Should Gov't have Limits?

Swallow, your trolling for business like this amounts to Spam. Take a break once in a while.
 
Let's cut to the chase - should the gov't have the power to force you to buy something, anything, or not buy it? Do they have the power to decide for you what's good for you and what isn't, a decision you have no say in? For example, should they be able to determine the conditions for who gets what medical treatment, based on cost analysis by a bunch of bureaucrats?

And let's not change the subject by bitching about the private insurance system. Separate issue, please stick to the basic question. Should the gov't have any limits at all?


My take: the gov't has no business making personal decisions for it's citizens. Nor does it have a responsibility to assist those who make the wrong choices. Gov't should be restricted to ONLY those functions that individual cannot do by themselves, such as national defense.

"The government" can, does, and always has mandated certain purchases. The question in regard to the individual mandat4e of the Affordable Care Act centers on whether the federal government has the authority it attempts to exercise here. There is no doubt whatever that state governments do. But the federal government, unlike state governments, is one of enumerated powers, and it is arguable that the individual mandate steps beyond what is authorized by the Constitution as a power of the federal government. But the reasoning behind that has nothing to do with whether a government should have the power to intrude on personal purchasing decisions, as a matter of political philosophy or government authority in general. It's purely a question of federalism and whether this is a power reserved for the states.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top