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

[protectionist]

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

Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for any other nation's border security but our own?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for someone else's storm or flood damage?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for someone else's retirement?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for someone else's economic distress?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for any other nation's healthcare?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for any other nation's pensions?
Can someone show me where the Constitution says I have to pay for any other nation's anything?

1. What you have to do, is not only prescribed by the Constitution. It is aso prescribed by thousands of laws.

2. All of us paying for someone else's this or that, is also all of us paying for our own these or those things, if/whenever we/you may need those things someday. Lots of riches to rags stories out there. You never know where you will be 10, 20, 30 years from now.
Some people think they have everything all figured out, all laid out. No. Life is much more complicated.

 

[candycorn]

You don’t know what your health insurance costs do you. You certainly don’t know what it was before obiecare.

Actually I do, My premiums have gone up about 13 dollars since Obama left office; 13 dollars over 9 years.

 

[protectionist]

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 ensures that products and services will be affordable to the people really generally only applies to non-essential things. When prices get too high (sporting goods, musical instruments, jewelry, etc, people stop buying, yes.

But for essential goods (ex. housing rents, gas, food) sellers raise prices too high to where people can pay, but then they can't pay for much of anything else. May have to go out and get second job. Borrow, steal, etc.

For these essential things, regulation sometimes becomes needed, and govt is the only thing that can do it.

 

[Greenbeard]

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.

The Federal government was intended to provide the national defense, promote, (not provide) the general welfare

The Constitution don't say it exactly but the preamble lists the duties of the federal government to "provide for the common defense" and to "promote the general welfare". You could say that government sponsored health care is part of promoting the general welfare for citizens. However there is no legal or Constitutional requirement to offer health care to undocumented aliens who have entered the U.S. illegally. Somebody please tell that to Schumer.

That's "providing" the general welfare.
The words provide and promote, used separately in the preamble, necessarily mean different things.

Promote, not provide.

If you’re going to hang your hat on the deep significance of choosing “promote” vs “provide,” you may want to read the actual document.

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;”

 

[JWBooth]

1. What you have to do, is not only prescribed by the Constitution. It is aso prescribed by thousands of laws.

2. All of us paying for someone else's this or that, is also all of us paying for our own these or those things, if/whenever we/you may need those things someday. Lots of riches to rags stories out there. You never know where you will be 10, 20, 30 years from now.
Some people think they have everything all figured out, all laid out. No. Life is much more complicated.

The free market ensures that products and services will be affordable to the people really generally only applies to non-essential things. When prices get too high (sporting goods, musical instruments, jewelry, etc, people stop buying, yes.

But for essential goods (ex. housing rents, gas, food) sellers raise prices too high to where people can pay, but then they can't pay for much of anything else. May have to go out and get second job. Borrow, steal, etc.

For these essential things, regulation sometimes becomes needed, and govt is the only thing that can do it.

I see, it’s all bollocks except for the shit that benefits you.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Not specifically in those words, but implied in obligations in other areas, such as common defence for Air Force, Space Force, Marines. Others may be implied in the Amendments.

if you like it, its implied. If you don't its not.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Fascinating. So Medicare is unconstitutional and all old people are on their own.

Yes, Medicare at the federal level is unconstitutional, but that doesnt mean old people have to be on their own. Each state can implement their own programs to help care for their residents, and then the federal government can stop taking so much in taxes from the states.

 

[ThisIsMe]

IIRC, Preamble is where it says "promote".
A1S8 is "provide for the common Defence and General Welfare of the United States;"

Correct

Seems we have a contradiction or conflict in duties and authorities, along with methods to perform such.

No conflict. I think the words here are used interchangeably. Both are subject to the delegated powers.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I doubt doctors and nurses, etc. will want to take major pay cuts. Also not sure if I want to be treated by someone who is the cheapest.

Im sure they dont, but healthcare costs are never going to be competitive as long as government keeps subsidizing it. Take government out of it and let health providers compete for people's business.

If you are overweight, don't exercise, use tobacco and alcohol to excess, don't consume healthy nutrition, etc.; don't see why I and your fellow citizens should have to pay towards your medical care expenses.

Health insurance needs to be structured similar to auto/driver insurance.

I agree, but there needs to be changes in our culture as well. America is the fattest country in the world because of our culture, but also because of all the chemicals and crap they put in our food. A discussion for another time.

 

[Marener]

Im sure they dont, but healthcare costs are never going to be competitive as long as government keeps subsidizing it. Take government out of it and let health providers compete for people's business.

They do compete for people's business.

 

[ThisIsMe]

They do compete for people's business.

They dont have to if government is covering a portion of the cost. Subsidies causes prices to rise and also stifles innovation.

 

[citygator]

You are too stupid to grasp the subject of the thread. Nowhere did I question the “Constitutionality of healthcare”, you lying sack of shit.

I asked you to show where in the Constitution it says you have the right to take my money to pay for your healthcare.

Got anything?

Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)

 

[Nostra]

Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)

Never asked if the income tax was Constitutional, moron.

Next?

 

[citygator]

Never asked if the income tax was Constitutional, moron.

Next?

Yes you did. That is exactly what you asked. Your memory is really really bad.

 

[Stryder50]

If you’re going to hang your hat on the deep significance of choosing “promote” vs “provide,” you may want to read the actual document.

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;”

Either/or depending where in the Constitution one reads.
While word dicing, note that it is "general" Welfare, not specific~personal~individual.

 

[Stryder50]

if you like it, its implied. If you don't its not.

That seems to be the case with many, both R and D.

 

[Greenbeard]

Either/or depending where in the

Hence the silliness of stressing the “promote”/“provide” distinction.

 

[BackAgain]

A farmer once told Davey Crocket about giving away others people's money.

I FF the story since most of us can't handle long videos.

I had read that a few years back. It wasn’t a bad argument, then. It still isn’t.

I confess that I still feel an impetus to have the government (on our collective tax dollars) help fellow Americans suffering after national calamities like tornadoes or earthquakes of hurricanes.

Yet I concede that, from a strictly Constitutional sense, the arguments in favor of behaving in that fashion aren’t very strong.

 

[Nostra]

Yes you did. That is exactly what you asked. Your memory is really really bad.

Quote me, liar.

citygator

 

[Stryder50]

Hence the silliness of stressing the “promote”/“provide” distinction.

No!
The silliness is in stressing the opposite of this;
"While word dicing, note that it is "general" Welfare, not specific~personal~individual."
i.e. nothing in the Constitution saying it is the duty of the government to fund individual citizens personal finances and living costs.