RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Silence8 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 12:01:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

I had such hopes for something that would cover people when they need a doctor, not when they can afford the bills.
To say Im disappointed is an understatement, I cannot believe that the right have lied every step of the way, the insurance and big pharma companies are still stickin it to people and pissed at the democrats for taking it up the ass without lube and letting everyone and anyone fuck them .
Its worse than a constitutional bukake ala clusterfuck party.
I had hopes with Obama, I still do, but to be honest.....well its christmas and I dont want to upset anyone.
May all politicians, (and lobbyists, insurance and pharma companies)  genitalia turn square and fester at the corners. Buncha wankers.
HO HO HO Happy holidays




Well, as George Washington is famous for saying, 'From each apple tree according to one's apple tree picking ability, to each taxpayer according to his healthcare needs.'

Something like that.



pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 1:23:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

A loaf of bread with out HFCS is a rare thing. I am talking whole wheat.   Not refined and processed.



I bake a loaf of whole wheat sourdough bread twice a week. Absolutely the best bread I've ever eaten in my life. Pure whole wheat flour, a couple of tablespoons of honey, a couple of tablespoons of olive oil, that's it. There are always options.



Yummy!  I would love that!


Airpig-  USA is 100x more greedy and corrupt- tho CA is catching up with it.  What works for 30 million CA - will not work for 300 mill USA, particularly when you factor in corporate interests.



Brain -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 2:01:29 PM)


Is Making People Buy Health Insurance Constitutional? - The Two-Way - Breaking News, Analysis Blog : NPR

But it's not like he's whistling in the dark. While the notion that the government can force people to buy private insurance will offend the sensibilities of many Americans, Reid can find any number of legal experts who argue that, so long as Congress frames the language of the law properly, such a mandate could pass a Supreme Court challenge.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/12/is_forcing_people_to_have_heal.html


quote:

ORIGINAL: shannie

Under the guise of "healthcare reform," it's proposed that the federal government has the right to force every American to buy a corporate product.  Someone's finally asking, "Under what authority?"

quote:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126148236683801411.html?mod=article-outset-box

Sen. John Ensign (R., Nev.) raised a point of order Tuesday against the bill, arguing that the Constitution doesn't give Congress latitude to force Americans to buy health coverage, as both the House and Senate bills do. "What's next?" Mr. Ensign said. "Will we consider legislation in the future requiring every American to buy a car? Will we consider legislation in the future requiring every American to buy a house?" Mr. Ensign isn't expected to succeed. But the effort dramatizes a criticism raised by Republicans and conservative activists. Under the Senate and House bills, Americans who don't receive health coverage through their employers must buy insurance if they can afford it.








TheHeretic -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 4:24:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain - pasting somebody else's words

Reid can find any number of legal experts who argue that, so long as Congress frames the language of the law properly, such a mandate could pass a Supreme Court challenge.




LOL!  And Bush II had no trouble finding legal experts who said what he was doing with the Gitmo detainee's was legal. 



popeye1250 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 5:22:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: shannie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I understand what you are saying Merc. I am just thinking about your constitution though, since this was in the thread title. If it is unconstitutional to be able to enforce one type of insurance, surely it applies to them all ?


The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states.  There are supposed to be limits on federal power. 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

It's one thing for the states to individually pass such laws, because the smaller state governments are supposed to be more receptive to the voice of the people. That was the premise behind our system of government, anyway. 

But it's an entirely different thing for the federal government to impose such a thing on the whole country.







Shannie, good point.
I think that if the federal govt was simply going to "provide" a national health care plan for those who can't afford it they wouldn't be stepping into this legal minefield.
But when they "require" that individuals buy insurance not from "the govt" but from private cos that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.



Arpig -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 6:38:12 PM)

quote:

If they did, a public option would become an absolute necessity, sending the gougers forever out of business.
That, my dear friend is exactly why I say the public option is the meat and drink of the whole issue...they are already gouging you, they already charge outrageous prices for their product, how else can they cover the exhorbitant hospital fees and still make such obscene profits...the gouging & price fixing is already being done.



pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 6:39:01 PM)

Well it is a good thing medicare is solvent.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 8:17:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
A loaf of bread with out HFCS is a rare thing. I am talking whole wheat.   Not refined and processed.


