Which Freedoms Lost?

[Bern80]

I didn't realize how active this thread was going to be!

And I appreciate everyone who remained civil through the discussion.

I would like to reiterate that I wanted to know which freedoms we've lost since the beginning of the Obama administration (not that I think those freedoms we've lost previous to it aren't any less valid).

So far I've seen some general posts on business regulation and health care reform (and the loss of freedom to choose is counter-balanced by the freedom to not pay higher costs and rates because of someone who chose not to get health insurance - IMHO).

Up until this post I haven't read of any real loss of individual freedoms.

It is unfortunate you see it that way. Freedom by definition is the ability to choose. Taking away a choice is not off set by how government chooses to spend your tax dollars and you are naive to think your taxes will go down as a direct result of people have to purchase health insurance.

You are right though in that you should be free to not have to pay for someone elses medical expenses. Doesn't that pose a contradiction when the consequence of me not paying for health insurance is paying for someone elses medical expenses. Focus on that instead.

One poster asked if I would be okay with signing a waiver statng I am responsible for any health care costs if I choose not to have insurance. I said of course. Apparently he thought I would really balk at paying people for a service. The fact is sticking the tax payer with my medical expenses is something that would never even occur to me as an option. What we all don't want is to be paying other people's health care costs it seems. Except the left seems to have this goofy notion that the best way to do that is to have government make people purchase health insurance so they aren't spending tax money to care for people. Do you not see if you have an extra, unneccessary step there? Why not instead just tell government you don't want them spending your tax dollars on other people's medical expenses, period.?

 

[boedicca]

The government taking more of a person's income and wealth diminishes his freedom. He spends more time working for no pay, at the point of a gun.

 

[Mr Natural]

The government taking more of a person's income and wealth diminishes his freedom. He spends more time working for no pay, at the point of a gun.

That's a bit dramatic, no?

Unless you're dealing with the mob, when was the last time someone put a gun to your head and said "pay up or else"?

 

[Coyote]

The government taking more of a person's income and wealth diminishes his freedom. He spends more time working for no pay, at the point of a gun.

hmmm....according to this graph...that doesn't seem to be true:

...and this article has some interesting things to say: Superrich Americans Driving Income Inequality

The 400 people on Forbes magazine's list of the richest Americans saw their combined net worth climb 8 percent this year. The good news for the wealthy comes as the poverty rate has reached a 15-year high and unemployment remains stuck near 10 percent.

The Forbes 400 list makes clear that a huge amount of wealth in this country is controlled by a very small number of people. Timothy Noah, who reported a 10-part Slate magazine series on the growth of income disparity in the U.S., says the last time the country experienced a similar kind of distortion was in the 1920s.

"It ended of course in 1929 with the crash, and after that we had a very long period in the United States where incomes grew more and more equal. That reversed itself at the end of the 1970s, and ever since then incomes have been growing more and more unequal," Noah tells NPR's Linda Wertheimer.

For his series, Noah defines the wealthy in three categories: the sort-of rich are those who make more than $100,000; the rich — those in the top 1 percent — earn more than $360,000; and stinking rich — those in the .01 percent — make more than $1 million.

"It's really that top 1 percent and .01 percent — the rich and the stinking rich — who at least since the early '90s have really been driving this inequality trend," Noah says.

And despite these economically rough times, the rich got 8 percent richer.

"Wall Street caused this recession and yet Wall Street recovered from it while the rest of the country is suffering from unemployment that's close to 10 percent," Noah says.

So why, as the rich have gotten richer, does everyone else seem to be sinking?

"Obviously there are inequalities related to gender and race, but the increase since 1979 has nothing to do with gender or race," he says.

Education appears to have played a very big role, as did the decline of labor.

But the notion of the American dream persists even though, he says, dreams of making it rich aren't fulfilled as often as they used to be.

"A lot of people say, 'So what if we have unequal incomes? We have a great deal of mobility in the United States. Anybody can grow up to be president.' But in truth, social mobility has actually decreased over the last 40 years," Noah says. "There's still a fervent belief that that is what defines the United States, but it is less true now than it used to be."

I'm not so sure it's the government that is stalling "freedom"....

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The freedom to not give my money to a health insurance company if I don't want to.

And to counter this, I have gained the freedom to not fund your hospital bill when you can't pay.

What aout the freedom to not buy a person's food, shelter them, clothe them, pay for their abortions, pay for their (fill in the blanks)?

