2/3 say ditch individual health care mandate

[Listening]

exactly...Imagine if government forced them to?

Indeed! and when faced with the need to insure hundreds of thousands of previously-existing homes in flood plains, the government didn't force companies to offer flood insurance. Instead, they saw flood insurance as a public good and offered it through the government with the government assuming the risk.

What do you mean the Govt assumed the risk??

You idiot. We the taxpayers have rebuilt homes for folks living on flood plains, beaches and loads of other places where they never should have built homes. Some of em more than once.

Good deal for the fucking home owner but not so good for the taxpayers footing the bills.

Yes...

As J. Stossel pointed out. People build homes in places where they get damaged, get replaced, and get damaged again.

And somewhere in all this, they seem to think we should keep replacing them.

If you want me to pay for your home replacement, I am going to have a say in where you put it.

 

[Syphon]

In the historical context I understand why they passed the act. However, the constition gave them no authority to pass such an act requiring people to buy guns.

Do you think that act would pass the supreme court today?

We were in a time of war then and they used that, just like Bush and CO used the war on terror to pass the patriot act (unconstitutional), to pass something that otherwise would not be allowed.

but why would the founding father pass any law if they didnt believe the constitution gave them the authority to do precisely that?

You completely ran away from Madison on another thread. Why are you asking this question when that answer was provided to you ?

youre an idiot and you cant argue madison if it kick you in the face. so go try arguing with grade school kids, you might have a better chance.

 

[Listening]

Private SS accounts?

I am 100% for it.

The government is forcing me to save money....I dont need them to force me to do it...I do it becuase it isd what I need to do.....I dont need daddy to do it for me.
I am an adult.

So the government forcing people to buy health insurance is unconstitutional, but forcing them to open a brokerage account at Fidelity isn't? What makes these two things different?

people do not choose to participate in the health care market, since every person will need health care at some point in their life. not by choice, but by necessity.
you dont choose to have a stroke, you dont choose to have a heart attack, you dont choose to get in a car accident, you dont choose to get cancer, you dont choose be born with a disability, you dont choose to have a genetic defect.

"Congress had a rational basis for concluding that the minimum coverage provision is essential to the Affordable Care Act's larger reforms to the national markets in health care delivery and health insurance," he said. "The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity."
Judge James Graham -- a Reagan appointee -- agreed

show me where everyone will participate in the financial markets? show me any other service that people will use without choice.

Garbage.

People can chose to never have health insurance nor utilize health care services.

 

[Syphon]

So the government forcing people to buy health insurance is unconstitutional, but forcing them to open a brokerage account at Fidelity isn't? What makes these two things different?

people do not choose to participate in the health care market, since every person will need health care at some point in their life. not by choice, but by necessity.
you dont choose to have a stroke, you dont choose to have a heart attack, you dont choose to get in a car accident, you dont choose to get cancer, you dont choose be born with a disability, you dont choose to have a genetic defect.

"Congress had a rational basis for concluding that the minimum coverage provision is essential to the Affordable Care Act's larger reforms to the national markets in health care delivery and health insurance," he said. "The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity."
Judge James Graham -- a Reagan appointee -- agreed

show me where everyone will participate in the financial markets? show me any other service that people will use without choice.

Garbage.

People can chose to never have health insurance nor utilize health care services.

guess when you get in that car accident they wont have to take you to the hospital, or when you have that heart attack the doctor will just ignore you.....

guess that better for us that you wont leach off the system anymore..

 

[Listening]

but why would the founding father pass any law if they didnt believe the constitution gave them the authority to do precisely that?

You completely ran away from Madison on another thread. Why are you asking this question when that answer was provided to you ?

youre an idiot and you cant argue madison if it kick you in the face. so go try arguing with grade school kids, you might have a better chance.

I might have a better chance of getting a rational response.

Your sentence does not make any sense....maybe you should get a gradeschooler to help you.

And your premise for why I am an idiot ?

I presented Madisons writings on Federal vs. State governments and you provided a quote from a fifth grade history book.

