Is Health Insurance Socialism?

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by Freddy

First, the Declaration of Independence is dead document with zero legal implications for the US. Concerning the US Constitution, the supreme law of the land, one need only to read the Preamble, which has equal weight with any other part of the Constitution, to see the intent of the founders.

"The Constitution of the United States of America"

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, 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."

The cost of government includes; "promote the general welfare", which means help Americans in need. Since Congress has established through its law making power laws that protect those in need they are the law of the land until struck down by the federal courts or changed by Congress later.

first; the US, laws are with in the structure of the constitution and the amendments. it is not dead, very much alive and part of our existence. we are proud of it and desire no changes. no city, state or federal law can go outside this document. the process to go beyond these guidelines has been tested more times than you might think.

the words "promote" and "provide" mean different things. from the writing of those who formed the document we have come to accept this as creating the atmosphere or encouragement, but non-interference. the word provide, has a very differing meaning, which is government and protection.

Americans in need. who is it to determine this fallacy. if Bill Gates needs a new house, i am sorry its up to him to buy it. if you need a new liver, this should be up to you. if a person is a citizen and has not achieved whatever i have, its not up to me to provide him/her what ever they consider needs.

by the way your quoting the pre-amble of, not the constitution. that is the reason for not the mechanism...

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by jackson33

first; the US, laws are with in the structure of the constitution and the amendments. it is not dead, very much alive and part of our existence. we are proud of it and desire no changes. no city, state or federal law can go outside this document. the process to go beyond these guidelines has been tested more times than you might think.

the words "promote" and "provide" mean different things. from the writing of those who formed the document we have come to accept this as creating the atmosphere or encouragement, but non-interference. the word provide, has a very differing meaning, which is government and protection.

Americans in need. who is it to determine this fallacy. if Bill Gates needs a new house, i am sorry its up to him to buy it. if you need a new liver, this should be up to you. if a person is a citizen and has not achieved whatever i have, its not up to me to provide him/her what ever they consider needs.

by the way your quoting the pre-amble of, not the constitution. that is the reason for not the mechanism...

I said,
Originally Posted by Freddy
"First, the Declaration of Independence is dead document with zero legal implications for the US."

I did not say the above about the US Constitution.

Whether the Preamble is the reason for is not the point. The point is the Preamble is just as much a part of the US Constitution as any of the 7 Articles or the 27 Amendments.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by jackson33

...if Bill Gates needs a new house, i am sorry its up to him to buy it. if you need a new liver, this should be up to you. if a person is a citizen and has not achieved whatever i have, its not up to me to provide him/her what ever they consider needs....

You may technically have a point there, but...

BUT... I don't want to live in a country where people are dying in the streets. Where children are starving and begging for food. Where people can justify crime because their babies need bread and milk right now. Where the disabled cannot even get or keep a job because a wheelchair is just too damn expensive. I do not and WILL NOT live in a country where dead bodies must be picked up off the streets and out of tenement shacks each morning.

Do YOU want to live in a country like that? Perhaps you can afford to live in a gated community (with friendly armed guards!) so you don't have to see the death and suffering down town. Good for you!! I can afford it, too, just barely. But <<I>> would still know that the death and suffering was going on. And I refuse to live with that.

There is a thin, thin line between Laissez-faire Capitalism and heartless fascist assholism.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

You may technically have a point there, but...

BUT... I don't want to live in a country where people are dying in the streets. Where children are starving and begging for food. Where people can justify crime because their babies need bread and milk right now. Where the disabled cannot even get or keep a job because a wheelchair is just too damn expensive. I do not and WILL NOT live in a country where dead bodies must be picked up off the streets and out of tenement shacks each morning.

Do YOU want to live in a country like that? Perhaps you can afford to live in a gated community (with friendly armed guards!) so you don't have to see the death and suffering down town. Good for you!! I can afford it, too, just barely. But <<I>> would still know that the death and suffering was going on. And I refuse to live with that.

