a chance to return it piecemeal.
I watched `Surrogates' over the weekend.
That seems to be the only answer ..a major asteroid, a major economic collapse, the present administration hamstringing the military till some foreign government dares to bomb us into the Stone Age...
Do I WANT this to happen ? Nope.
But I prefer slavery even less.....
"Give me liberty or give me death?" Sounds like a unabomber. You are definitely a radical, quite possibly a terrorist. I'm in.
Allow me an example ;
You are on a ship, moving thru the cold darkness of the North. The ship is crewed by blackguards, rapists, thieves, and thugs of every description. There are a FEW..a precious few..passengers that are not engaged in criminal or debasing activities.
You see in the distance an iceberg ..and the ship is heading right for it full speed.
Would you not alert all the decent people you know about..and prepare them to man the lifeboats and repel the crew that will attempt to flee for their lives, after the wreck ?
Would you not gather some supplies against the cold and sleet you will face, after casting loose from the sinking ship ?
Would you not attempt to strike the crew, while they are disorganized from the impact...and perhaps yet save the ship, if possible ?
How is this terrorism, or unibomber, or any other thing except facing the facts ..we few are POWERLESS to take the ship back as long as the crew is strong...and NO attack on the crew is possible as long as they hold all the high cards.
To do so is suicidal ..and ultimately fatal to the fight for freedom.
No running in the streets, hair on fire, no secret plans to destabilize, no bold attack plans...Just an interested observer, watching and waiting for the rotten, corrupted system to implode.
Begin to understand why I feel a total collapse is the only answer ?
Of course, I've understood where you've been coming from for as long as I've been here.....I haven't always agreed, but that's why I keep coming back.
quote:
ONLY out of chaos do we stand a chance of bringing back a Republican form of government.
On this point, I think you're most likely correct, as much as it pains me to say it.
On the other hand, I think its just as likely (if not more so) that the aftermath of a complete collapse would leave us in worse shape than we are now.
What a mess we've made.......
Respectfully, I disagree with this.
We have a bright, shining path to follow..the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. With but a little clarifaction, I think, along with the Ten Commandments, a good set of rules to follow....we should find our way out of the darkness pretty quickly...and if the military does THEIR job...no foreign enemy will attack us.
But don't forget free VA medical care. In the case of someone who has served their country and become injuried, or served until retirement, then those people have earned their reduced cost or free medical insurance.
In regards to Medicare, if it worked like it should, in that the part A medicare is provided at no charge to 65 and over, that should not be yanked away because it is supposed to be that people like me are suppose to pay into medicare all their working lives (I did BTW and still am) For the part B medicare I pay about $100.00 per month which is coverage only for physician's office calls and treatment, no hospital stays. Hospital stays are covered by part A.
So, bottom line, if we don't want people who can't help themselves dieing in the streets, then constitution or no constitution we will always have at least some free medical care given to such people. In my case, the government made me agree to a "contract" when I was 15 and starting out working and I have to take part of every single pay check and pay into Medicare. So in that regard, it would not be fair to yank it away from people like me that have kept my end of the contract.
You guys don't want to hear my opinions but you get to anyway.
If you don't want to see men, women and children dying in the streets from untreated illnesses, then we will always have some sort of socialized medical care. The trick is to find some way to make those who are young enough and healthy enough provide for themselves.
Therin lies the rub.
Our system, as it is currently set up goes something like this:
The young and healthy pay through their nose for insurance that, for the most part, they don't use. The sick and the elderly, who need health coverage more frequently, have their care subsidized by the taxpayers.
Medicare is hemorrhaging money like a sieve.....because the system is set-up at a disadvantage from the start. Meanwhile, insurance companies make out like bandits because they only insure the healthiest segment of the population.
I think that our problem is the way we've set up our insurance system. Health insurance is, for the vast majority of us, a job-related benefit.....which is great, except that almost everyone retires as some point.