 

[8537]

exactly...Imagine if government forced them to?

Indeed! and when faced with the need to insure hundreds of thousands of previously-existing homes in flood plains, the government didn't force companies to offer flood insurance. Instead, they saw flood insurance as a public good and offered it through the government with the government assuming the risk.

What do you mean the Govt assumed the risk??

I mean the government is the payee for claims made to the National Flood Insurance Program. They are also the recipient of premiums. It's a government insurance program.

You idiot. We the taxpayers have rebuilt homes for folks living on flood plains, beaches and loads of other places where they never should have built homes. Some of em more than once.

hmm...it's like I just said that! Speaking of idiots...

Good deal for the fucking home owner but not so good for the taxpayers footing the bills.

In most years the NFIP runs a surplus, though it certainly has years when it runs a substantial deficit.

 

[Syphon]

You completely ran away from Madison on another thread. Why are you asking this question when that answer was provided to you ?

youre an idiot and you cant argue madison if it kick you in the face. so go try arguing with grade school kids, you might have a better chance.

I might have a better chance of getting a rational response.

Your sentence does not make any sense....maybe you should get a gradeschooler to help you.

And your premise for why I am an idiot ?

I presented Madisons writings on Federal vs. State governments and you provided a quote from a fifth grade history book.

yup and you were too stupid to comprehend the text of a 5th grade text book.

that argument went way over your head.

 

[8537]

Indeed! and when faced with the need to insure hundreds of thousands of previously-existing homes in flood plains, the government didn't force companies to offer flood insurance. Instead, they saw flood insurance as a public good and offered it through the government with the government assuming the risk.

What do you mean the Govt assumed the risk??

You idiot. We the taxpayers have rebuilt homes for folks living on flood plains, beaches and loads of other places where they never should have built homes. Some of em more than once.

Good deal for the fucking home owner but not so good for the taxpayers footing the bills.

Yes...

As J. Stossel pointed out. People build homes in places where they get damaged, get replaced, and get damaged again.

And somewhere in all this, they seem to think we should keep replacing them.

If you want me to pay for your home replacement, I am going to have a say in where you put it.

Since about 1989, anyone building in a flood plain where such development is allowed pays actuarially accurate rates for flood insurance.

 

[Listening]

guess when you get in that car accident they wont have to take you to the hospital, or when you have that heart attack the doctor will just ignore you.....

guess that better for us that you wont leach off the system anymore..

I can buy coverage under my auto insurance.

And I can pay for my care out of pocket.

Or I can choose to not have care.

Why don't you try acting like an adult and stop with the stupidassed arguments ?

 

[Listening]

What do you mean the Govt assumed the risk??

You idiot. We the taxpayers have rebuilt homes for folks living on flood plains, beaches and loads of other places where they never should have built homes. Some of em more than once.

Good deal for the fucking home owner but not so good for the taxpayers footing the bills.

Yes...

As J. Stossel pointed out. People build homes in places where they get damaged, get replaced, and get damaged again.

And somewhere in all this, they seem to think we should keep replacing them.

If you want me to pay for your home replacement, I am going to have a say in where you put it.

Since about 1989, anyone building in a flood plain where such development is allowed pays actuarially accurate rates for flood insurance.

So, did you just contradict yourself ?

I am not sure I understand what you mean by actuarially accurate.

 

[Listening]

yup and you were too stupid to comprehend the text of a 5th grade text book.

that argument went way over your head.

There was no argument. The history book was wrong....imagine that.

That you need to appeal to a fifth grade book shows just how educated you are.

 

[Syphon]

bwhahaha a history book written for 5th graders went over your head, and the only argument you can come up with is that the book is wrong? man i almost pissed my pants i laughed so hard.

im gonna post the link for everyone to see how dumb you really are.

The Civil War for Fifth Graders

Radford University's website has the link. Who is Radford University you might ask...

