THis will not stand

[drsmith1072]

Specious Comparisons.

The requirement for auto insurance involves Liability Coverage in case one causes harm to others as a condition for sharing the public roads. One is not required to cover insurance for harm to oneself.

Worker's comp is insurance for being hurt on the job - for which one give up one's right to sue. It is income insurance while one cannot work - and involves the worker actually engaging in an activity to apply (working). (I'm not a supporter of this piece of big government lobbying efforts which causes individuals to give up rights.)

Mandating health insurance is forcing someone who is inactive (opting out) into action merely because that person is alive in America. That person's mere existence causes no threat to others (unlike sharing a road) - nor is there any activity similar to working to trigger a quid pro quo.

I guess you don't understand how insurance works since you think those w/o insurance don't cause harm to those with insurance.

They dont. Those without insurance use ER's...at the cost of the taxpayer...and we are OK with this. We do not see it as hurting us...we see it as a ramification for having a free market healthcare system.

Now, we will be paying for it AND not have the benefit of a free market helath care system.

And as for auto insurance.....you are only mandated to purchase it if you opt to own a car. So yes, it is personal choice.

With THIS HC law, you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life.

You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy.

It is unprecedented.

More made up BS. Imagine that. LOL

You hypocrites whine and cry all the time about how your tax dollars go for numerous things so it's hilarious that NOW that you think you can spin it you say that you are "OK" with taxpayer dollars paying for the care of uninsured people when they go to the hospital. LOL

Furthermore, you are WRONG with your "you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life. You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy. " BS because if you already have insurance then you are not required to purchase an additional plan.

however, thanks for the spin. it was mildly entertaining. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

you can give up on the auto insurance arguement...not the same animal. My health can't do 2500 bucks worth of damage to you bumper. If I damage your property, then I should have to pay for it. If I hurt your body, then I should have to pay for it. If I get sick, I'm not wronging you...these laws of protection designed to protect you from me, don't apply in health insurance.

Actually, it can do more damage than that. If you don't have health insurance (and you only have liability auto coverage) and you get hurt in a car accident, your treatment does indeed affect how much my insurance costs.

Are there not any wingnuts that actually understand how health insurance works?

Yeah...I do.....and reading what you have been saying, I fear that you may not yourself.

First of all, Auto is by state.

Secondly, there is a big difference between collisssion (NOT a mandate ) and liability (a mandate)...note: Collission may be a mandate by contract you may have with the financing company of your automobile

SO go ahead....ask away....do your best to try to convince me that Auto Insurance mandates are the same as the new healthcare mandate.

But I warn you....I use facts, not talking points....so toss me facts...not talking points.

No they are not the exactly the same but they are similar and that is all many have tried to say.

furthermore, i find it hilarious that you, who has a history of parroiting talking points and then disappearing from the thread after being called out for your BS, are trying to be critical as you accuse others of using talking points. LOL

 

[Oldandtired]

I guess you don't understand how insurance works since you think those w/o insurance don't cause harm to those with insurance.

They dont. Those without insurance use ER's...at the cost of the taxpayer...and we are OK with this. We do not see it as hurting us...we see it as a ramification for having a free market healthcare system.

Now, we will be paying for it AND not have the benefit of a free market helath care system.

And as for auto insurance.....you are only mandated to purchase it if you opt to own a car. So yes, it is personal choice.

With THIS HC law, you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life.

You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy.

It is unprecedented.

More made up BS. Imagine that. LOL

You hypocrites whine and cry all the time about how your tax dollars go for numerous things so it's hilarious that NOW that you think you can spin it you say that you are "OK" with taxpayer dollars paying for the care of uninsured people when they go to the hospital. LOL

Furthermore, you are WRONG with your "you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life. You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy. " BS because if you already have insurance then you are not required to purchase an additional plan.

however, thanks for the spin. it was mildly entertaining. LOL

You really dont have a clue.

You MUST OWN by law...is that better you fucking spinner?

YOU MUST OWN BY LAW....and if you dont already...YOU MUST BUY

Try to spin your weasly little ass out of that one you hack.

 

[Oldandtired]

Actually, it can do more damage than that. If you don't have health insurance (and you only have liability auto coverage) and you get hurt in a car accident, your treatment does indeed affect how much my insurance costs.

Are there not any wingnuts that actually understand how health insurance works?

Yeah...I do.....and reading what you have been saying, I fear that you may not yourself.

First of all, Auto is by state.

Secondly, there is a big difference between collisssion (NOT a mandate ) and liability (a mandate)...note: Collission may be a mandate by contract you may have with the financing company of your automobile

SO go ahead....ask away....do your best to try to convince me that Auto Insurance mandates are the same as the new healthcare mandate.