I bake a loaf of whole wheat sourdough bread twice a week. Absolutely the best bread I've ever eaten in my life. Pure whole wheat flour, a couple of tablespoons of honey, a couple of tablespoons of olive oil, that's it. There are always options.



It's always kind of amazing, when you start talking about it, how many people avoid the "flavor enhanced" products on the market today.

And fresh-baked bread is always the best.


The healthier i eat, the more I wonder why I ever thought that the stuff in the stores even tasted good. Except for Reese's peanut butter cups, of course. Those rock.



quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

And this goes right to the heart of the whole issue. The only value of this bill - the absolute only remotely valid reason for passing  this hideous monstrosity - is the expectation that it will be an incremental law, a foundation upon which to build a better system.

But why does anyone expect that to happen? Not singling you out, Tazzy, but just a general question to everyone who thinks this means we've turned the corner and now we'll gradually evolve this utterly worthless law into a true national health care system  - why do you think that will happen? How do you think that will work? What would be the sequence of events that will result in that, and why do you think it's likely that it will happen? Because I absolutely do not see it.


I agree with you here. I think this bill is a sop to the public so that they can claim that they did something without actually achieving anything significant. I don't believe that next year or two years from now or whatever there will be any radical revision to healthcare ... well ... unless a changed Congress repeals this bill.


Even looking well out beyond the next few years, I don't see it happening. Who's going to have the guts to try it? Health care reform savaged first the Clinton Administration, and now the Obama Administration. History teaches lessons - don't invade Russia when summer's already half over, don't arm and train Muslim jihadists, and don't attempt to reform the American health care system. I'll be surprised if any American president ever tries it again in my lifetime. At best, I would expect whichever party happens to be in power at any particular time to make various incremental tweaks here and there, the sum total of which will result in no significant improvement and probably serve simply to worsen what is already a bad bill. I just don't see there ever being the political momentum to move this issue very far forward in the future.



quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
Over the weekend I'm sending e-mails to both of my Senators (democrats both) explaining why i will never vote for either of them again, and in fact probably never vote democrat again, just as I already refuse to ever vote republican again. If the democrats aren't able to deliver on this, what use are they to me? Why should I ever vote for them if they can't (or won't) represent my interests?



Ah! Another rebel! Rip the system! (;


You know, it's more that I've just given up on the system. I think I'm finally, really done.

I'm under no illusion that my hopping off the bus will send any sort of message or make any sort of point; it's just that I no longer want to participate. Neither party represents my interests. I don't have a dog in this fight anymore, and I'm not going to pretend I'm part of this farce. I feel like a liar and a fraud and a fool every time i cast a vote. And I just don't want to feel that way any more. I'd rather just call it for what it is and move on.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/24/2009 8:22:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

A loaf of bread with out HFCS is a rare thing. I am talking whole wheat.   Not refined and processed.



I bake a loaf of whole wheat sourdough bread twice a week. Absolutely the best bread I've ever eaten in my life. Pure whole wheat flour, a couple of tablespoons of honey, a couple of tablespoons of olive oil, that's it. There are always options.



Yummy!  I would love that!



If you ever decide you want to take a run at it, feel free to e-mail me. I'll send you some sourdough starter and the recipe. It's fun to do, and I know you're always looking for ways to save money. Best tasting bread I've ever eaten, and it costs less than 50 cents a loaf.



Raiikun -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/25/2009 1:38:20 AM)

Personally, I calculated what my insurance costs would be, and take about that much out of each check and save/invest it.  Last year when I got really ill, requiring a CAT scan, MRI, visits to a neurologist, hemotologist, and an inner ear specialist to take care of it, I took the money out, paid for it up front, and still have a nice chunk of money still drawing interest and available in case another medical emergency happens.

