Should Gov't have Limits?

[DontBeStupid]

So how am I wrong? C'mon dude, we got a good debate going here, how can you possibly say that the ACA does not require the purchase of HC?

I can say it because no where in the law does it say you will pay a fine for not buying insurance. No wording exists that is even close to that.

You pay a fine if you can afford insurance don't have insurance. Period. There is nothing that says you must buy it.

You're arguing semantics, how dishonest.

If your employer provides you with health insurance, are you required by law to go out and by more or pay a fine?

No.

You guys simply do not understand this law.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Ok.... my dad, who happens to be a pretty hard core conservative, was on his wife's insurance plan through her work for years. He had some things he was doing on a second home, he had bought a little Mercedes sports car.... he was getting older and was doing all right so he was treating himself to some things he wanted.... but he decided that the cost of the insurance was just getting too high. He dropped it.

Two years later, he came down with PLS, a neuro muscular degenrative and he has had to be taken care of by the VA and SSI disability instead of the insurance he should have kept.

This is fair how?

I've said it a hundred times: I agree with the premise of the Tea Party. When they have the meeting where THEY all bring their government checks and their medicare and SS and disability and VA .... then... then I'll know they aren't a bunch of entitlement idiots screaming about other folks entitlements. Give up yours first. Anyone can scream and holler about taking something from someone else.

 

[The T]

In fact I said it was a good idea to have auto insurance. You just what the government to tell you to do so. Now tell me you are not for big government controlling your life. You are an advocate for government controls. This is all about whether government has the right to get into your personal life and you like that. You want them to tell you everything. You want them to nursemaid you through life. Or do you think people should make decisions on their own. Auto insurance is one of the examples I used as government telling you to buy things. If you let them to to buy one thing you have opened the door for them to tell you what else you need to buy.

Government since by Article 1, Section 8 are bound to 'post roads' and therefore may demand certain things to be required for the public to use them as insurence, and to be licensed to ensure you know how to drive without killing your fellow citizens isn't an issue.

Some like to argue that Government demanding you have Auto insurance is the very same as having health insurance is the very same thing...and it isn't...Nor is using the Commerce Clause.

This is not about insurance. It was set clearly as an example with many other examples. How someone decide to make this about car insurance is beyond me.
I don't care about car insurance. This is about government be involved at a personal level. Once they are in the door in one area that many seem to be able to justify you have opened the door to everything else.
Having car insurance is a good idea as is health insurance. On one hand people are defending government for force car insurance that will protect one person from loss. On the other hand people fight about government forcing health insurance on them and saying it's not right. It protects everyone from losing.
Someone please tell me if you are for government control of your lives or not. Most do not seem to know what they want.
You say government is to big and want it limited yet you want them telling everyone to buy this that and the other thing. You seem to have a grasp on what I have been stating.

Government has no business dictating pretty much anything...it's an affront to the DOI, and the Constitution that codified it.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

It is not the same thing. Your line of reasoning would imply that your car insurance should be paid for by the person you run over. Sort of a silly proposition.

Someone focused on an example of auto insurance. That is not the focus of what I have been saying. Not at all. What I have been trying to do is show how each day government more and more micromanages your life and obviously Americans like that.

If they were micromanaging my life, they would never let me post on USMB. Yet, here I am....

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

 

[snakedoc]

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.

There is no question the Government should have limits especially when it comes to peoples personal decisions. Of course there are those with different views on this so the other important question at least in my view is how much control or influence do you think the Government should have in peoples personal decisions where would you draw the line?

 

[DontBeStupid]

Someone focused on an example of auto insurance. That is not the focus of what I have been saying. Not at all. What I have been trying to do is show how each day government more and more micromanages your life and obviously Americans like that.

If they were micromanaging my life, they would never let me post on USMB. Yet, here I am....

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

And then people got cancer from second hand smoke and kids died in car accidents due to idiotic parents.

Yay Freedom!

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Once upon a time America was peopled with folks that Edmund Burke referred to as follows:
'They were Protestants “of that kind which is most adverse to all implicit submission of mind and opinion,” and their dissent from the Anglican Church not only favored liberty, it was “built upon it.” '

Now, there are far too many who march in lock step, as you seem to.


In November you'll see folks who bridle at being told what to do, march to the voting booths...

You are sadly mistaken and have not understood a word in any of the posts I wrote. I do not walk in lockstep with anyone. I have sent protest letters against each of these acts where government has over stepped the bounds.
If anyone walks in lockstep it is the religious mind that has an entire rule book to lead them by the nose.

In that case, please accept my apology for misreading post #25, which I read as agreeing with government overreach.
Rep on the way.

It is no problem. It happens many times in debate like this. Thanks .

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Someone focused on an example of auto insurance. That is not the focus of what I have been saying. Not at all. What I have been trying to do is show how each day government more and more micromanages your life and obviously Americans like that.

If they were micromanaging my life, they would never let me post on USMB. Yet, here I am....

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

Man I miss the good old days when children didn't have to wear seat belts and drivers were free to smash their cars into mine uninsured.

Those were the days.

Now freedom is but a faint memory.



You can still smoke in bars in my state, asshole. Its a LOCAL issue. Your state doesn't let you smoke in bars and you don't like it? Move to Louisiana!

 

[Skull Pilot]

Should the government have the power to protect its citizens from exploitation? You seem to think it should not.

How do you propose the government of this?

Why by forcing people to buy what the government tells them to buy. You see that way no one gets taken advantage of. Liberal "logic" at its best.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

If they were micromanaging my life, they would never let me post on USMB. Yet, here I am....