But I warn you....I use facts, not talking points....so toss me facts...not talking points.

No they are not the exactly the same but they are similar and that is all many have tried to say.

furthermore, i find it hilarious that you, who has a history of parroiting talking points and then disappearing from the thread after being called out for your BS, are trying to be critical as you accuse others of using talking points. LOL

One is considered the loser of a debate when he resorts to discrediting the opponent.

So you ar still the sorry ass loser you were the last trime I wiped your sorry ass off this board....and you PMed me begging me to stop hurting your feelings like you were a scared little child......and I said grow a pair of balls.....I see you didnt you hack.

 

[bodecea]

Making a Us citizen do something against their will should be intolerable for anyone. It violates your freedom and the people who jammed this down our throats are going to pay in every way. I've been told that I have to get insurace well you can go fuck yourself. I am a free person and not a slave of the government.

You're still here?

 

[drsmith1072]

Specious Comparisons.

The requirement for auto insurance involves Liability Coverage in case one causes harm to others as a condition for sharing the public roads. One is not required to cover insurance for harm to oneself.

Worker's comp is insurance for being hurt on the job - for which one give up one's right to sue. It is income insurance while one cannot work - and involves the worker actually engaging in an activity to apply (working). (I'm not a supporter of this piece of big government lobbying efforts which causes individuals to give up rights.)

Mandating health insurance is forcing someone who is inactive (opting out) into action merely because that person is alive in America. That person's mere existence causes no threat to others (unlike sharing a road) - nor is there any activity similar to working to trigger a quid pro quo.

Actually, one could easilly say that being "forced to buy health insurance" is very similar to being "forced to by auto insurance." It involves coverage in case one gets sick and has to go to the hospital where this coverage prevents OTHERS from being harmed by having to fund or pay for their care as a condition for sharing the use of said care. Yes, some will get their care subsidized anyway but they will still be paying into the system IN CASE of an emergency which is the very reason for auto insurance.

Please tell me who is forced to buy auto insurance.

Before you throw a fit...the answer is simple. Not a single Amrerican is forced to buy auto insurance. Not one. And this is a fact I can prove.

Any American that wishes not to buy auto insurance may take the necessary steps to not do so.

Can you say the same for health insurance per the new law?

Enough said.

uh you need me to spell everything out for you even though you have already admitted who is forced to buy auto insurance?? BTW you avoided the core of my post. Didn't you reacently attack someone who you claimed did that to a post of yours?? LOL

Please let me know when, IF EVER ,you become honest enough to actually debate a topic instead of spinning endlessly as you parrot republican party talking poiints. LOL

 

[Diuretic]

How about looking at the point of the analogy? The point being, I assume of course, that we all live under compulsion of some sort if we choose to live in an ordered society. It has nothing to do with "insurance", it is about compulsion as opposed to complete free will.

Perhaps...

However, the topic of this thread and therefore the context of the analogy was whether or not the madate to buy health insurance under penalty of law was consitutional and whether or not it was unprecedented.

So therefore, in an effort to debate the consitutionality and "lack of precedent" of this mandate, it was necessary to ditinguish between the two mandates of auto and health insurances.

Bear in mind...one side of the debate said auto insurance is a precedent....when, in fact, not only is auto insurance a mandate that originates at the state level; it is only a mandate for those that opt to own a vehicle....so it can not be considered a precedent for a federal mandate nor can it be considered a precedent for a mandate to purchase something from a third party.

I hope that clears things up for you.

Making a Us citizen do something against their will should be intolerable for anyone. It violates your freedom and the people who jammed this down our throats are going to pay in every way. I've been told that I have to get insurace well you can go fuck yourself. I am a free person and not a slave of the government.

I must have missed all that you pointed out Old

 

[Diuretic]

And what's more.....

If we believe in a comforting mythology then we are going to make ourselves easy targets for those who would exploit us. I realise that Americans - along with other people - cherish individual freedom, indeed on my first visit way back in 1984 I had a true sense of understanding the American attitude towards individualism, it's far more pronounced than in my society where we are pretty much conformist in many ways.

But let's not kid ourselves that any of us are truly free. We're not. None of us are. Some of us have greater freedoms than others, some poor bastards live in dumps like Saudi Arabia which is a dictatorship. But what we call freedom is never an absolute, it is always relative. When we discuss freedom we're actually discussing its extent, not its existence as an absolute. Maximising individual freedom while balancing the collective responsibility inherent in any society is the trick. But it has to be real freedom, not the misty-eyed bullshit mythology that the rulers try to sell us to keep us quiet.