I'll be miffed if I'm suddenly required to pay for insurance that I have no need for.

I guess it's also the same issue I have with Social Security...I'd have much less complaint about it if they'd just let me opt out of it.  Hell, I'd even give up the money I'd paid into it for years point blank if they'd just let me opt out of it now.  I'd be a lot better off in the long run if I could save and invest it myself.



popeye1250 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/25/2009 10:21:51 AM)

They could avoid all this mess by giving all Americans the same healthcare plan that the House and Senate have.
Are they still going to have their healthcare plan or will they be going onto the same plan that they want to "give" to us?



Lorr47 -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/25/2009 10:38:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


No one has to buy car insurance or homeowners insurance because no one has to buy a home or a car.


quote:

ORIGINAL: shannie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I understand what you are saying Merc. I am just thinking about your constitution though, since this was in the thread title. If it is unconstitutional to be able to enforce one type of insurance, surely it applies to them all ?


The difference is that it's the federal government doing it, not the states.  There are supposed to be limits on federal power. 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

It's one thing for the states to individually pass such laws, because the smaller state governments are supposed to be more receptive to the voice of the people. That was the premise behind our system of government, anyway. 

But it's an entirely different thing for the federal government to impose such a thing on the whole country.









Google "commerce clause."  With the exception of the Lopez case, the Court has ruled virtually everything affects "commerce."



Real0ne -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/26/2009 1:33:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: shannie
Under the guise of "healthcare reform," it's proposed that the federal government has the right to force every American to buy a corporate product.  Someone's finally asking, "Under what authority?"


well not every american. 
probly every citizen though.
people forget the 14th amendment makes most of you chattel property of the government and extends the feds into both the states and your bedrooms.

I just wrote a little on this subject matter for another group I will get it and paste it below

This is how governments hook you:

First and foremost you have an infinite right to contract. You can contract to be someones slave and there is no one who can tell you otherwise and force you not to be a slave if that is your will or agreement. (if you do it properly that is).  The government cannot interfere with a private contract unless it is brought into their venue and that has to be very specific.... and a peoples common law tribunal is not government btw..... anyway.....

They hook you by obtaining your agreement to share title and by your specifically granting them legal title by virtue of registering your property in the government trust, with the county, instead of in your bible and a public notice.

legal title controls. (trust law)

They split title in the early 1900's so they could do precisely what they are doing today which removes the dejure allodial title granted by the king in the treaty if paris brokered by Franklin mostly.

It does not end with property title;

A marriage license gives them authority to regulate what goes on in your bed

The birth certificate is a surety bond giving them authority over your children as chattel.

The Drivers license gives them authority to overrule your right to travel.

Hunting license, plumbing license, air conditioning license etc etc etc all give the government permission to regulate you.

The upcoming health care will give them legal authority to tell you what you have to do with your body.

You see the people created a de jure government and then under that government that operated under "public law" likewise corporations who also operated under the people under the public law.

Then the supreme court gave corporations nearly all the "rights" persons have or nearly on par with the people and in doing so now corporations could be used in place of government which was put into effect when the country (as in de jure government) lost its sovereignty through foreclosure on the bankruptcy.

It was a very well constructed plan and it worked flawlessly.

With that this country was converted to "public policy", (no longer republic but a democracy).....

Many of us either have corporations where we make "policy" for our employees or work at corporations and are subject to corporate policy at work. So we should all have understand corporations.

That said the government has legitimate authority to regulate corporations within their juridiction (and most are), and those who commingle their affairs.

So all the government does is require all corporations under their jurisdiction to fill out a registration form for any guns they sell.

So you register your gun and blam you have just shared title with the government who now has legal title and control over your guns.

The only way to prevent this is to buy from a "private party" not someone who is part of the corporate structure under the control of the government.

So once you register your weapon, house, car, boat, business, marriage, children, yourself, anything they have legal title, legal title controls and hence they are more than happy to take control over it for you because it means more tax revenue for them.

