What if Obamacare is voted down by the Supreme Court?

[BRUTALITOPS]

Spare me the hyperbole Grind. Has that happened in those great bastions of socialism Switzerland, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea? They have a universal mandate. Guess what? They pay a hell of a lot less as a percentage of GDP than we do and they get superior outcomes. More healthy people at a lower net cost. This is a win/win.

i actually prefer a straight single payer system to what is currently being proposed. If you are going to have government up your anus then they may as well love you tender. Something really irks me about being forced to purchase a product, and I believe it sets a bad precedent.

Honestly I wish it was just a state issue and we could let the poor states die off and be obliterated. It's too hard to corral 300 million people.

 

[apple0154]

anything that accomplishes the objective, whether it violates the constitution or not, am I right?

" intelligenceof the american people prevented a direct route."

If you're going to change my quote at least have the decency to space the words properly and use appropriate capitalization.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Uh yea...yea they do.

show me a country with a constitution that restricts the central government and has universal health care.

 

[Airstrip One]

Plessey was bad. Roe I agree with. It's a womans private business.

Plessey was the next worst case after Sanford (Scott).

Anyway, if I get tired of your retarded proleness, and decide to shoot you, why can't be my private business? I'm sure it would be less painful than a D&X...

 

[apple0154]

anything that accomplishes the objective, whether it violates the constitution or not, am I right?

We've been over this before. It doesn't violate the Constitution. The preamble "states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve."

It states the Founding Fathers' intentions and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve. So, what were their intentions and what were they hoping to achieve? "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

So, we have to ask the question, "Does access to health care promote the general welfare? Is access to health care a blessing of liberty?"

As for domestic tranquillity aren't you cranky when you don't feel well?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

There's only two reasons anyone would be against a universal health care system. Either they have a financial interest in the rip-off of the sick and dying or they are ignorant of facts.

Oops, I forgot the third one. The attitude of to hell with everyone else.

i'm not surprised with your limited intellect that you can only see three reasons.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

" intelligenceof the american people prevented a direct route."

If you're going to change my quote at least have the decency to space the words properly and use appropriate capitalization.

grammar nazis always lose.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

We've been over this before. It doesn't violate the Constitution. The preamble "states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve."

It states the Founding Fathers' intentions and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve. So, what were their intentions and what were they hoping to achieve? "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

So, we have to ask the question, "Does access to health care promote the general welfare? Is access to health care a blessing of liberty?"

As for domestic tranquillity aren't you cranky when you don't feel well?

i'm cranky when fucktards intentionally misinterpret the founding documents in pursuit of their own laziness to make others pay for their shit.

 

[apple0154]

The lies perpetrated by the Repubs/Conservatives prevented a direct route.??????????????????????????

How come those lies didn't stop the Obamacare bullshit that was passed........

They work to stop one but not the other ????......

and the moon in swiss............. or is it chedder.........I forget...

Obama had to get rid of the government mandate. He wasted time trying to include the Repubs in the negotiations. In the end, like unruly school children the Repubs were removed from the proverbial classroom and told to stand in the hall (removed from final discussions).

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Obama had to get rid of the government mandate. He wasted time trying to include the Repubs in the negotiations. In the end, like unruly school children the Repubs were removed from the proverbial classroom and told to stand in the hall (removed from final discussions).

and isn't it strange how the republicans, with the help of the TEA party, took over the house after that.

 

[apple0154]

i'm not surprised with your limited intellect that you can only see three reasons.

Then showcase your supposed superior intellect by stating something concrete. If you're able.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Good idea....and what's one of the most affective way to manage cost? A universal mandate. Cost controls will certainly be a part of HC reform. Your last statement was utter non-sense.

The rest of the modern world has implemented these principles. They work! Why shouldn't we do the same? I'm helping to pay for those 50 million people who can't afford or don't carry insurance anyways and that's a big part of the problem. If those people start paying then my cost go down and the quality and scope of my coverage improves cause I don't have to subsidize these freeloaders anymore.

If they can't afford it now, what makes you think that they're going to be able to pay if it's passed?

36.3 Million people in the US go hungry, at at least that's what the stats say; so why aren't they pushing for a mandatory single payer grocery store?

 

[apple0154]

grammar nazis always lose.

It's just common decency. I couldn't care less how malformed your posts are but take exception to your butchering mine.

 

[NOVA]

We've been over this before. It doesn't violate the Constitution. The preamble "states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve."

It states the Founding Fathers' intentions and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve. So, what were their intentions and what were they hoping to achieve? "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

So, we have to ask the question, "Does access to health care promote the general welfare? Is access to health care a blessing of liberty?"

As for domestic tranquillity aren't you cranky when you don't feel well?

They can 'promote' all they want, they can't ignore their own laws and the rights given to the people under that Constitution.....

The Constitution is the law, not the Preamble to it......

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Really? So why has it worked for all the other developed industrialized nations? How comes most nations who have implemented a universal mandate pay around half of GDP what the US does for Health Care. Please explain away that glaring contradiction?

Are those the same countries that have the people rioting; because their nanny government is cutting back on the teat they suck on?

 

[NOVA]

Obama had to get rid of the government mandate. He wasted time trying to include the Repubs in the negotiations. In the end, like unruly school children the Repubs were removed from the proverbial classroom and told to stand in the hall (removed from final discussions).

You can't have it both ways.....

If the Republicans were removed from the final decisions, then Obama could and did whatever he wanted to do.....the Republicans had no say, and no part in it....they didn't prevent anything....

 

[NOVA]

Then showcase your supposed superior intellect by stating something concrete. If you're able.

Its unconstitutional.......period.....

 

[apple0154]

i'm cranky when fucktards intentionally misinterpret the founding documents in pursuit of their own laziness to make others pay for their shit.

Intentionally misinterpret? The preamble states what the founding fathers hoped to achieve and the courts have agreed. The only misinterpretation is from those who don't respect the preamble.

Perfect Union. Domestic tranquillity. General welfare. Blessings of Liberty. Are any of those things possible without access to proper health care? How perfect and tranquil and blessed would anyone feel if they were unable to acquire proper medical care?

The founding fathers were hoping to make a better life for the people. That was the whole idea. A better life for everyone.

 

[apple0154]

and isn't it strange how the republicans, with the help of the TEA party, took over the house after that.

Nothing strange considering Palin talking about death panels and others saying how people in countries with government medical are suffering when statistics show countries with government medical have as long or longer life expectancy.

How many citizens actually researched government medical? Isn't it strange how the numbers in opposition have dropped since parts of the plan have taken effect and the plan has been talked about more?

 

[apple0154]

They can 'promote' all they want, they can't ignore their own laws and the rights given to the people under that Constitution.....

The Constitution is the law, not the Preamble to it......

The preamble let's the Justices know how to interpret the Constitution. What is it's purpose? Is the Constitution to be interpreted with the understanding the government is supposed to make life as miserable for the citizens as possible or as amicable? Is the government's enumerated powers designed to set a limit on how far it can go to cause dissent and strife or are they enumerated in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity?

Does universal medical care promote the latter? I'd say, "Yes", considering the citizens in every country that has implemented such a system insist on keeping it and refuse to revert to a "pay or suffer" system. No exception. Not one.