- Thread starter
- #81
This is great. Shouldn't all citizens have equal right to CHOOSE the public option based on
if they find it works for them.
Obamacare exchanged, or spiritual healing and charities and teaching hospitals for covering universal care).
In a perfect and ideal world one can cling to that...in the real world compromises have to be made .... in my youth the Government could require me to report for a physical and go fight a war whether I wanted to or not...that is how WW 2 was fought .the draft....if I want to own a car I have to buy car insurance and a tag ...no options on that.... is this a perfect law...of course not...a process of improving it to address issues should occur...but the OCD panic and throwing Freedom as an argument against it is nuts...we compromise all the time all the time....its how we can live in society ...why do we live in societies...its Superior to going at it alone ...
Last I checked, we AGREE to decide car insurance policies PER STATE, where citizens can VOTE ON LAWS and reform them per STATE (not rely on a federal battle through Congress to change state laws), and don't require all people to buy insurance in advance of needing it or else pay a federal fine taken out of your salary. In some states, you can even show ABILITY TO PAY and not be required to buy insurance! So why not allow that for health care, that if people can cover their own health care other ways without imposing on the public, then insurance is optional, but other ways are exempted too.
Wouldn't you say that was excessive if the costs of hospitalizations from car accidents was pushed to a federal level,
and the IRS started imposing a tax penalty on every citizen IN ADVANCE to cover the shortfall?
Wouldn't you say the States should go after the criminals who incurred costs to the public, and not penalize citizens
on a FEDERAL LEVEL.
Do you see the difference between STATE and FEDERAL.
And how much harder it is to reform and represent laws on a FEDERAL level through Congress
than it is to make changes locally on a STATE level.
TyroneSlothrop The reason you don't see people objecting to car insurance policies is we AGREE to those,
on a STATE level where we do have more direct representation.
If this were blown up to a federal level, YES you might see the same objections demanding that this be kept to the states where the people can vote on and change laws more directly! And NOT try to micromanage car insurance through the federal govt when it is better handled locally by state where people can VOTE on and AGREE to the terms, unlike going through Congress.