The institution now known as Radford University was founded by the Virginia General Assembly in the spring of 1910. The State Normal and Industrial School for Women at Radford grew out of a late nineteenth-century effort to expand Virginia's public school system and prepare a sufficient number of teachers. The school was to be located on 33 acres in east Radford known as the "Heth Grove." On October 3, 1911, Dr. John Preston McConnell was appointed president of the institution.
Radford University is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards and to upholding the public’s trust. We recognize that our behavior affects not only our own individual reputation, but also that of Radford University. Accordingly, this Code of Ethics forms the ethical principles that will guide all members of the university community in all decisions and activities.

just keep digging that hole.....

so tell the world again how the North didnt want a strong central government and how the south didnt want all the power to rest with the states. and tell us all again how the North winning didnt mean that the fed was to be strong.....

 

[8537]

Yes...

As J. Stossel pointed out. People build homes in places where they get damaged, get replaced, and get damaged again.

And somewhere in all this, they seem to think we should keep replacing them.

If you want me to pay for your home replacement, I am going to have a say in where you put it.

Since about 1989, anyone building in a flood plain where such development is allowed pays actuarially accurate rates for flood insurance.

So, did you just contradict yourself ?

No.

I am not sure I understand what you mean by actuarially accurate.

Rates paid into the program are high enough to cover the associated risk of coverage.

 

[Listening]

bwhahaha a history book written for 5th graders went over your head, and the only argument you can come up with is that the book is wrong? man i almost pissed my pants i laughed so hard.

im gonna post the link for everyone to see how dumb you really are.

The Civil War for Fifth Graders

Radford University's website has the link. Who is Radford University you might ask...

The institution now known as Radford University was founded by the Virginia General Assembly in the spring of 1910. The State Normal and Industrial School for Women at Radford grew out of a late nineteenth-century effort to expand Virginia's public school system and prepare a sufficient number of teachers. The school was to be located on 33 acres in east Radford known as the "Heth Grove." On October 3, 1911, Dr. John Preston McConnell was appointed president of the institution.
Radford University is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards and to upholding the public’s trust. We recognize that our behavior affects not only our own individual reputation, but also that of Radford University. Accordingly, this Code of Ethics forms the ethical principles that will guide all members of the university community in all decisions and activities.

just keep digging that hole.....

so tell the world again how the North didnt want a strong central government and how the south didnt want all the power to rest with the states. and tell us all again how the North winning didnt mean that the fed was to be strong.....

That you are a complete jackass is no longer in doubt.

I asked if you knew what Shay's Rebellion was and how it triggered the end of the Articles of Confederation. Understanding what the difference is between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution is the first step.

You, didn't answer.

So, please show the world how you continue to appeal to fifth grade history books all the while ignoring the context of the Federalist Papers as written by the Father of the Constitution.

Please go to the sixth grade and get a little better informed.

Moron.

 

[Listening]

Since about 1989, anyone building in a flood plain where such development is allowed pays actuarially accurate rates for flood insurance.

So, did you just contradict yourself ?

No.

I am not sure I understand what you mean by actuarially accurate.

Rates paid into the program are high enough to cover the associated risk of coverage.

But didn't you say no actuarial would offer flood insurance ?

 

[8537]

So, did you just contradict yourself ?

No.

I am not sure I understand what you mean by actuarially accurate.

Rates paid into the program are high enough to cover the associated risk of coverage.

But didn't you say no actuarial would offer flood insurance ?

Yes, I did. Perhaps you should read a bit closer. Hint: Not all homes in flood plains were built after 1989.

 

[Claudette]

Indeed! and when faced with the need to insure hundreds of thousands of previously-existing homes in flood plains, the government didn't force companies to offer flood insurance. Instead, they saw flood insurance as a public good and offered it through the government with the government assuming the risk.

What do you mean the Govt assumed the risk??

I mean the government is the payee for claims made to the National Flood Insurance Program. They are also the recipient of premiums. It's a government insurance program.

You idiot. We the taxpayers have rebuilt homes for folks living on flood plains, beaches and loads of other places where they never should have built homes. Some of em more than once.

hmm...it's like I just said that! Speaking of idiots...

Good deal for the fucking home owner but not so good for the taxpayers footing the bills.