I thought we owed everyone that?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The government taking more of a person's income and wealth diminishes his freedom. He spends more time working for no pay, at the point of a gun.

That's a bit dramatic, no?

Unless you're dealing with the mob, when was the last time someone put a gun to your head and said "pay up or else"?

The IRS does it (figuratively) every day... they don't even need a court order. And they do show up with guns sometimes.

 

[saveliberty]

The thread title led me to believe from the beginning you were predisposed to your conclusion no rights have been lost. For that reason I decided to participate at only a minimal level. Your willingness to trade my rights for someone else's benefit is remarkable.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The thread title led me to believe from the beginning you were predisposed to your conclusion no rights have been lost. For that reason I decided to participate at only a minimal level. Your willingness to trade my rights for someone else's benefit is remarkable.

Welcome to the collective.

 

[Oddball]

The thread title led me to believe from the beginning you were predisposed to your conclusion no rights have been lost. For that reason I decided to participate at only a minimal level. Your willingness to trade my rights for someone else's benefit is remarkable.

What he said.

 

[Oddball]

The government taking more of a person's income and wealth diminishes his freedom. He spends more time working for no pay, at the point of a gun.

That's a bit dramatic, no?

Unless you're dealing with the mob, when was the last time someone put a gun to your head and said "pay up or else"?

Not dramatic at all.

Try refusing to pay your taxes and resisting that nice IRS CID man, when he shows up at your door with the handcuffs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Welcome to the board.

What nation are you posting from, if I may end a sentence with a preposition...?

When will you visit us in America?

It seems that you are unaware of how friendly and humane our nation is...we have always had healthcare for all people in America, citizens, visitors, even illegal immigrants.

Glad to be able to enlighten you.

Visit soon!

Where am I from? Originally from Canada where I didn't have to worry about health insurance and you know what? That was kind of nice.

It's a different world in the States though and apparently you don't understand that. If I had a little more time I'd devulge a bit more but from my point of view health insurance isn't something you can put a price on. I don't mind paying for it myself but why should someone die or have to file for bankruptcy because they can't afford it? That is not friendly and humane to use your words.

Actually, I thought you were American, and was simply reminding you that every single individual in this nation had healthcare prior to Obamascam...

Emergency rooms made sure that we didn't have "someone die ... because they can't afford it."

A. Canada may not be the best example, as you should know,...

"Pressured by an aging population and the need to rein in budget deficits, Canada's provinces are taking tough measures to curb health care costs, a trend that could erode the principles of the popular state-funded system. According to Reuters:
Ontario, Canada's most populous province, kicked off a fierce battle with drug companies and pharmacies when it said earlier this year it would halve generic drug prices and eliminate "incentive fees" to generic drug manufacturers.
British Columbia is replacing block grants to hospitals with fee-for-procedure payments.
Quebec has a new flat health tax and a proposal for payments on each medical visit -- an idea that critics say is an illegal user fee.
And a few provinces are also experimenting with private funding for procedures such as hip, knee and cataract surgery. "
Source: Ed Morrissey, "Canada reconsidering health care model in face of soaring costs," HotAir.com, June 1, 2010; and Claire Sibonney, "Soaring costs force Canada to reassess health model," Reuters, May 31, 2010.

B. Sally Pipes interviewed on the Bill Bennett show May 6, 2009
1. Sally Pipes is President of the Pacific Research Institute and the author of “The Top 10 Myths of American Healthcare.” A Canadian by birth, and an American citizen.
2. The US spends 16% of GDP on healthcare. Canada, 10%. But the trade-off is a) long waiting lists, b) rationing of care, and c) less access to the latest technology and drugs.
3. In Canada today there are almost 1 million people waiting for medical procedures. 17% , 5 million of the 32 million Canadians, are waiting to be assigned a primary care physician. In a government healthcare system, salary is set by the government, so very few opt to be primary care md’s.
 It takes about a decade to train a physician. In the last 5 years in the US, the number of doctors has increased about 1% a year. The number of nurses has stayed about the same. To compare, the last decade has seen a doubling of the number of lawyers. US population increases about 3% a year. There is no around rationing of healthcare in a government system.
4. In Canada, the average wait after seeing a primary care doctor until seeing a specialist by referral is 17 weeks.
5. Mrs. Pipes related the story of her mother who felt ill in July ’05, but was advised by her primary care doctor that she did not have colon cancer. She requested a colonoscopy, and was told: “At your age we can’t give you a colonoscopy, but we can give an x-ray.” Nothing showed up on the x-ray. In November ’08, very ill with bleeding, she was advised to go to the emergency room by ambulance. There, she spent two days in the “transit lounge.” (…Transit Lounge opened today (Monday) to provide a peaceful place for discharged patients who need somewhere to wait before going home.) She received a colonoscopy, but died within two weeks.