Insurance should instead be treated, IMO, almost like an investment. I pay into it my working life and the proceeds are used to pay for my care when I get sick or I'm no longer working. Perhaps some type of "standard" insurance premium in case something bad happens before my account has grown large enough to provide for my needs.
I pay several hundred dollars a month for an insurance policy that I do not use, and most likely will not use significantly for several years......When I retire, I'll have nothing to show for it but a hole in my bank account where tens of thousands of dollars should be.....then Uncle Sam gets to pay for it all.
I don't believe that was ever the founder's intent.
We have a bright, shining path to follow..the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. With but a little clarifaction, I think, along with the Ten Commandments, a good set of rules to follow....
I wish I shared your optimism (Highball the Optimist, what a concept [;)])
Unfortunately, history has shown that when an industrialized society collapses, people often turn to whoever "makes the trains run on time"
We are Americans.
The remnant people will NOT submit. We CAN take this country back and right the ship..IF we get the help we need from either corrupted government totally overstepping its bounds...or natural catastrophe.
Optimistic ?
I always HAVE been so. Just not about the future under the corrupted leadership and support of that leadership by republicans and democrats we have witnessed for all the years of my life.
Only one taker......[V]
Gentlemen, it is not only the easy Constitutional questions we must deal with, but also the hard ones.
I deliberately posted this in the Constitutional Law forum for a reason....this issue isn't a political one, but a question of how big a role government should play in the lives of its citizens.
The word or term socialism is used only in the context of being something a certain group of people have been conditioned to hate or fear as being associated with communism or fascism.
All governments that are using programs that help their people are integrating aspects of socialism. This government already infuses so much money into oil companies and the healthcare system through funds going to drug companies and insurance companies that they are huge beneficiaries of government paying for and subsidizing them. It is couched as free enterprize but it anything but.
Midsize corporations are forced to pay for their own research and development, huge corporations that profit from goods sold to the government for people not only profit at the back end on prices that are controlled higher in their favor but they get huge subsidies, grants, and tax credits that just add to already excessively fat profit margins. We are socialist in nature helping these industries that suck excessive government funds but we get no breaks or benefits.
I want a government healthcare option that sets the standard of care and it's cost. I pay $1200 for Kaiser for my wife and I and that sir is a substandard care in which we are subject to excessive copays and denial of catastrophic procedures. I will be on the list of the first people to sign up for a government option that is similar in nature to medicare.
Constitutional is whatever the senate agrees to make constitutional. What is not constitutional are those things like wire taps and electronic surveillance that has no judiciary checks and controls such is in effect right now and was not approved before initiation of those breaches of law.
Any well organized government in a thriving economy should and will have many good socialist provisions for the health and well being of it's people. Learn a bit about how government money can be spent better for our people instead of for greed oriented profiteering.
Why fight a battle that is for people's best interest? Unless you own a healthcare company you sure as heck don't need to look after their profit interests, they won't go under they will just be brought into a better and more reasonable level of profits. When we as a government are paying hundreds of billions of dollars into a system we do have the right to say how much is reasonable profits and CEO compensations. Paying for care gives that right and I choose to excercise the right to expect reasonable care for the money we spend.
The best care I ever had was in the military, that is the level we would get with a government option.
quote:Unfortunately, history has shown that when an industrialized society collapses, people often turn to whoever "makes the trains run on time"
We are Americans.
The remnant people will NOT submit. We CAN take this country back and right the ship..IF we get the help we need from either corrupted government totally overstepping its bounds...or natural catastrophe.
Optimistic ?
I always HAVE been so. Just not about the future under the corrupted leadership and support of that leadership by republicans and democrats we have witnessed for all the years of my life.