I cannot stress enough that you all sold yourselves up the river because you have no idea what those contracts with the devil "REALLY" mean in LAW and this is why those contracts are enforced and will continue to be enforced!

You agreed to it!

That and before you all want to stone me to death for bringing the sad truth to bear, take a hike down to the registrars office and get a "couple" copies of your berth certificate and it will be....ta da! on watermarked bond paper each with a filing number and a unique BOND number. 

It is a surety bond underwritten and drawn against you!  (and you all thought slavery needed shackles and a collar) :)

That said, this is a very large topic to explain in one post and really deserves a thread of its own, but insurance is admiralty law ok.

the constitution talks about 3 forms of law; common law, torts etc (on land), equity law to force performance and finally admiralty law of the sea.

the only one requiring insurance is admiralty and it was officially imposed, well it started after lincoln but went full force in 1938 when we went insolvent and finally became cast in concrete when we left the gold standard completely.

Anyway that is how they have the authority to control you and force you to do whatever they want. 

It has nothing to do with the constitution as a whole (another long story) just the 14th for the most part, and everything to do with your contracts with the devil.  you all did it to yourselves and you do not even know it.

The moral of the story is: "You joined the club" you follow the club rules. So its not a matter of "do they" have the authority, it a matter of how far do they want to push that authority.  (boiling that frog slowly)  and how fearful are they of the people finding out that the constitution for most people today is nothing more than a piece of paper because they waived their rights through contracting with the devil.


Oh and before I end here.  My birth cert, the water marks on it, get this:  are CHAINS!


Happy holidays

.



pahunkboy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/26/2009 3:34:33 AM)

yeah real- Alodial title .. yup.

http://www.youtube.com/user/turboredcart


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cx4XIvotC0Q  I been doing a few vids on "hoarding" of gold and silver.   BADDDDDDDDD



Termyn8or -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 8:04:14 AM)

The problem with these Constitutionalists and others is that they have too much media. Everything is in tapes or DVD. Whatever happened to reading ? Do they read the Constitution to you as well ? If you can't read how do you trust the readers ? This point was used in an ad for a remedial reading course years ago.

It's gotten to the point that if they can't take the trouble to write I don't read. I am serious. They brought me tapes, disks all kinds of things but I don't have a tape player hooked up. A video is useless to me, and in fact I don't even have flash player on this PC. If I want video I can drag up my old TV from the basement. What's more I can read several times faster than anyone can talk, well almost anyone. Just qualify it with the word "intelligibly". Not like the lease terms in a car commercial.

While Real has inserted comment, he has inserted very little in the way of his own conclusions, which is another thing that sticks in my craw. Alex Jones COULD be a US American hero, literally, if only he knew when to STFU. Present the facts, I will draw my own conclusions. To try to inject your conclusions into my head is insulting to me. Exceptions are in an argument actually. But when the purveyor of the "original" data tries to excercise influence, they lose me. And if they lose me, I'd bet they are losing alot of others. I don't appreciate anyone who is "on our side" doing things that are counterproductive to our ends.

Then there's the YHWH crowd. In the name of God they think they can compel certain actions by the government. It comes obvious that these people have no fucking idea with whom they are dealing. Plenty sit in jail for listening to this shit. The only people who win have to do certain things to achieve even the smallest victory.

So now our side lies, and uses the same tools as the major media outlets. The manipulation, the tugging at the heartstrings, false faith. Even if their faith is not false, it has absolutely no bearing on how the system is going to treat them.

The only thing that has worked is the stoppage of personal income tax. The tried to get out of the license/plates game but ran into just too much trouble. They tried to get out of paying their mortgage, and YHWH did not have any significant effect on the actions of the deputies coming to evict them. About 95% of them lost. Getting out of a cognovant note, especially a secured note is very tricky and requires a specific set of circumstances to work. The guy could talk all day long and seem to forget to mention this.

I know someone who tried all this shit to get out of trouble for growing pot. He took the road placed before him and the court got to the point where it ordered him to have a psychological examination. He did get acquitted on appeal, but that was because of a loophole, their loophole, not our beliefs or anything like that. He didn't get out until he used the system's own loophole. Because of this stupid shit he did a bit over a year and got set free - to an empty bank account and a crippled business.

So, if they fine me for not buying health insurance, I will be back. I'll let you know exactly what happens. At that time be assured that I will have fought it tooth and nail. Within their parameters as well as without. State and local government already know that they will never get one thin dime out of me, now it's the feds turn to learn that lesson. I don't even pretend it will be easy, and I am likely to emerge from the situation ruined financially at the very least.

It is not for us to spoonfeed all of this to the public. Present the facts. Try to raise their conscienceness to the point where they will absorb the truth, and they will also be relatively immune to manipulation on the part of the other side. Get that done and it's 300,000,000 against 535. Then true change will come.

Until then change has a different meaning -

Can
Help
Get
A
Negro
Get
Elected.

But he is no different than the rest. Nobody sits in that chair without going through a vetting process, that of the real powers that be. His election was engineered by those who pull the strings. Anybody elected who is anything other than white has minorities cheering in the streets no matter what he does. Just another little tidbit for the sheeple to chew. In the end, falsely garnered support is false.

Ignorance requires money. Can anyone accept the fact that someone can be intelligent yet ignorant ? Well they are. They are very intelligent at raping the people, and that means almost every last one of them. But they are ignorant of the fact that when they finally finish destroying the dollar, they will have destroyed their own dollars as well. And overseas currency which I am sure they have a big love affair with, will not help them much because of their folly of a worldwide economy.

In short, the US is simply going to have to default on the debt eventually. Many foreign currencies will fall. Maybe not fail, but they will fall. These suits have so much loyalty to their constituents I bet they put their money in places that have no, or very minimal interest in the finance of US debt. Hopefully there will be enough interdependence even there to cost them some of their loot. And loot it is, that is the proper term.

Right now the prospects are not all that promising, but that could change if they are ignorant enough. The fact is that the US is operating like a publicly traded corporation. Creditors are analogous to stockholders so it is no surprise that they exercise influence on all levels, which includes the selection of a CEO.

And Real, you'd be proud of me. I did not sign my name to get this house, car, or anything big. Other things yes, but unsecured credit only. I am in a unique position, my paper trail has all but vanished. It is almost as if I were dead. Some may say that the strawman is dead.

But as cocky as I am I am not without brains. I will pay the property taxes, despite my personal exception to the whole idea. I will pay other things of course. But I have not signed any contract with the government for about five years now. The neighbor mentions from time to time I could get free renovation money from the city. Little does she realize that I would rather be eaten alive by a shark than to accept their money.

As I stated about contracts, it is true that your ability to contract is unlimited. But by many contract laws among the several states, there must be consideration on both sides to be enforcable. There is no consideration in forcing you to buy something under these circumstances. Auto insurance and license notwithstanding becase of supreme court rulings that certain things, like driving a car, are a priveledge. The right to travel is abridged in this manner, and if they can abidge it they can abolish it. That means they can abolish rights by simply turning them into priveledges. Then simply deny the priveledge. Gun ownership is a prime example. The exercise of one's second amendment rights is now a priveledge. Therefore the right is gone, except for a recent supreme court ruling. We'll have to see how this one plays out. Of course any fights will be financed by the people.

Let me know when we get up to about 150,000,000 against 535 and we can talk about the next step. And it might come sooner than you think.

T




Real0ne -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 9:23:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

As I stated about contracts, it is true that your ability to contract is unlimited. But by many contract laws among the several states, there must be consideration on both sides to be enforcable. There is no consideration in forcing you to buy something under these circumstances. Auto insurance and license notwithstanding becase of supreme court rulings that certain things, like driving a car, are a priveledge. The right to travel is abridged in this manner, and if they can abidge it they can abolish it. That means they can abolish rights by simply turning them into priveledges. Then simply deny the priveledge. Gun ownership is a prime example. The exercise of one's second amendment rights is now a priveledge. Therefore the right is gone, except for a recent supreme court ruling. We'll have to see how this one plays out. Of course any fights will be financed by the people.


driving is a "commercial" activity and therefore authorized to regulate the citizens.  Travel is not, but they will always treat you like a driver...

if they can arrest you for anything aside from a capital crime or the injury of another your rights are "a"lienable because the first thing they do is "charge" you.

Hey you can "charge" them right back.  Literally every court they break the law in one way or another.  nail them.  Hell their use against the people is fraud. 

you cant do it by getting an "at-turn-on-me" because if you do you become a ward of the court and the court views you as incapable of managing your own affairs. (corpus juris secundum, Am Jur)

Attorneys are communists.  They are foreign agents.  They take a commie oath.  They are club members of the BAR.  The british accredation registry.  Hey they are required by law to register as a foreign agent!

So you gotta do it yourself because when you hire them you give them oiwer of attorney and they are more than happy to work out a "deal" with the judge.  Never heard that one huh?  Work out a deal with their employer?  Now if the public knew this at large we would not have the problems we do.

Then to make matters even worse separation of powers is an illusion!  They are all regulated under the APA.  LOL

My rights are "un"alienable.  They are unalienable because I took all the necesary steps to make it that way.   Its a lot of work.   Over a grand in filing and fees and notifying all the alphabet agencies.   you start by studying law. 

Now as far as consideration goes there is NONE.  ZIPPO

The only way you can have consideration is quid quo pro.   They took the money and gave us promisary notes of debt. 

You cannot pay a debt with another debt.  Its impossible!!!!  An illusion!!!  You give the other guy dolla bills thinking the debt is paid and its not.  That is why they have traffic records of you back to a teenager.  It never goes off the books.  (mine go off the books)

That does not meet the test of consideration.  

In fact it invalidates literally every deal made with the corporation.

Right now I need to write a court order to reverse the judges order.  LOLOL

Of course this sounds like a fantasy land to the slaves.

I know who I am.



DomImus -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 3:59:22 PM)

I wasn't going to get into this discussion and now I know why.



mnottertail -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 4:09:19 PM)

well there have been some really fuckin stupid arguments on this one.

But I am not going to disabuse you shithouse lawyers of your pangyric.

I am going to give you one word, and you can consider it in the light of homeowners insurance:

draft.


end of joke.



domiguy -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 4:31:12 PM)

Should there be health care reform absofuckinlutely.

I couldn't read through all of these posts....Tooo much drivel.

You own your car you need laibility.  You get sick you have to pay or the taxpayers do. Seems we need some sort of liability to cover your ass or we are all paying.

I saw a past post where someone is saving and investing their premiums...It could work.  You better avoid a hospital stay like the fucking plague or you are out of loot in no time flat.

If you are under age 65 their ain't no medicare part A&B to be your advocacy sytem..you are on your fucking own fighting it out with the docs and the hosipitals.

Joint replacement 35 to 50k....If you have a heart prob kiss  your ass goodbye.

It is obscene what we have allowed to transpire within our health systems.  The current plan does little to tackle and resolve the issues.

You need tort reform. You need caps and preassigned costs across the board for all medical test and procedures.

Docs will have to take it in the shorts.  Med school will be subsidized by the gov. Part of the pleasure of being a doc is one that is completely altruistic in nature....the pleasure one recieves from helping others.  This will provide not only cheaper health care but a more dedicated group of physicians.  Not out for the payday.

Not for profit insurance system to which premiums will be payed into.

There are so many corporate sponsored health plans that are not worth shit. So many employers holding down employees hours to not have to provide benefits.

or if you are like me, independent contractor, you buy individual health.  Get fucking scalped for half assed coverage.  Wouldn't even be a possibility to gain coverage if my health was compromised at all.

There isn't a question of whether health reform needs to be enacted..It is when.



Real0ne -> RE: Is it constitutional? (Forcing us to buy corporate insurance) (12/30/2009 6:19:02 PM)

sure there wasnt any need for it before the guberment took over.

only took them 60 years to destroy it.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875