The line in bold.....that is where we take separate forks in the road.

How so?

 

[Truthmatters]

They can always pay the fine

 

[Oldandtired]

They can always pay the fine

And be forced to buy it again or be brought up on charges of INTENTIONALLY ignoring the law of the land.

 

[drsmith1072]

Not sure how they have come up with the fact that ins rates will come down....Forcing all Americans to have insurance will increase the supply and demand, which will drive prices up. Covering existing conditions will too. Since they can't drop them, those with lots of sick people on their rolls can probably close shop and re-open as a new company. I see this helping the insurance companies more than the people...no wonder they are endorsing it. You'd think that requiring them to cover pre-existing conditions would turn them against it...but apparently there is a way out.

You obviusly don't understand how supply and demand works. Insurance is NOT in limited supply so how would more demand for something that is NOT limited and has many sources cause an increase in cost??

Based on your own analogy those companies with lots of sick people on their rolls will be cutting costs to try to draw in more people to curb the effects of the sick ones.

You are quite naive doc.

Basic risk management doc.

You know what risk management is doc? It is the basis of the insurance industry.

You increase the risk of a payout, you must increase the cost to purchase.

What will increase the risk of payout?

The mandatory elimination of pre-existing clauses Doc......as the insurance companies will now be insuring those that will be making necessary and costly claims.

So you tell me doc.....have you been lied to by your President? Sure seems you have been.

Basic risk management Doc. Basic logic Doc.

I am for elinination of pre-exisiting condition clauses...but I was not one of those fools that beleved the liar when he said COSTS WOULD GO DOWN.

That, doc, is impossible.

Oh yeah...and I am curious doc...you are a birght man....tell me.....do you know WHY the insurance companies had pre-exisitng condition clauses?

Becuase of the greed of the CONSUMER...not the insurer.....but your President did not think you needed to know that.

WOW all of that writing and most of it are nothing but baseless attacks. My statement had to do with supply and demand comment which is what the previous poster was referring to and you can't even keep up and stay on topic LOL
Did me burning you in previous threads get your goat so much that you have to try and find ways to try and tear me down?? LOL

As for WHY pre-existing condition clauses were initially created, it is far different from how they are being and have been used in recent years by the insurance industry. However, thanks for the spin.

 

[drsmith1072]

They dont. Those without insurance use ER's...at the cost of the taxpayer...and we are OK with this. We do not see it as hurting us...we see it as a ramification for having a free market healthcare system.

Now, we will be paying for it AND not have the benefit of a free market helath care system.

And as for auto insurance.....you are only mandated to purchase it if you opt to own a car. So yes, it is personal choice.

With THIS HC law, you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life.

You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy.

It is unprecedented.

More made up BS. Imagine that. LOL

You hypocrites whine and cry all the time about how your tax dollars go for numerous things so it's hilarious that NOW that you think you can spin it you say that you are "OK" with taxpayer dollars paying for the care of uninsured people when they go to the hospital. LOL

Furthermore, you are WRONG with your "you MUST purchase insurance regardless of what you do in your life. You have no choice involved....you live thereofre you must buy. " BS because if you already have insurance then you are not required to purchase an additional plan.

however, thanks for the spin. it was mildly entertaining. LOL

You really dont have a clue.

You MUST OWN by law...is that better you fucking spinner?

YOU MUST OWN BY LAW....and if you dont already...YOU MUST BUY

Try to spin your weasly little ass out of that one you hack.

LOL nice spin but if you already have insurance through your employer or any other means you do NOT have to buy any additional plans.

Funny how you changed your argument from

you live thereofre you must buy

to

YOU MUST OWN BY LAW....and if you dont already...YOU MUST BUY

So you screw up by saying something that isn't true and then attack me because I dared to call you out on your dishonest claim?? LOL

Thanks for the personal attacks and the spin but if you are so old and tired that it makes you this cranky then perhaps you should go take a nap. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Yeah...I do.....and reading what you have been saying, I fear that you may not yourself.

First of all, Auto is by state.

Secondly, there is a big difference between collisssion (NOT a mandate ) and liability (a mandate)...note: Collission may be a mandate by contract you may have with the financing company of your automobile

SO go ahead....ask away....do your best to try to convince me that Auto Insurance mandates are the same as the new healthcare mandate.

But I warn you....I use facts, not talking points....so toss me facts...not talking points.

No they are not the exactly the same but they are similar and that is all many have tried to say.

furthermore, i find it hilarious that you, who has a history of parroiting talking points and then disappearing from the thread after being called out for your BS, are trying to be critical as you accuse others of using talking points. LOL

One is considered the loser of a debate when he resorts to discrediting the opponent.

