Can someone show me where the Constitution says I must pay for someone else's healthcare.

[Zincwarrior]

You're paying for Argentina's but only if Trump's pal Meliel wins the election.

https://thehill.com/business/5555148-milei-trump-ally-argentina-economy/

They are selling soybeans to China instead of US farmers, FYI.

 

[maj]

So then, what is the republican plan for healthcare?

Why ask them? What is your personal plan?

 

[NetJedi]

"Are you attempting to put forth the argument that Government is more efficient at allocating resources than markets?"
Are you attempting to revise history?

I'm pointing out that your argument runs counter to historical fact patterns.

Was it the markets that defeated Nazism (and, Stalinism, for that matter)? "Who won WWI
I, you so smart?", to steal a question from Firesign Theater.

..... You believe that was done efficiently?

and even if someone, somewhere were to buy into the ridiculous non-sequitur assertion, it would only indicate that the ONE thing government does efficiently is kill people and destroy things using tools built by free enterprise but alas' it doesn't even meet that bar.

Certainly, context makes a difference. It was market demand that made the telegraph, telephone, automobile, radio, air travel, television, computers and the Internet. These were not government dictated or compulsory, and they were expensive. At the same time, defeating Germany and Japan while also supporting allies to massive extents was entirely a product of central planning and government.

They were expensive when introduced but as capacity ramped up, distribution was built out and technology improved they got CHEAPER until that is, government got involved with regulation and picking winners and losers.

Government involvement always leads to increased costs 'cause TANSTAFL and the fact that central planning cannot account for all the variables in market demand.

And that has a tremendous amount of value.

Killing people and destroying capital has a tremendous amount of value?

Apparently you missed the fact that GOVERNMENT was involved in both sides of that conflict. The only reason the U.S. won it was because our system of free enterprise created a far larger and more efficient manufacturing base than the central planning systems of Nazi Germany and Militarist Japan did.

Heck if we'd have followed your prescription of central economic planning we'd have lost WW II.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You're paying for Argentina's but only if Trump's pal Meliel wins the election.

https://thehill.com/business/5555148-milei-trump-ally-argentina-economy/

They are selling soybeans to China instead of US farmers, FYI.

So? I didn't see soybean farmers being hurt by aiding Argentina anywhere in that article.

 

[Stryder50]

Maybe have emoyers pay the full amount, no deductibles for employees?

Think you meant "employers".
Clearly you are ignorant on basic economics and business operations.
That "pay full amount" would be passed on to you and other consumers of the goods and/or services those businesses offer.

 

[Winston]

Article I, Section 8, states that Congress has the power to "...raise and support armies...[and]...provide and maintain a navy..."

Congress has the power to tax and spend.

That's about it. You, as a legal taxpayer, have to pay for the healthcare of the Armed Forces.

Nobody else.

Happy?

Why? Congress has the power to raise and support armies. But what about veterans. Paying for their health care is not part of raising and supporting an Army. If there is no constitutional provision allowing for the government to furnish health care private individuals there is no constitutional provision allowing government to furnish health care to veterans and damn sure not ex-presidents and retired members of Congress.

 

[Winston]

Think you meant "employers".
Clearly you are ignorant on basic economics and business operations.
That "pay full amount" would be passed on to you and other consumers of the goods and/or services those businesses offer.

You mean like tariffs?

 

[Winston]

Then you look at government misconduct, inefficiency, ineffectiveness that caused that situation and exercise your right as a citizen to demand that it stop doing whatever is so destructive to the general welfare of the people.

The free market ensures that products and services will be affordable to the people or else those providing those products and services cannot stay in business because nobody can pay for them.

Bad government policy and initiatives disrupts that process.

The "free market" doesn't apply to health care. Most industrialized nations have figured that out. For a free market to work, just like for a contract to be legal, there must be equal consideration. Now, if the choice is pay for and take your insulin shot, OR ******* DIE--there is not really equal consideration.

 

[dblack]

The "free market" doesn't apply to health care. Most industrialized nations have figured that out.

Health care works fine a free market. But lots of people don't like free markets, so they pass laws that thwart it.

For a free market to work, just like for a contract to be legal, there must be equal consideration. Now, if the choice is pay for and take your insulin shot, OR ******* DIE--there is not really equal consideration.

?? What does that mean? How does "equal consideration" apply?

 

[dblack]

You mean like tariffs?

Exactly.

 

[Stryder50]

You mean like tariffs?