Did you see Bush's administration as a corrupted government? This one sir is trying to make great strides in turning the tide. Unfortuneately it has to overcome a certain group of people that see wisdom in the defense of bad policies that have proved deregulation and a total lack of oversight has brought this country to the brink of insolvency. We are going to need to understand and support a lot of new regulations and oversight. This generation is going to have to start the process of paying off a decade of hideously managed fiscal policies. do you want to pass it off or understand we have to start tightening up ludicrously bad spending.
New and good programs will cost money, but that money could come from wasted funds.
Read a bit right off the forum concerning my thoughts on bush and his administration...and the last dozen presidents, also. In fact...right back to lincoln.
The difference between you and I..I recognize the corruption of BOTH democrat AND republicans.
No party hackery for me, no fuzzy math, no rose colored glasses.
I am an adult...I deal with REALITY.
You are no doubt outraged at the concept that I dare to attack you...with all your degrees, secrecy clearances, and all.
Allow me to explain;
I respect Americans.
People that understand and believe in the Constitution...AS WRITTEN.
I have little but contempt for those that believe in a 'living document'...as if immortal words and binding chains on government are EVER dead...I will go further.
Those that seek to relieve me of my hard-earned gains, or deprive me of my Rights are EVIL...and will be treated as such.
Today I do it with words. Tomorrow, when the Beast grows tired of waiting for people like me to die...with actions.
Well I don't directly belive that government OUGHT to be giving anything away free.
I would rather they set up clinics, on a sliding scale (according to your household income) and perhaps have a deal set up with a local (withing a reasonable distance) hospitol for intense care.
I don't belive it is the governments job to give FREE healthcare, but moreso insure that people can GET care.
A bit of personal info: I don't have insurance, nor does my son. I have ALLREADY looked high and low for insurance that I can afford (since my employer does NOT even offer it) and NONE can be found. The most affordable I could find was 500 a month for a SINGLE plan. I have also called several doctors and the local hospital about a discount for paying cash. That didn't happen either.
Some can say "well that IS capitolism", but really, that doesn't help the situation. I am happy to pay a reasonable fee for doctor visits (say up to 60 bucks) but I am not able to pay 120 bucks a visit, plus all the other expense involved. What happens IF one of us breaks a leg? I don't have 10 grand spare to pay, and I certainly am NOT going to get a discount like insurance companies do.
The governement, the insurance companies, and the medical community has had their fingers in the cookie jar too long. I am ALL for capitolism, but not at the expense of the "little people".
Instead of "giving" away medical care, should they instead "regulate" the giant corporations so they can't harm the people?
I used to work at a hospital. I've seen so many worthless people, that have never worked a day in their lives, walk in and swipe their damned medical card and get everything they need taken care of....Meanwhile decent, hardworking people fall through the cracks.
A family friend of ours had to put their child in Neonatal ICU about a year ago. Thank God they had good insurance. The room alone (not the equipment in the room, or the care) was $10,000 A DAY. Once everything else was added in, it was something like $20,000 a day. The kid was there for 2 weeks.
Its impossible to pay for something like that without insurance......and your coverage can be lost at any time. Its insane.
I'm lucky. I have excellent insurance at a reasonably affordable rate....and they can't drop me or refuse to cover my family for a pre-existing condition....but I've got a sweetheart deal that not many people have access to.
But for freemind the glaring question is this: Since "Obama-care", in whatever form it ends up with, will almost certainly be closer to your ideal system than what we have now, are you supporting it?
james, people like you are the reason I'm so torn on the issue.
I used to work at a hospital. I've seen so many worthless people, that have never worked a day in their lives, walk in and swipe their damned medical card and get everything they need taken care of....Meanwhile decent, hardworking people fall through the cracks.
A family friend of ours had to put their child in Neonatal ICU about a year ago. Thank God they had good insurance. The room alone (not the equipment in the room, or the care) was $10,000 A DAY. Once everything else was added in, it was something like $20,000 a day. The kid was there for 2 weeks.
Its impossible to pay for something like that without insurance......and your coverage can be lost at any time. Its insane.
