Posted on 03/27/2010 8:45:04 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
RAGHT=RIGHT. Got to get new fingers.
So my next question is "Can/does the state force you to have bodily injury insurance on yourself?"
I'm wondering if they do that now regarding car accidents.
What would your solution be? (just curious, no sarcasm intended.) There has to be a strategy out there that would work for everyone, I just have not run across one yet (I know this Healthcare bill is not it).
Currently EVERYONE is patched up and everyone pays.
You want to consider carefully what you're saying there, FRiend.
First off, consider your assertion about the "right to LIFE." And remember what the Founders said in the Declaration: "That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
One might plausibly argue that because life is a right, and government's duty is to secure such rights, it is the government's job to assure proper medical care to those who cannot afford it for themselves. So although Obamacare is a very clear and egregious case of government over-reach, the logic of your comment could be used to actually support a general argument that health insurance or health care is, at some level, a government concern.
The question of rationing is wonderfully scary, but it's not nearly so clear-cut as you might want it to be. Health care is rationed right now, by private insurance companies. Neither government nor private insurance is required to go to the last extremity for every patient: both entities simply have to draw the line somewhere -- and they do so by very similar calculations.
You should also be careful not to go overboard with your objections to government health care. For example, you make the assertion that "untold numbers" will die because of socialized medicine. That should be a claim that you can verify, based on other socialized medicine schemes in other countries -- let's take Germany and Sweden, just to name a couple. But the facts there don't bear out such worst-case claims. Yes, there are those on the margins who might die there, that might not die here. But it's a plain fact that "untold numbers" (i.e., lots of) people aren't dropping like flies from treatable maladies in places like Germany or Sweden.
I'm just as opposed to Obamacare as you are ... but to effectively oppose it, we need to come up with serious arguments that apply to the real situation.
Government can regulate priviliges such as driving, but they cannot govern the most basic of human rights as bestowed upon us by our creator - and acknowledged in our Constitution - to LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of happiness.
The argument the Obama Administration is going to make won't compare automobile insurance to health insurance. They know that's a false argument.
Rather, they will argue that the Federal Government has the right by conscription to act in the national best interest, which in this case would be health care. They're preparing to argue that the Federal Government has the right through conscription to act in the national interest whether it's sending men to war, or forcing them to buy health insurance.
That's the argument they're going to make, and I say this confidently because Obama back in 2001 on National Public Radio said as much when he said and I quote:
The Constitution specifies what the Government cannot do to you. The Constitution does not specify what Government must do for you on your behalf. It's very simple: Obama believes that the Government must mandate people to do specific, certain things in the "National Interest" as a back-door to his plan for "social justice."
Just look at what he's doing and ask yourself who benefits the most from what he's doing? C'mon, everyone knows the answer even if they're afraid to say it.
If you have enough property or know someone who does you can drive your car on it all you want without insurance, registration or even a license and there's nothing any government can do.
Like wise, if you (are going) see a private doctor it should be none of the government's business what your insurance situation is.
Here’s a good start:
1. Get rid of the law that says all people have a right to be treated whether they can pay or not. Health care is not a right because that means you could lawfully force someone against their own will to provide a service for you. This law also allows too many people to show up in emergency rooms so they do not have to pay for their own health care. Why should a group of people (doctors, nurses, administrators) be forced by law to provide their services for free? Many hospitals have gone bankrupt at least partially because of this, so this law has to be repealed.
2. For those among us who truly cannot afford health care due to physical, emotional, or psychological disabilities, local governments (not the Federal government) should be encouraged to set aside a certain percentage of the money they collect to provide for these people. And when that money is gone, it is gone. Private charitiies and volunteers would have to make up the slack.
3. Get states to get rid of all mandates - this would decrease costs. Why should any state force me, a male, to buy insurance in case I get pregnant?
4. Get rid of the law that prohibits buying insurance over state lines - this would reduce costs. Why outlaw one of the main things that will reduce costs - competition?
5. Finally, everyone who believes health care should be a right and that doctors, nurses, administrators, and insurance companies should not profit from their craft should go to medical school and/or open an insurance company so they can provide those services any way they want. In fact, they should provide them in the most altruistic way possible - for free.
How’s that?
Plus, if I don’t own a car I don’t need the insurance
bump
Or if the vehicle doesn’t leave your property (farm or work truck, plow truck, etc).
For auto insurance? No. In fact, I don't think it's possible to buy auto insurance to cover your own injuries when you're at fault. ("No-fault" states may be different; I have no idea.)
Hows that?
Wow! It looks like I asked the right person! I agree with a lot of this. the only problem I have is with the first suggestion ... there is no way to keep these people out of emergency rooms, and the Doctors are sworn to help all those who need it. This issue is the toughest one, I think.
Good job the rest though, you really thought this through.
Is that a "Yes"?
If a doctor wants to make that individual, compassionate choice, that is his God-given, professional right. And we as a society owe him/her our thanks. In fact, many, many doctors and dentists volunteer their time both home and abroad to help people. This - not government largesse with your and my tax money - should be encouraged.
Hey, I think you just came up with the answer. Why can’t these doctors voluteer at clinics once a month (alternating with other doctors) to provide free healthcare for those who have none. A nominal fee can be charged to keep the clinic operational. Just a thought.
“If we want a doctor, we need insurance.
Your doctor doesn’t accept cash? “
The argument i ran into recently is not the payment with cash but ‘what about someone who doesn’t have the money’ type of argument. How fair is it that some people have to pay full price for a drs appointment and tests and the insurance companies have payment rates that knock that price down for their policy holders. The argument was “why should the ones paying cash have to pay for those who have insurance?” What about those who really can’t pay? I know of some who don’t have insurance because it just isn’t in the budget, but who probably will be making to much to get assistance in paying for the mandated insurance so they still won’t have insurance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.