Page 62 of 122 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472112 ... LastLast
Results 611 to 620 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #611
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,939

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Which is a sad note considering ...
    I’ve never understood why regulating by making people go buy something is somehow more intrusive than regulating by making them pay taxes and then giving it to them
    I can understand that....

    In one case, you're making people enter into a private agreement with a private entity for a private good and service with their own private finances.

    In the other case, you're undertaking a standard government function in taxation and having the government provide a governmental service to a citizen.

    Secondly, "intrusiveness" is not the standard. Constitutional is the standard. Simply because one may be less intrusive in ones opinion is irrelevant to whether or not its constitutional. The government has a clear constitutional authority to levy taxes on individuals, and to provide some services to citizens as the government. It's far more questionable to suggest that the government has the ability to compell a private individual to spend their private resources on a private good/service from a private company. That opens up a whole different length of issues...for example, if we establish that its perfectly acceptable for the government to do such, they could for instance require that a person pays to undergo certain medical procedures or face a penalty.

    It's not whether or not one is more "intrusive". It's whether or not one is within the scope of what the government is constitutionally supposed to be allowed to do.

  2. #612
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It's far more questionable to suggest that the government has the ability to compell a private individual to spend their private resources on a private good/service from a private company.
    Both parties in the case before SCOTUS have agreed that Congress can force purchase of the insurance at the point of sale, it has come down to an argument over whether the purchase can be mandated before the sale.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  3. #613
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Actually, it's saying one has case law to at least say that it's constitutional and that another has no such case law to suggest that it's constitutional.

    Sorry, I'm more interested in dealing with reality than your misguided dishonest attempt to spin my words into something differnt. Ask me a question about what I actually said rather than your worhless strawman reconstruction of my point and perhaps I may answer.
    Wow, touchy as ever! I'm not disagreeing with your summary of the legalities (haven't reasearched it); all's I'm saying is that there's something whanky in our system when an outright government takeover of the health care system is not a problem, but a minor tax penalty affecting 2% of adults is seen as an overwhelming hurdle.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  4. #614
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,117
    Blog Entries
    20

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    states require car insurance.
    Completely different issue... They require liability insurance to protect other drivers should you damage or destroy someone else's car through your own negligence.

    lenders require flood insurance, including for federally-backed mortgages.
    Once again, that is to protect lenders should a flood destroy the home, to assure they get their money back.

  5. #615
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Nonsense. Leave private insurers alone to keep jacking their rates, eventually they'll have to enter a death spiral. You know what that is right? Accelerating attrition as fewer and fewer can pay the premiums. Something the private insurance industry is doing is failing, so only by letting it fail can it learn from its mistakes and maybe figure out how to offer something sustainable. Don't chain the American people to the sinking ship by mandating we stay hooked in to this failed structure.

    And yes it does matter what was going on fiscally and how much health care was costing per capita right before these other countries implemented UHC. We want to entitle all people to limitless amounts of something that already costs more here than it does anywhere else in the world. How does that reduce the amount we devote to health care? It doesn't. It makes us commit to spending more.
    I agree with you that the private insurance system is hosed. What I'm saying, though, is that we aren't going to be able to do rational reform, i.e. single payer, any time soon.

    I don't see allowing the insurance companies to tank our economy as being a great solution.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  6. #616
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Once again, that is to protect lenders should a flood destroy the home, to assure they get their money back.
    And why doesn't that also work for doctors and hospitals? Why can't they demand some form of assurance they will get their money?
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  7. #617
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Completely different issue... They require liability insurance to protect other drivers should you damage or destroy someone else's car through your own negligence.



    Once again, that is to protect lenders should a flood destroy the home, to assure they get their money back.
    health insurance protects us from paying for the cost of their irresponsibility. I really don't see a difference. Both dealing with me having to pay for their irresponsibility.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  8. #618
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Wow, touchy as ever! I'm not disagreeing with your summary of the legalities (haven't reasearched it); all's I'm saying is that there's something whanky in our system when an outright government takeover of the health care system is not a problem, but a minor tax penalty affecting 2% of adults is seen as an overwhelming hurdle.
    Constitutionally, it is. Obama himself has denied calling it a tax, because he knows he can't call it a tax, because it's not tied to income, value or population, which makes it the type of direct tax that's prohibited by Article I of the COTUS.

  9. #619
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I agree with you that the private insurance system is hosed. What I'm saying, though, is that we aren't going to be able to do rational reform, i.e. single payer, any time soon.

    I don't see allowing the insurance companies to tank our economy as being a great solution.
    Then you must be a vehement opponent of PPACA.

    If you leave government out of it, you also leave insurance companies to fend for themselves, and if that means chasing all their customers away with runaway premiums, then so be it and adios. Runaway prices should be met with going out of business, not bailed out by mandated participation. When government steps in and forces participation, that chains us all to each other and drags us down with the sinking ship that is their defective pricing and reimbursement practices.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 03-29-12 at 05:42 PM.

  10. #620
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,255

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    A 9-0 ruling would be stunning. I mean, that's how it SHOULD go, but I see a few of them (like Ginsburg) who would dissent just to dissent if the outcome were not in doubt.
    Ginsberg is a ACLU hack.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •