The mistake wasn't made by Lincoln and the United States. They were in the right, of course. It was made by Davis and the Confederate States, the folk who started a war that killed half a million of their countrymen in a hopeless attempt to protect an brutal system of racist repression.
Actually herschel, you are not 100% correct. The south started the war to see if they could succeed from the union states. Slavery was an issue but not the reason for the war.
I don't think you guys realize that other countries have universal health care and they're much better off. You guys are ignorant, stupid asses. Give Obama a chance. Bush was the horrid one leaving Obama with so many problems so chill out!
no they are not. doctor's will make much less money just so the lazy ass mother of ten can collect welfare and now receive free health care. it is not ignorant for other people to actually want to keep more than 60% of the money they earn, asshole.
What other countries that are doing sooo much better are you talking about? England? Did you know England is going BANKRUPT? Canada? Do you realize how long you'd have to wait for a transplant by relying on the government? France? They have a high unemployment rate and high drop-out rate. Before you call others ignorant, look into other nations' economies first please. Don't just spout shit off that you may have heard in passing when you really haven't researched it yourself.
To be fair, England and Canada have two of the worst systems of medicine in the developed world. If you want to compare things properly, look at systems like France's, Sweden's, and Switzerland's. They suck much less.
Bush and Obama both suck. The last really good President the US had was Eisenhower. As for which healthcare system leaves people better off, it's really hard to get good data. The US has the best healthcare at the top end and the shortest waiting lines for everyone, without question, but it's much less evenly distributed. The hard part is getting real-world data on what effect that has without confounding variables. For example, is low US life expectancy because of healthcare or gun crime and c
Article I, Section 8 has a handy-dandy list of all the things Congress is allowed to do. This doesn't fit under any of them. Then again, the enumeration of powers has been a dead letter since FDR threatened to stack out the Supreme Court in the 1930s, so it's not like this is a new thing - exactly the same objection can be raised to Medicare, for example.
what part of the commerce clause are you referencing? i see nothing in there that could directly or indirectly mention anything about health care. this bill is a travesty and fingers crossed it will not go through. who do you think will be paying for it? us, baby. i make hardly enough money to pay my bills every month, i don't need another half of it going to pay for someone else's problems.
United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States..." This means (inter alia) that if a corporation does business across state lines, they are subject to federal regulation. Insurance is interstate commerce. (see U.S. v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n)
The supreme court disagrees with your 2:47 assertion. "In short, a nationwide business is not deprived of its interstate character merely because it is built upon sales contracts which are local in nature. Were the rule otherwise, few businesses could be said to be engaged in interstate commerce." Id. at 547
Your last argument seems to only apply to nationwide businesses. That is not what I am talking about. Nationwide businesses ARE interstate, yes. But many health insurance agencies are NOT nationwide, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield. They have different sects for each of the states they represent. You cannot use your BCBS of Illinois in Tennessee, you must use BCBS of TN. So the government cannot regulate these private sector businesses. Anyway, my point was, this health bill is unconstitutional, bad news.
Again, nice try. However, Blue Cross Blue Shield is engaged in interstate commerce (see Doctors, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Greater Philadelphia 490 F.2d 48)
i was unaware of that reference, TY for bringing it up. BCBS was a bad example. But, there are other private sector businesses that will be affected by this, such as 1 of our neighbors who runs a family-owned insurance business. I am not worried about the wording and twisting of words. You can interpret anything in any way if that's what you're fighting for. Premiums will skyrocket, the gov't will win because they don't have to raise their premiums. They have empty pockets that we pay f
That would be the *interstate* commerce clause. This bill applies to in-state transactions. Hence, it's outside the scope of the interstate commerce clause. If the bill only referenced transactions across state lines, then I'd agree with you. American jurisprudence on the topic of interstate commerce is deeply flawed as far as I'm concerned, and has completely lost sight of the entire purpose of a federalist system and the interstate commerce provision of the Constitution.
Nothing - I rather like it. Don't use much myself, but it's good to know it's there if I need it. The question you should be asking is "What's wrong with an insurance mandate?". Obamacare isn't anything to do with healthcare, it's an insurance reform, and a remarkably bad one.
It's completely unconstitutional. I have a friend who's a constitutional lawyer and he has been saying how the government can't force people to buy health insurance. He and some other lawyers are gonna file lawsuits if it passes.
Funny that you bitch about his health care yet you neglect to see that we have the most expensive health care in the world and it currently ranks 37th in regards to care. Nope nothing wrong with that picture at all
There is absolutly NOTHING wrong with a national Heath care plain... As mentioned many other countries have one and are better off... HOWEVER THIS PARTICULAR one will basicly screw up everything and make all the trivial shit like common problems free but anything slightly more serious where you ACTUALLY need a doctor will cost each person hundreds of thousands cus insurance companies will be spread soo thin they won't be able to afford to cover it.
lmao. u people get so damn fired up about all of this even though ur arguing on the internet and most of u have no idea wut ur talking about. i could submit a text on here that says nothing but "obama" and everybody on this site would suddenly become a politics major and it would spark the biggest debate in history. haha
Comments
You must be Logged in to post a comment