In most years the NFIP runs a surplus, though it certainly has years when it runs a substantial deficit.

Who provides the money for any Govt program??

Your an idiot.

 

[Listening]

No.



Rates paid into the program are high enough to cover the associated risk of coverage.

But didn't you say no actuarial would offer flood insurance ?

Yes, I did. Perhaps you should read a bit closer. Hint: Not all homes in flood plains were built after 1989.

Just looking for the linkage.

Thanks.

 

[Syphon]

bwhahaha a history book written for 5th graders went over your head, and the only argument you can come up with is that the book is wrong? man i almost pissed my pants i laughed so hard.

im gonna post the link for everyone to see how dumb you really are.

The Civil War for Fifth Graders

Radford University's website has the link. Who is Radford University you might ask...

The institution now known as Radford University was founded by the Virginia General Assembly in the spring of 1910. The State Normal and Industrial School for Women at Radford grew out of a late nineteenth-century effort to expand Virginia's public school system and prepare a sufficient number of teachers. The school was to be located on 33 acres in east Radford known as the "Heth Grove." On October 3, 1911, Dr. John Preston McConnell was appointed president of the institution.
Radford University is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards and to upholding the public’s trust. We recognize that our behavior affects not only our own individual reputation, but also that of Radford University. Accordingly, this Code of Ethics forms the ethical principles that will guide all members of the university community in all decisions and activities.

just keep digging that hole.....

so tell the world again how the North didnt want a strong central government and how the south didnt want all the power to rest with the states. and tell us all again how the North winning didnt mean that the fed was to be strong.....

That you are a complete jackass is no longer in doubt.

I asked if you knew what Shay's Rebellion was and how it triggered the end of the Articles of Confederation. Understanding what the difference is between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution is the first step.

You, didn't answer.

So, please show the world how you continue to appeal to fifth grade history books all the while ignoring the context of the Federalist Papers as written by the Father of the Constitution.

Please go to the sixth grade and get a little better informed.

Moron.

we never talked about Shays Rebellion or the Article of Confederation. my you have with yourself in your little fantasy world, but not where the big boys and girls play.

we talked about the federalist papers, to which you completely ignored my reference to Fed 10. and why many people considered it the most import of all the federalist papers. which plainly advocates for a strong central government.

did you forget all about this one?
Federalist Paper #10 is arguably one of the most important documents in U.S. history. Madison spoke openly and honestly, from his class-based point of view, about the issues of democracy and republicanism...clearly favoring the latter. He touches on many issues still with us today...class divisions, in particular...and stratification by design, in general. He openly discusses just "who should govern" and why he thinks so. Although it has an innocent sounding title, its content is very powerful...it is far more than "just a political document." It's a philosophical justification for a particular class-based point of view.
Federalist Paper #10

One of the most famous essay is the Federalist No. 10 written by Madison. It constructs the problem of "factions" and how a large republic framed by the Constitution, can better give a cure for these.
What is federalist paper 10 about

and again, prove the south wasnt for states rights and the north wasnt for a strong fed. you should really take your foot out of your mouth from time to time.

Causes of the Civil War - Causes of the American Civil War - Beginning of the Civil War
As the South recognized that control of the government was slipping away, it turned to a states' rights argument to protect slavery. Southerners claimed that the federal government was prohibited by the Tenth Amendment from impinging upon the right of slaveholders take their "property" into a new territory. They also stated that the federal government was not permitted to interfere with slavery in those states where it already existed. They felt that this type of strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution coupled with nullification, or perhaps secession would protect their way of life.

you havent even posted one link providing evidence you even have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[8537]

[

Who provides the money for any Govt program??

Your an idiot.

Well, in the case of the National Flood Insurance Program the vast majority of the money is "provided" by the clients who hold flood insurance. Any amount beyond the ability of the fund to pay is covered by the taxpayers and lenders, which is why we have an NFIP instead of private flood insurance.

FYI, if you are going to call someone an idiot you should at least employ proper English. It's not "your an idiot". It's "you are an idiot" or, "You're an idiot".