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

And then people got cancer from second hand smoke and kids died in car accidents due to idiotic parents.

Yay Freedom!

Yes, freedom has consequences. No one ever said freedom was a rainbow field of unicorns. In order to be free you must be willing to accept the consequences of your own actions.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Should the government have the power to protect its citizens from exploitation? You seem to think it should not.

How do you propose the government of this?

??? Do you mean "How do you propose the government do this"? The old fashioned way, by making bad things illegal.

Define "bad"

 

[DontBeStupid]

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

And then people got cancer from second hand smoke and kids died in car accidents due to idiotic parents.

Yay Freedom!

Yes, freedom has consequences. No one ever said freedom was a rainbow field of unicorns. In order to be free you must be willing to accept the consequences of your own actions.

But, should I be forced to accept the consequences of YOUR actions?

Many of you seem to think I should.

 

[The T]

How do you propose the government of this?

??? Do you mean "How do you propose the government do this"? The old fashioned way, by making bad things illegal.

Define "bad"

In the Statist world? Anything the Statist deems necessary to rob liberty.

 

[The T]

And then people got cancer from second hand smoke and kids died in car accidents due to idiotic parents.

Yay Freedom!

Yes, freedom has consequences. No one ever said freedom was a rainbow field of unicorns. In order to be free you must be willing to accept the consequences of your own actions.

But, should I be forced to accept the consequences of YOUR actions?

Many of you seem to think I should.

So you admit there is a two-way street when it comes to liberty and encroachment by Government?

 

[Katiegrrl0]

No one is forcing you to drive a car. If you want to drive.... the rules are you have to carry insurance and or use a car seat for you child and wear your seat belt..... of which many choose not to. The choice is still yours to drive or not. No kids... no car seat. Don't drive... no need to purchase insurance.

I guess you did not read my first post. I do not want government running my life...and i do not want them telling me to purchase anything...i do not want for myself.

You still are defending big government and it's infringement. You obviously do want them running your life. You like them telling you to buy things. You support big government and their actions. You state it clearly.

And if you don't have auto insurance and you hit me ... ?

If it happens to you, don't look to Boehner to help you out. He's too busy sucking up to the baggers who want to control your sex life.

Why shouldn't people be responsible for their own health care?

Why is it that the rw's can never answer that simple question?

No excuses, no "what ifs?". Just answer that one question.

How many times do I have to say that auto insurance was an example of the government telling a person what to by. This is about infringement about government forcing their way into everyone's life. You believe they are justified because it protects you when someone has auto insurance. So what you are saying is you want government to babysit you, hold your hand and tell those bad people that can hurt you to stop. You love big government protecting you in your home from that nasty smoke from a cigarette the person next to you might light up.
People call me a Socialist but clearly I don't support government infringement. All these that fight against big government want the nanny state telling them what to by and to change their diapers. I'm so confused by you people. Do you have any clue what it is you want. On one hand you say get away government you are to large and interfering and on the other you are begging them to wrap you in a blanket and tuck you in at night.

 

[The T]

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.

There is no question the Government should have limits especially when it comes to peoples personal decisions. Of course there are those with different views on this so the other important question at least in my view is how much control or influence do you think the Government should have in peoples personal decisions where would you draw the line?

And those decisions should remain just that personal unless it encroaches upon the liberties (and verifiable), of another citizen. But then that's why we supposedly have courts, isn't it?

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Government since by Article 1, Section 8 are bound to 'post roads' and therefore may demand certain things to be required for the public to use them as insurence, and to be licensed to ensure you know how to drive without killing your fellow citizens isn't an issue.

Some like to argue that Government demanding you have Auto insurance is the very same as having health insurance is the very same thing...and it isn't...Nor is using the Commerce Clause.

This is not about insurance. It was set clearly as an example with many other examples. How someone decide to make this about car insurance is beyond me.
I don't care about car insurance. This is about government be involved at a personal level. Once they are in the door in one area that many seem to be able to justify you have opened the door to everything else.
Having car insurance is a good idea as is health insurance. On one hand people are defending government for force car insurance that will protect one person from loss. On the other hand people fight about government forcing health insurance on them and saying it's not right. It protects everyone from losing.
Someone please tell me if you are for government control of your lives or not. Most do not seem to know what they want.
You say government is to big and want it limited yet you want them telling everyone to buy this that and the other thing. You seem to have a grasp on what I have been stating.

Government has no business dictating pretty much anything...it's an affront to the DOI, and the Constitution that codified it.

I agree that government has no business in much of what they are involved in.

 

[Dante]

Should the government be forced to pay for emergency room care for everyone who enters a hospital that takes federal funds?

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.

Should the government be forced to pay for emergency room care for everyone who enters a hospital that takes federal funds?

 

[Katiegrrl0]

If they were micromanaging my life, they would never let me post on USMB. Yet, here I am....

They are not doing that today true. But two years ago people could smoke in bars. Five years ago you could transport a child without a car seat. Two years ago you could drive without your seat belt. Five years ago you weren't force to buy car insurance. So today you can do this I said in the beginning government will take freedom by inches.

And then people got cancer from second hand smoke and kids died in car accidents due to idiotic parents.

Yay Freedom!

Do you want government control in every facet of your life? If you do that's fine. I don't.

 

[bripat9643]

It's true. The bad guys won. But I can't placate your demands. I'll whine as much as I want.

The bad guys won! LOL! And as a result seniors in this country have one of the highest standards of living in the world.

And their grand children will all work like galley slaves their entire lives to pay for it all, and they'll live like paupers after the government takes 80% of their income.

Thanks granny!