I'm lucky. I have excellent insurance at a reasonably affordable rate....and they can't drop me or refuse to cover my family for a pre-existing condition....but I've got a sweetheart deal that not many people have access to.
But for freemind the glaring question is this: Since "Obama-care", in whatever form it ends up with, will almost certainly be closer to your ideal system than what we have now, are you supporting it?
To answer your question Rack. No, I will not, nor will I ever support "Obama care". I would rather take my chances at my own personal bankrupcy, then to willfully bankrupt my fellow countrymen/women.
There are other alternatives that are just no being explored by the politicians.
To answer your question Rack. No, I will not, nor will I ever support "Obama care". I would rather take my chances at my own personal bankrupcy, then to willfully bankrupt my fellow countrymen/women.
I appreciate your honesty, but I'm having a bit of trouble following.
What you've described, as I understand it, is a gov't run "safety net", whereby people lacking insurance can receive low cost medical care.
This strikes me as basically being a "public option", with the caveat being that you're not officially "signed up" for something specific.
Am I missing something?
quote:Originally posted by freemind
To answer your question Rack. No, I will not, nor will I ever support "Obama care". I would rather take my chances at my own personal bankrupcy, then to willfully bankrupt my fellow countrymen/women.
I appreciate your honesty, but I'm having a bit of trouble following.
What you've described, as I understand it, is a gov't run "safety net", whereby people lacking insurance can receive low cost medical care.
This strikes me as basically being a "public option", with the caveat being that you're not officially "signed up" for something specific.
Am I missing something?
What I am suggesting is if it doesn't allready exist is:
The government PAY to set up a "clinic" and supply it with a doctor. The schooling gets paid for the doctor, for X years of service. The clinic, pays for itself like any other business, through the revenue of the customers (remember, sliding scale according to income). The only ones who could NOT pay, would be the jobless, and those people allready have free medical care.
While not one who has worked for a hospital, I know things like asprin can be bought at the local mart, FAR cheaper than can be bought from the hospital suppliers. Things like sutures can be bought through vetinary suppliers MUCH cheaper than through medical suppliers too. This half witted idea I have would also require the government scale back a few requirements they lay on the medical community, at least giving exemption to these "clinics".
I don't want free medical care, I want affordable medical care. We have A SINGLE free clinic in my area. I don't qualify according to income guidelines. Under those guidlelines that are required, you would quailify for medicaid/care, or HIP (an Indiana program for people without insurance) You can only make 40K a year for a family of four. I exceed that. (P.S. they will only see 20 people a week. They met that number TWO minutes after the clinic opened last week.)
Though I may exceed the income guidelines, that does not mean I have enough spare klinkies to pay $120 office visits, or 1K E-room visits. Muchless the money for other outragiously priced services. We need medical care, but I can't fathom why we have to go bankrupt to see a doctor.
To be honest, I would rather have a system that afforded ME to pay a reasonable fee, rather than carry an "Insurance".
The government have the obligation/responsibility to provide its citizens (the people) with a good health care system regardless age, economical and social status, IS THAT SIMPLE!.
Individuals who are mentally and physically healthy are the strongest fiber of a society, being the most productive and positive in its accomplishments. The most important reason for having elections in this Country is to elect the representatives that will represent the people who elected them and provide and care for us the people and not for their personal interest or few companies, that only care for themselves.
Does the system is corrupt? YES!, Do we actually do something about it? NO!
Do we have the power to change things? YES!, Do we do something about it? NO!
Does the government manipulate the people into believing their lies? YES!, Do we actually question those lies? NO! No one questions the government or the media, we just believe all the rhetoric's and lies they feed us.
Is there is enough $$$ to solve our financial situation, including health care....etc..etc. YES!
Think of all the Government officials excessive salaries, expenses claims, under the table benefits (monetary or otherwise). The billions expended for warfare, weapons and related to that. The billions used in the "wall street bail out". Billions in God Knows What!, Etc..etc..
