punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Nonsense...you provide customary services and bill them for it. If they can't pay, they can declare bankruptcy and any creditors will be discharged according to law. Health care is just like any other product or service. Who ends up paying for it then BC? Everyone else is who pays for it. That is the issue. Everyone needs health care at some point and time which is why the government needs to regulate it. Which is where the commerce clause comes in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Everyone needs health care at some point and time which is why the government needs to regulate it. No, that is false. Not everyone needs health care at some point in time. One could well be a perfectly healthy adult, the only health care they ever used was a regular dentist check-up they paid for out of pocket, and suddenly die in a car crash. No chance to use any health care on them. Just one of many possible examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Who ends up paying for it then BC? Everyone else is who pays for it. Who ends up paying for education, police, or firefighting if not the "poor"? That is the issue. Everyone needs health care at some point and time which is why the government needs to regulate it. Which is where the commerce clause comes in. Everyone needs food and water (not health care) but they are not required to buy insurance. Edited August 13, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 No, that is false. Not everyone needs health care at some point in time. One could well be a perfectly healthy adult, the only health care they ever used was a regular dentist check-up they paid for out of pocket, and suddenly die in a car crash. No chance to use any health care on them. Just one of many possible examples. True....fact is that 20% of the population consumes 80% of health care services at great expense. Young people can go many years without ever needing such services. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 No, that is false. Not everyone needs health care at some point in time. One could well be a perfectly healthy adult, the only health care they ever used was a regular dentist check-up they paid for out of pocket, and suddenly die in a car crash. No chance to use any health care on them. Just one of many possible examples. Give me a break this is your argument? Someone could die in a car crash? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 True....fact is that 20% of the population consumes 80% of health care services at great expense. Young people can go many years without ever needing such services. There insurance should reflect that then but someday they will need health care and when they do they should have to pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Give me a break this is your argument? Someone could die in a car crash? You made a claim, that "everyone" needs health care. The claim is patently false and I gave an obvious counter example. Don't like it? Don't make ridiculous claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) You made a claim, that "everyone" needs health care. The claim is patently false and I gave an obvious counter example. Don't like it? Don't make ridiculous claims. No because your claim is silly. That person could just have well died but used up 250,000 dollars worth of healthcare which other people would have to pay for if they had no insurance. That is the point. I know you socialists want everyone else to pay for things but I think you should pay for the things you use. Edited August 13, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 There insurance should reflect that then but someday they will need health care and when they do they should have to pay for it. They can and do pay for it....with insurance or cash. If they don't pay their debts, there is already a process to deal with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 ....I know you socialists want everyone else to pay for things but I think you should pay for the things you use. You can keep that commie crap in Manitoba! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 How do you figure in Wickard v. Filburn they were able to make a farmer on their own land burn crops that were grown in excess of what the government allowed because and I quote the ruling "Congress could regulate anything that exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce." So you are telling me the government can make someone burn their crops because it had an effect on the economy but not buy Health insurance? Health care is 20% of GDP, it has an effect on the economy. You might disagree with the commerce clause but it is what it is and these judges are legislating from the bench. The ruling didnt say there cant be a health insurande mandate. It said that if the government wants a mandate they have to provide a public insurance option. And thats the only context in which a mandate ever made any sense anyways because it would be necessary to avoid the free rider problem. Forcing people to patronize a private industry just puts upward pressure on prices. All they have to do is provide a public non-profit option like they should have in the first damn place and the mandate is constitutional. The private insurance mandate was written into the law by insurance companies and was an absolute stab in the back to Americans who prior to the law being passed supported a public option by a fairly large margin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 The ruling didnt say there cant be a health insurande mandate. It said that if the government wants a mandate they have to provide a public insurance option. And thats the only context in which a mandate ever made any sense anyways because it would be necessary to avoid the free rider problem. Forcing people to patronize a private industry just puts upward pressure on prices. All they have to do is provide a public non-profit option like they should have in the first damn place and the mandate is constitutional. The private insurance mandate was written into the law by insurance companies and was an absolute stab in the back to Americans who prior to the law being passed supported a public option by a fairly large margin. The ruling didn't address the arguments made by either side. It was very strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 They can and do pay for it....with insurance or cash. If they don't pay their debts, there is already a process to deal with that. That doesn't address the problem that if they don't pay everyone else pays for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 ...The private insurance mandate was written into the law by insurance companies and was an absolute stab in the back to Americans who prior to the law being passed supported a public option by a fairly large margin. That's right...Obama was facing the exact same brick wall as the Clintons did back in 1993, so they chose to jump into bed with the insurance companies, Big Pharma, and doctors. The US already has a huge single payer system in Medicare/Medicaid/VA that could have been expanded, but instead Obama actually steals $500 billion from those programs to help fund a new entitlement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 That doesn't address the problem that if they don't pay everyone else pays for it. That's true of any business for products and services....what's so special about health care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 No, that is false. Not everyone needs health care at some point in time. One could well be a perfectly healthy adult, the only health care they ever used was a regular dentist check-up they paid for out of pocket, and suddenly die in a car crash. No chance to use any health care on them. Just one of many possible examples. The problem is people without insurance become free riders when they need care. You could make the exact same claim about auto insurance. "Im a good driver and Iv never been in an accident dude!". Without the mandate uninsured motorists that damaged people or property would become free riders, and everyone else would be paying more for their policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Without the mandate uninsured motorists that damaged people or property would become free riders, and everyone else would be paying more for their policies. They still pay more for their policies...the products are called uninsured motorist or underinsured motorist. Some people don't realize how entrenched the insurance business is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 That's true of any business for products and services....what's so special about health care? Everyone needs it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Everyone needs it. Why do you keep repeating this false claim, compared to, say.... food? Health care is not a right...not even in Canada. Edited August 13, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Why do you keep repeating this false claim, compared to, say.... food? You pay for food up front or are denied that food. Would you like health care to be that way? If you can't find your insurance card you get to die. Great plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 The ruling didn't address the arguments made by either side. It was very strange. Yes but what was interesting was the language. It specifically mentions PRIVATE insurers. This actually might be a good thing. Because it makes it clear in legal terms that the only way to get everyone covered and eliminate the free rider problem is to add a public non profit option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 You pay for food up front or are denied that food. Would you like health care to be that way? If you can't find your insurance card you get to die. Great plan. You are missing the point....people actually do consistently require food to live, not health care. Those who cannot afford food are provided access to food and it is paid for by others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 You are missing the point....people actually do consistently require food to live, not health care. Those who cannot afford food are provided access to food and it is paid for by others. The same is true of Health care it is called Medicaid. Yet people who can afford health care or insurance don't buy it and instead use that money in other ways because they know they can just free ride off you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 The same is true of Health care it is called Medicaid. Yet people who can afford health care or insurance don't buy it and instead use that money in other ways because they know they can just free ride off you. Are they not American citizens who qualify for the program(s)? Why should they be excluded over real deadbeats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Are they not American citizens who qualify for the program(s)? Why should they be excluded over real deadbeats? I think you are right everyone should be included in Government health care. However if we wont go that far then we should at least stop the free loading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.