LOL you make this statement and then follow it up with your attempts to discredit me. LOL

So you ar still the sorry ass loser you were the last trime I wiped your sorry ass off this board....and you PMed me begging me to stop hurting your feelings like you were a scared little child......and I said grow a pair of balls.....I see you didnt you hack.

Funny but the last few debates I remember between us ended with you disappearing from the thread. LOL Oh and IF this PM ever really occured I am sure that you have a copy of it to show everyone don't you?? Oh you mean you don't beause it NEVER happened.

WOW how far you will stoop as you try to discredit your opponent. Which according to you means that you lost the debate. LOL

read it and weep.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/101468-democrats-caused-the-global-financial-meltdown-10.html

 

[Chat Room Hero]

Excuse me , but hasn't auto insurance been mandatory (i.e.-the law, you will buy it) for years?

hasn't Workers Comp also been mandatory for years?

On that note, did you know that WC is mandatory , even if you have ZERO workers, and because the executive officers of a type S corp can be the only de facto 'workers' , and sign off on themselves the policy is mandatory , AND effectively covers nobody in the company?

Perhaps if some of you flag waving freedom loving Americans could delve into the past debacles of big insurance legislating itself into what you suddenly precieve as corporate totaltarianism , you'd be better prepared to comment on it

~S~

Well here is where your point as so many like to bring up, is 100% wrong and invalid. Auto insurance is required only if you DECIDE you want to drive a car. The feds don't force you to drive, and they don't require you to start a company, therefor nobody is required to buy auto insurance or pay WC.

Only people that CHOOSE to drive or CHOOSE to start a company must pay. Nobody is required to buy a car or start a company.

My sister-in-law lives in New York and takes the bus everywhere and does not need a car. She does not drive at all and does not have a DL. This Bill would be like telling her that even though she does not drive or even own a car or even have a DL, she needs to pay a car insurance premium every month to cover someone else that has a car and drives. How is that American?

Curious?? what kind of identifcation does she use?? Does she already have health insurance?? If not how does SHE pay for her care? Does she even really exist or is she just a figment of your imagination?? LOL

She uses a state ID card and she has health insurance through her work, where else would she have it? She has lived in NY about 12 years and never had a car, she moved from another country. My brother has been there 15 years and just bought a car a year ago, never needed one before he moved out of the city. You take a train or cab or metro car or walk everywhere. Everything you need is within 2 miles walking distance and the subway goes everywhere else. I have been there many times over the past 15 years and never had any use for a car except once when we went out of state and borrowed one.

How do you not know what a state ID is? Did you assume that everyone has a drivers license as their major form of ID? Really? What does her not having a car have to do with her paying for care? She takes the same train to and from work every day. I wonder if you really exist.

 

[Chat Room Hero]

Yeah...I do.....and reading what you have been saying, I fear that you may not yourself.

First of all, Auto is by state.

Secondly, there is a big difference between collisssion (NOT a mandate ) and liability (a mandate)...note: Collission may be a mandate by contract you may have with the financing company of your automobile

SO go ahead....ask away....do your best to try to convince me that Auto Insurance mandates are the same as the new healthcare mandate.

But I warn you....I use facts, not talking points....so toss me facts...not talking points.

If I CHOOSE to ride a bike and I don't own a car, do I have to buy auto insurance? No
If I CHOOSE not to use medical services will I be forced to buy health insurance? Yes

There is the difference, they are not even close to the same thing.

I have the OPTION not to drive, entirely my choice. There is no law saying I must own a car or drive a car.

If you want to compare it to healthcare- I chose not to own a boat or a motorcycle so I have never been required to buy insurance on those and I doubt anyone wants to be required universally to pay motorcycle and boat insurance when they don't own a boat or a motorcycle.

If you were required by law at age 26 to pay $150 a month in auto insurance, $125 in boat insurance and another $100 in motorcycle insurance regardless of owning any of the 3 ever in your life, then you'd have an apples to apples comparison.

Excuse me sir.....we are debating on the same side....you should read a post completely.

I was explaining to someone who questioned our knowledge of isnurance that I know plenty about insurance...

And there is NO WAY you can compare the mandate to own auto insurance with the mandate to own Health Insurance.

As I said earlier..

You OPT to buy a car...it is a choice.
You do NOT opt to be born...no choice.

As I said...read my post...dont just jump down someones throat.

Settle down Tiger. I quoted the wrong post, I meant to quote the one you were replying to not yours. No need to excuse yourself or call me sir.

Nobody is jumping down your throat so just sit back, crack a beer, and relax.