More revenues? Yes!
Illegal's - clearly there is nothing we can do to stop or control it, so how can we fix the problem? Simply, register every illegal and give them working card, Social Security and MAKE THEM PAY TAXES!, Impose heavy FINES to business who hire non documented workers.
More higher Taxes, Hell Yes! To Companies like Cigarettes, Alcohol, Gambling Casinos, etc. I would include as well the very Rich people, because the richer you get the less you pay! At least pay like everyone else's do.
What happened to all the Foreign loans! - START CLAIMING THEM, lost of European, African and Central American Countries asked for USA Loan that have not yet been collected, ask yourself WHY?, better yet ask the responsible governmental department?
Stop buying "alliances" with Countries that clearly don't care for the USA, just to get the $$$ they can scam/get from the us!
There are better ways for our government to develop a sound financial structure for our Country, where they can focus in the need of its citizens, the Country and not the interest of the few or selected.
As a final thought, if you actually believe that we live in a democratic Country and the primal object of our political elected representatives is to respect our FREEDOM, our way of life, then you can also believe I own a UNICORN.
The right to have/demand for free or affordable healthcare is not a constitutional issue is a governmental responsibility to the citizens.
The government have the obligation/responsibility to provide its citizens (the people) with a good health care system regardless age, economical and social status, IS THAT SIMPLE!.
Individuals who are mentally and physically healthy are the strongest fiber of a society, being the most productive and positive in its accomplishments. The most important reason for having elections in this Country is to elect the representatives that will represent the people who elected them and provide and care for us the people and not for their personal interest or few companies, that only care for themselves.
...
Is there is enough $$$ to solve our financial situation, including health care....etc..etc. YES!
...
More revenues? Yes!
Illegal's - clearly there is nothing we can do to stop or control it, so how can we fix the problem? Simply, register every illegal and give them working card, Social Security and MAKE THEM PAY TAXES!, Impose heavy FINES to business who hire non documented workers.
More higher Taxes, Hell Yes! To Companies like Cigarettes, Alcohol, Gambling Casinos, etc. I would include as well the very Rich people, because the richer you get the less you pay! At least pay like everyone else's do.
What happened to all the Foreign loans! - START CLAIMING THEM, lost of European, African and Central American Countries asked for USA Loan that have not yet been collected, ask yourself WHY?, better yet ask the responsible governmental department?
Stop buying "alliances" with Countries that clearly don't care for the USA, just to get the $$$ they can scam/get from the us!
There are better ways for our government to develop a sound financial structure for our Country, where they can focus in the need of its citizens, the Country and not the interest of the few or selected.
...
Apparently you were 'born fightin' for the fruits of another's labors. I find it sad that someone would adopt that moniker and use it to espouse the goal of having government 'take care of us'. Simply amazing.
Anywhoooo...
If an individual state wishes to provide health care for its citizens, it is not prevented from doing so. It has no responsibility to do so, but it is not prevented from doing so. The Federal Government, on the other hand is prevented from doing this by the Constitution of the United States. Suggested reading is the entire document, of course, but for your first visit to that document, may I suggest Article 1, Section 8 and Amendments 9 and 10.
The responsibilities of the Federal Government are specified in the Constitution. One cannot simply create them from thin air.
Brad Steele
"Apparently you were 'born fightin' for the fruits of another's labors. I find it sad that someone would adopt that moniker and use it to espouse the goal of having government 'take care of us'. Simply amazing."
There is no reason for personal attack, In my experience individuals who respond with this kind of conduct/behavior are those who can't argue facts based on knowledge and/or experiences so the Bully/Aggressive stand is intended to intimidate as their final recourse.
The "bornfightin" is a reflection of my life, since no one has given me anything for free and my achievements have been my own. Born American and on my own since I was 16 years old, put myself through schools/university, survived 3 conflicts (not "wars") and consider myself as a student of life, I can assure you sir I don't expect anything for free.