There is a thin, thin line between Laissez-faire Capitalism and heartless fascist assholism.

where on earth do you live????? its certainly not in the US and for sure not in Houston Texas.....

none of those thing exists and you darn well know it. look in your phone book. there are hundreds (pages) of listings where everything you even suggest no help is available is found in mass.

if things were that bad, its your responsibility to get up and do something about it. to ask others to solve your view of humanity in your neighborhood, in your town is not my or any other person responsibility. if a person is to lazy to help themselves or their family or unable, that person should be confined. in Texas, i can get this done in 5 minutes and you in two. report to your choice of local authorities.

since your smart enough to type, i must assume you know many communities around this country have cleaned up their neighborhoods. one man pretty much cleaned up NYC a few years back and countless participate in watches at every level, all the time.

[InfiniteNow]

Jackson,

I'm going to ask that you watch your tone, be respectful of our members, and review the rules if needed. It's fine to feel passionate about something, but argue the merit of your point. Your "are you daft" approach is, for me anyway, growing tiresome... Thanks. I'll be glad to clarify if you wish to PM me.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by jackson33

where on earth do you live????? its certainly not in the US and for sure not in Houston Texas....none of those thing exists and you darn well know it....

Correct. These things do not currently exist. You misunderstood my point, which was:

these things WOULD exist in a totally unconstrained capitalist nation where there were NO social security, NO safety nets, NO taxpayer funded services for the disabled, the desparate, the disadvantaged, the dissolute. that is my opinion, and one I hold to quite strongly.

Prune the government down to just military protection and keeping the peace -- get rid of everything that you consider to be 'tainted' by socialism -- and let everybody fend the hell for themselves as they are able, and you WILL get dumptrucks cruising the back alleys, the bullhorns blaring...

"bring out yer dead... bring out yer dead..."

[Edella]

Originally Posted by jackson33

if a person is to lazy to help themselves or their family or unable, that person should be confined. in Texas, i can get this done in 5 minutes and you in two. report to your choice of local authorities.

You can get people who are to lazy or unable to work confined (jailed I presume) in five minutes? Does this include those who are unable to work through no fault or their own?

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

There is a thin, thin line between Laissez-faire Capitalism and heartless fascist assholism

I would like to see this printed on our money.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

Correct. These things do not currently exist. You misunderstood my point, which was:

these things WOULD exist in a totally unconstrained capitalist nation where there were NO social security, NO safety nets, NO taxpayer funded services for the disabled, the desparate, the disadvantaged, the dissolute. that is my opinion, and one I hold to quite strongly.

Prune the government down to just military protection and keeping the peace -- get rid of everything that you consider to be 'tainted' by socialism -- and let everybody fend the hell for themselves as they are able, and you WILL get dumptrucks cruising the back alleys, the bullhorns blaring...

"bring out yer dead... bring out yer dead..."

well sir, the conditions you suggest for that scenario were what was, for most of the history of this country. our government was formed with idea of self destiny, self reliance and a touch of benevolence. this served to promote and develop the worlds center for economic and social ideas. the introduction of social tactics, is not beneficial to society. for starters there is no end to the idea of control. if its good to control smoking for instance, then it good to control whats eaten, then its good to control whats watched on TV and in the end lets control death. i will cut this here, but you know this has been and will continue to be the reality.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by Edella

You can get people who are to lazy or unable to work confined (jailed I presume) in five minutes? Does this include those who are unable to work through no fault or their own?
I would like to see this printed on our money.

if people that are capable to provide and do not, can be held responsible for not doing so. if a person is not capable, yet has a family is liable to some degree to find help. if that person is not capable to find help, then its up to a neighbor to help out. there should be no reason for the Federal Government to become involved.

no doubt most every person over 20, has helped some one many times. maybe even, i have. what is so disingenuous is the idea some one with apparent means is liable to the so many that in life preferred the use of earned resources for personal gratifications. booze, drugs, gambling or just over spending on stuff they never needed.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Jackson,

I'm going to ask that you watch your tone, be respectful of our members, and review the rules if needed. It's fine to feel passionate about something, but argue the merit of your point. Your "are you daft" approach is, for me anyway, growing tiresome... Thanks. I'll be glad to clarify if you wish to PM me.

if some one calls me or infers "heartless fascist asshole", my response will be the same. there will be no PM, however it is hard to tone down something i consider mild responses, at least to the tone of a message.