C. And and interesting side-light is that Canadians pay a higher percentage of healthcare costs out of pocket than do Americans (before Obamacare).
See Docteur and Oxley "Health-Care Systems: Lessons From the Reform Experience,"
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/53/22364122.pdf

D. And, it seems, logic is not your strong suit, nor is economics:
"If I had a little more time I'd devulge a bit more but from my point of view health insurance isn't something you can put a price on. I don't mind paying for it myself..."

Yeah, you do...Your whole premise is that someone, [else] should pay for your healthcare insurance...not healthcare, as we do here in America, but via the socialist-government-confiscation-to-give-insurance...

I'd love to hear why your same argument doesn't apply to housing, food, clothing, a car...etc.

Just another dime-a-dozen leftie who can't wait to show what a good person he is by spending other folks money...

And that is why I'm pleased as punch to have you on the board: the more of you guys, the more illustrative of the weakness of your arguments.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

It's not just about personal liberties, it's about freedom from stifling regulations in business as well.

What business are you in, and what are the most stifling regulations you have to deal with in your business?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I didn't realize how active this thread was going to be!

And I appreciate everyone who remained civil through the discussion.

I would like to reiterate that I wanted to know which freedoms we've lost since the beginning of the Obama administration (not that I think those freedoms we've lost previous to it aren't any less valid).

So far I've seen some general posts on business regulation and health care reform (and the loss of freedom to choose is counter-balanced by the freedom to not pay higher costs and rates because of someone who chose not to get health insurance - IMHO).

Up until this post I haven't read of any real loss of individual freedoms.

There are business constraints for Wallstreet and large corporations but they aren't individuals and those constraints are in place to protect consumers from predatory lending practices and being taken advantage of by unscrupulous businesses or individuals. Now you might counter with, well, you have the freedom to choose with whom you invest and if you lose out in the end, you have the freedom to do that. However, that far more easily said than lived through. How would you feel if your grandparents or parents (or you) lost their retirements due to investment companies risky practices? If a company claims to provide services that provide mutual benefit for client and business alike, but behind the scenes destroys its long-term profitability through dangerously risky short-term gains practices - then who is at fault? You, your parents, your grandparents (and most people have a very limited understanding as to how Wallstreet firms work or the workings of the economy even with a trustworthy and helpful broker), or the firm for knowingly risking its clients' investments?

Has any new regulation been past that restricts small businesses that I am unaware of? (Sorry about the preposition at the end of a phrase, PC).

Actually this is untrue. By forcing me to purchase insurance or face financial fines I lose my liberty to decide if I want to purchase health care or not. They are actually forcing me to spend money I may think is better used on something else. If I am allowed to decide not to buy insurance without facing fines and penalties then I would agree with your comment in blue but since this isn't the case I can not.

My freedom and liberty to choose my level of health insurance and if I even want to pay for health insurance has been taken from me. How do you not call that a loss of freedom? I need more of an explaination as what you gave so far doesn't do a good job of convincing me that I indeed have not lost a freedom and liberty.

If the law I linked you in boston goes through you will have another real example of a loss of freedom.

The link I posted for you about the farmer showed that he lost the freedom to be charitable with the food he grows on his private property.

 

[Bern80]

It's not just about personal liberties, it's about freedom from stifling regulations in business as well.

What business are you in, and what are the most stifling regulations you have to deal with in your business?

You're not really trying to set up him for the lame "well if it's not affecting you...." argument are you?

 

[Urkie]

Emergency rooms made sure that we didn't have "someone die ... because they can't afford it."

Well, technically emergency rooms can't not give you care but you're still going to get stuck with the bill. Lets say someone gets cancer, you get treatment for awhile and then your insurer drops you. What's going to happen now? They're going to have to decide if they want to pay for it and likely use up all the money they have or potentially die.

Some people want insurance but they can't afford it so they're out of luck too. If anything ever happened to them they would be in quite the pickle.

"If I had a little more time I'd devulge a bit more but from my point of view health insurance isn't something you can put a price on. I don't mind paying for it myself..."