You suggested to read the Constitution, I in return am going to remind you of the 1st. Amendment:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Maybe you, Sir, have your own interpretation of the Constitution.
My humble advice to you is to learn to respect others opinions even if they differ from yours.
It was my understanding that this forum is a platform for members to express their opinion (within the forums rules) without the fear of personal attacks or being bullied by other members.
I always enjoy a good debate (excellent source for knowledge and experience) as long as it is conducted with respect and arguments are based on knowledge and/or experience.
This said, this will be my last post.
"Apparently you were 'born fightin' for the fruits of another's labors. I find it sad that someone would adopt that moniker and use it to espouse the goal of having government 'take care of us'. Simply amazing."
There is no reason for personal attack, In my experience individuals who respond with this kind of conduct/behavior are those who can't argue facts based on knowledge and/or experiences so the Bully/Aggressive stand is intended to intimidate as their final recourse.
The "bornfightin" is a reflection of my life, since no one has given me anything for free and my achievements have been my own. Born American and on my own since I was 16 years old, put myself through schools/university, survived 3 conflicts (not "wars") and consider myself as a student of life, I can assure you sir I don't expect anything for free.
You suggested to read the Constitution, I in return am going to remind you of the 1st. Amendment:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Maybe you, Sir, have your own interpretation of the Constitution.
My humble advice to you is to learn to respect others opinions even if they differ from yours.
It was my understanding that this forum is a platform for members to express their opinion (within the forums rules) without the fear of personal attacks or being bullied by other members.
I always enjoy a good debate (excellent source for knowledge and experience) as long as it is conducted with respect and arguments are based on knowledge and/or experience.
This said, this will be my last post.
I apologize for having offended you. The intent was not to intimidate, nor to stifle your comments, but to point out the disconnect between your screen name and your advocacy of the nanny state. FWIW, many of us on here receive similar 'attacks' and worse on a regular basis, and don't walk away in a huff. I expected, and looked forward to someone who was 'bornfightin' to come back at me with both barrels blazing rather than a boo-boo lip.
Respect takes many forms. I respected you enough to think you were man enough to support your views, or I would not have wasted my time responding. Apparently that respect was misplaced, and my time was in fact wasted. My first postings in these forums elicited a response from one who is now a moderator to the effect that he would cheer the day I experienced a tragedy like Katrina and be left abandoned by the state. I have also been called a gun-grabber, a shill for the Bush administration, a Paul-bot, insensitive, a right-wing nut, and malodorous. (OK, maybe not malodorous).
The point remains, however: There is a disconnect between your screen name and your advocacy of a responsibility of the Federal Government to 'provide and care for us the people' (your words). If you care to justify the 'provide and care for' statement in the context of health care and the Constitution, please do.
If you do not wish to do so, that's just fine as well.
Brad Steele
Now, Don, I have not called you by those names in years. [:D]
As for 'respect', bornfightin...around HERE...you get it the old fashioned way.
YOU EARN IT.
So far.you ain't. Take you lower lip and go home.
OR...you actually can grow a pair and defend your position.such as it is.
Damn a society where `respect' is supposed to be handed out like candy at the Thanksgiving day parade.how far we have fallen as a Nation, and as men.
One need do NOTHING except consume Oxygen and breath out methane to be `respected' so some think.
I am fine with medicaid/medicare so long as it is a state run program. I am even fine with the federal government telling insurance companies that if they want to do interstate business that they must comply with federal regulations.
I am however against any attempt by the federal government to take over any business, or to regulate intrastate affairs.
James Madison is the acknowledged father of the constitution. In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia. James Madison wrote disapprovingly, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." Today, at least two-thirds of a $2.5 trillion federal budget is spent on the "objects of benevolence." That includes Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, aid to higher education, farm and business subsidies, welfare, ad nauseam.
The above is from a Walter Williams article.......