Tariffs are part of the equation.
Also, tariffs are a two way street and the USA has been getting shafted by other nations for a long time now.
Reciprocal is long overdue.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

So when we hit a point when only a few can afford health care, then what?

When there are only a few that can afford it, there will be no more insurance. Most insurance is a racket anyway.

 

[Stryder50]

Why? Congress has the power to raise and support armies. But what about veterans. Paying for their health care is not part of raising and supporting an Army. If there is no constitutional provision allowing for the government to furnish health care private individuals there is no constitutional provision allowing government to furnish health care to veterans and damn sure not ex-presidents and retired members of Congress.

Anything and everything a government provides comes via taxes (or tariffs, which are another form of tax) which ultimately the consumer/citizens pay for.
TANSTAAFL
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

 

[Winston]

Are you attempting to put forth the argument that Government is more efficient at allocating resources than markets?

The reason health insurance is so expensive in the United States is a direct result of government distortion of and intervention in the market place via all the idiotic schemes dreamed up by politicians and bureaucrats that are more interested in optics, paying off special interests and buying votes than in end results.

If you want to make something more expensive and lower quality, put government in charge of it, politicians and bureaucrats have no incentive to be efficient or quality conscious, which is evidenced by the fact that tax payers pay hundreds of billions of dollars a year and government has thousands of pages of regulations dealing with health care and the system has been FUBAR'd.

How uninformed and simplistic. The reason health insurance is so expensive is that the market is segmented. Look it up, it is a microeconomic concept used to maximize profits. The foundation of our health insurance system is employer provided health insurance. A pretty sweet way to segment the market. Accountants share their healthcare risk with other accountants, factory workers share their risk with other factory workers.

Then the heath insurance market segments the market based on age, sex, and even zip code. Even height and weight can be a factor. Fat people share their health care risk with other fat people. Live in an area of a cancer cluster, well you share your risk with other members living in that same cancer cluster.

What you end up with is an almost infinite number of tiny little pools all sharing the health care risk among themselves. Of course it makes sense to have a national system, like Medicare for all, where there is just one big ass risk pool. Sure, some people are going to pay more but far more are going to pay less.

 

[initforme]

Premium plans run upward of 30 grand. If someoneis working 40 plus hours for 50 lousy pittance dollars how do they afforrd healthcare? Things are looking bleak in that respect.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Don't bring the "general welfare" bullshit, cuz making one person pay for something for another isn't general welfare.

Dammit nostra, you just destroyed their whole argument! Gotta at least give 'em a chance!!

 

[ThisIsMe]

Actual text, quote: "promote the general Welfare"

Note the term is "promote"*, not "provide".

* Could also mean "not prevent" ...

Welfare meant the general condition in broad application, per dictionary of that time, not the guv'mint interpretation and policies of the Present.

Well, before someone brings it up and tries to challenge you on this, there are actually 2 areas this is repeated. The preamble and then in A1S8 where it actually does say "provide" for the general welfare, but its not meant as a catch all for the government giving anything to the people other than whats listed in the 18 delegated powers

 

[ThisIsMe]

Actual text, quote: "promote the general Welfare"

Note the term is "promote"*, not "provide".

* Could also mean "not prevent" ...

Welfare meant the general condition in broad application, per dictionary of that time, not the guv'mint interpretation and policies of the Present.

Well, before someone brings it up and tries to challenge you on this, there are actually 2 areas this is repeated. The preamble and then in A1S8 where it actually does say "provide" for the general welfare, but its not meant as a catch all for the government giving anything to the people other than whats listed in the 18

So when we hit a point when only a few can afford health care, then what?

find ways to make Healthcare cheaper?

 

[BrokeLoser]

So then, what is the republican plan for healthcare?

Buy yourself insurance if you want it…it’s just like buying a car.

They seem to like it the way it is.

“The way it is”?
Do you honestly believe there’s even one Republican who wants to give free healthcare to even one foreigner?

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

It is not a question of healthcare being "paid for" by the government. The the people pay for the healthcare we get now. That sum is more, proportionally, than in most systems Americans consider to be "government run". That means the same level of healthcare presently available could be had with less expenditure. Those facts do not mean that U.S. healthcare has to paid for through government channels. The government's intervention in supervision and controls probably would be involved. It might be the creator of the system that takes the money now being spent and applies those funds more efficiently. In other words, those presently paying into the system as it functions now would continue to pay and would get more and better treatment, or would get the same treatment and pay less.

Did you seriously just post “government takes those funds now being spent and applies those more efficiently’ ?