Yeah, you do...Your whole premise is that someone, [else] should pay for your healthcare insurance...not healthcare, as we do here in America, but via the socialist-government-confiscation-to-give-insurance...

I'd love to hear why your same argument doesn't apply to housing, food, clothing, a car...etc.

Just another dime-a-dozen leftie who can't wait to show what a good person he is by spending other folks money...

And that is why I'm pleased as punch to have you on the board: the more of you guys, the more illustrative of the weakness of your arguments.

I only think it applies to health insurance because it's something everyone should have. If a person does get into financial trouble it should not be because they got hurt or sick. It should be for other reasons like being a lousy worker and getting fired or whatever.

I don't want anybody to give me anything as you seem to assume. I'm working and going to college right now and when I graduate I am worried about getting a job with the way things are right now. If this new healthcare plan didn't go through then the day after I walked out of the ceremony, I wouldn't have been covered. Plus, I don't know of many companies who are going to hire you at 22 and give you full benefits. I would have had to pay out of pocket for a very high price and not get a very good plan anyway or I could decide to take a chance and hope nothing happens to me. If it takes awhile to get a job (I've heard horror stories from people who graduated recently) then during that time, I'm screwed. Point being, I am working hard and I don't want to be given a house, car or clothing or anything else for free. Those things have to be earned. The only thing that I want guaranteed is my health insurance because then I can live my life without worrying about if something did happen to me.

Canada is not that much different then down here. The only drastic change was the healthcare system. Up there nobody holds your hand and gives you free stuff. You still have to earn everything you get. You just don't have to worry about healthcare. You mentioned some of the downside and I will admit it's not perfect but it is better then what we've got down here in the U.S.

 

[R.C. Christian]

There shouldn't be a ******* choice when it comes to health insurance. It's one of the things every single person should have. The thought of not having it at any point is downright scary because accidents do happen you know.

Is that really hard to understand? Actually, it is for conservatives because a persons health should be something that you can put a price on...get real

You obviously have no concept of the American concept of freedom, or in this case, the freedom not be forced by the most evil, vile, bureacracy on the planet, the IRS else you face punitive damages. I don't expect socialist vermin like you to understand this.

 

[Urkie]

You obviously have no concept of the American concept of freedom, or in this case, the freedom not be forced by the most evil, vile, bureacracy on the planet, the IRS else you face punitive damages. I don't expect socialist vermin like you to understand this.

Concept of freedom in America? I know what it is, the ability to make choices on your own. So should getting health insurance be a choice? The way I see it the answer is no because I can't think of a good reason to not have it. If everybody had the money to pay for it then they would have it. At least that's the way I see it but unfortunately not everybody can afford it.

 

[R.C. Christian]

You obviously have no concept of the American concept of freedom, or in this case, the freedom not be forced by the most evil, vile, bureacracy on the planet, the IRS else you face punitive damages. I don't expect socialist vermin like you to understand this.

Concept of freedom in America? I know what it is, the ability to make choices on your own. So should getting health insurance be a choice? The way I see it the answer is no because I can't think of a good reason to not have it. If everybody had the money to pay for it then they would have it. At least that's the way I see it but unfortunately not everybody can afford it.

Unfortunately, you still don't understand. The true concept of American freedom values the individual over the collective.

I apologize for calling you vermin. Sometimes even I am susceptable to partisan slants.

 

[hipeter924]

Do Democrats even know how universal health care works? It means long waiting lists at public hospitals for operations, some people die before they get treatment. If you get health insurance the whole point is to the avoid the public system so you can get private health care and avoid the bureaucratic mess in the public health-care system (not to mention relieve the pressure on it).

 

[rightwinger]

Do Democrats even know how universal health care works? It means long waiting lists at public hospitals for operations, some people die before they get treatment. If you get health insurance the whole point is to the avoid the public system so you can get private health care and avoid the bureaucratic mess in the public health-care system (not to mention relieve the pressure on it).

Wow......you paint a pretty bleak picture of universal health care. So you say we may actually have to wait for non-emergency care. Scary stuff

Why is it that the life expectancy in those countries in those countries is higher than ours? Why do the people in those countries shudder at the thought of dumping universal health care in favor of a plan like the US? Why is healthcare so popular in those countries?
Why do they spend significantly less of GDP on healthcare?

Why is it that nobody loses their homes or goes bankrupt because they can't pay medical bills?