Pretty sure the constitution makes no comment about healthcare or insurance. Lol. Have you read it? It's not 2000 pages.
We aren't other countries, and personally, i have no intention on my country following failed attempts at a "utopia" that will never help this country prosper. We lead. I say. Go to other countries if changing this one to model another is so crucial.
it doesnt speak on specific situations, but the general notion that the government isnt suppose to make you buy from another individual/private entity.
I think overall it's more of a positive than a negative. It may be unconstitutional but they haven't been strict on the constitution for a while, and there have been plenty of unconstitutional things in history that have worked. I don't know, it'll probably raise the prices for the middle class because of the people who will get it reduced price or free, but like somebody else said we're already paying for the lower class in many ways.
And yes, those who qualifywould you like to know just one qualification? Not being able to pay for it 3 hospitals with doctors that facilitate this at no cost just within 50 miles of me. This makes for good information being put out for those that dont know
You are lucky then, Block. Not all are. The Constitution isn't 2000 pages. Read it. You'll be amazed at what's NOT in it. Btw. The ACA is constitutional. Period. The Supreme Court upholding the law makes it -- by definition -- constitutional. Frankly, all the conversations you have about this law and what it means for your family don't amount to a hill of beans unless you're talking to someone who learned about this law from places other than cable tv. My last word: do you go to the doctor for checkups? When you get older, will you go for mammograms and colonoscopies? To check for cancer? This law eliminates the copays for those visits. Really. Going to the doctor won't cost you. Preventive care. It's actually good for you. But again. I'm hoping to be on a death panel someday, so feel free to ignore me.
No, the supreme court does not make it constitutional. Bases on the ruling, it was passed saying it was a "tax", not a "right" or a "law" there is a huge difference
Nobody said preventative isnt good for you but hou should pay for what you receive, doctors dont go to school for free you know, and developers dont get the land and build the hospitals as facilities for free either
It does, Block. The fact that Obama didn't sell it as a tax does not stop it from being constitutional under Congress's ability to tax. Doctors still get paid. Really.
Read the bill under "zoning", doctors will maie what the government decides to pay, no litigation. Really
Read the SCOTUS decision, then. Even if you only get through the syllabus. Or even to page 2! You'll see that SCOTUS has an obligation to uphold a law as constitutional, if it can. And, in this case, it did. Disagreement and healthy debate are brilliant. But I think that, on this case, you are not informed. I urge you to read the syllabus of the SCOTUS decision, the summary of the ACA law, and to google "what does obamacare mean for me." You do yourself a disservice if you don't understand what is actually going on.
You may want to look into this some more, i havent read the whole thing, cuz most of it is legal jargon but there are places very clear that state the intentions of the bill. I was shocked at some of what i have read. Also, check out what "you" are referred to as.."unit" i'm a damn unit then continue reading how "units" are treated. Its like your a box on an assembly line and "death panels" are there they are called "end of life counselors" no kidding. Your ability to receive certain procedures will be put to a number system, based on you contribution to society and the cost to repair you and how long youre expected to contribute after procedure. Its more hurtful then you know.
Okay. I'm just going to say this: Obamacare is NOT good for our country. Don't get mad at me if you support it, just let me explain. I was just talking about Obamacare with my dad on the phone. Lord, did we have a lot to say. So, a lot of people don't have to pay taxes, right? Since they don't have to pay the taxes for Obamacare, they don't care how they get the money for it, they get free health care. The people who do get taxed, or get taxed a lot (probably a smaller amount than the people who don't get taxed) are most likely the people who are against Obamacare. Why? Because they probably already have health care. And the government is already taking away their hard-earned money for other things, and now they're taking away an even bigger portion to provide health care for people who don't have it. Okay. So what happens when those people can't afford to pay anymore? Tell me that. I don't know what Chief Justice John Roberts was thinking when he PASSED this. They could be using this money to, I don't know, PAY OUR DEBTS? But no. Debts apparently aren't important. I'm not saying health care isn't important, I'm just saying that if we don't pay our debts, other countries are going to start shutting us off. Not giving us stuff anymore. Thank you for listening to my rant
It goes against the US constitution to make purchase of any goods and services mandatory for US citizens. The government has no right to force us to spend any portions of the incomes we work to make on a service or product. Sad thing is, they have all the power That being said, damn right ObamaCare is unconstitutional. There are people without health insurance who struggle paying to keep what they have. Insurance is not cheap paying month by month.
Ok, that was an insault The supreme court didnt , and a decision is singularly, not law. You can have several cases on the same subject and all be different outcomes. It doesnt change law, only justifies the individual case. I can see that as a government worker, this is too clise to you to be objective. But as for the insault, i'll leave you with the last word on that for friends sake i can read online an infinite amount of government propaganda and private propaganda, but at the end of the day, its what effects me and my family based on what the constitution offers--and government control is NOT what it stood for, it was small government with liberty and freedom for all here--even the poor. How many freedoms will you give up to let the government to everything for you? Hmm, its an interesting question
I don't mind being a unit. Lol. It means one- a useful means of measurement. I actually did read the bill, when it first came out two years ago -- a game my friends and I played. And I agree that the bill isn't perfect -- in my mind, it doesn't go far enough. I'm rather disappointed with the implementation delays and all the carve-outs. I wish the states weren't in charge of the exchanges, because 1 national pool would allow more cost savings than 50 state-sized pools. But that's just me.