if health care is a 'right' as speaker pelosi claimed

[Kulindahr]

Nothing is a right which takes from others by force.

 

[wastingmymind]

In Australia, you get a fine for not voting. To be honest, they should implement that here.

 

[Kulindahr]

In Australia, you get a fine for not voting. To be honest, they should implement that here.

SO they have no right to vote.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

In Australia, you get a fine for not voting. To be honest, they should implement that here.

Why? It doesn't matter who you vote for. They're all the same.

BTW - Australia is about the next best thing to China.

 

[Kulindahr]

Why? It doesn't matter who you vote for. They're all the same.

Seems to me Australians aren't stuck with having to choose with just two parties. If ALL the parties were on the ballot and representation in the House of Reps was proportional within each state, I wouldn't mind having everyone vote. I betcha we'd get Greens, Libertarians, Reform, Constitutional, Peace, Socialist, and maybe some other parties in there.

I could actually be represented!

 

[hotatlboi]

^^^

I don't believe in any mandate without exemptions or excuses.

And that's what people keep missing. There IS an exemption to the insurance mandate if you are really that poor and can't afford it.

 

[chuck10x]

And that's what people keep missing. There IS an exemption to the insurance mandate if you are really that poor and can't afford it.

Has anyone stopped to think of what kind of coverage you'll recieve under the mandate?
The more insurance you can afford, The better the coverage.
Not all Insurance policies are equal.
No one has mentioned the quality of service to be expected.
Do you expect the same service from MEDICAID as say a Senators Health Plan?

 

[hotatlboi]

Has anyone stopped to think of what kind of coverage you'll recieve under the mandate?
The more insurance you can afford, The better the coverage.
Not all Insurance policies are equal.
No one has mentioned the quality of service to be expected.
Do you expect the same service from MEDICAID as say a Senators Health Plan?

No, which is again why it is absurd to call this plan socialism.

This reform does not in any way change the fundamental capitalist nature of our health care.

It merely makes it a bit more fair and accessible (at least to some extent) to more people.

 

[iman]

^Ah, that clever conservative repartee! I remember this post of yours also: http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?p=5969693#post5969693

May I suggest that you are more likely to find a likeminded soul in the Fetish Forum.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

^Ah, that clever conservative repartee!

This is all you've got?

It's so touching to see you defending [JockBoy87]. Who are you, anyway?

 

[iman]

I don't have to defend Jockboy, he can do that himself. I would like to defend the right of people to exchange ideas and opinion without degenerating into dumb petty insults. If you are incapable of responding to someone with a modicum of intelligence then [Text: Removed by Moderator]

 

[Kulindahr]

Rights and obligations of citizenship.

I believe voting should be mandatory too.

That way, our representatives truly represent America, and not just the politically active and people who have nothing better to do.

I'd rather have a system with a National Service program, which would of course include military service but also the Peace Corps and anything else someone might be fit to do, and only allow those who honorably completed their terms of service (like four years minimum) to vote.

After all, why should anyone not willing to invest in the outfit have a say?






Oh -- as long as there's a national debt, I'd allow people to purchase the privilege of voting for a cool million.

 

[Kulindahr]

that would be funny, an act of tyranny for mandatory voting in a free election

^^^

Motivation to exercise the right to vote was once good enough. Now most people figure their lives won't change one way or the other. Fines aren't such a bad idea, but the money shouldn't just be used by government for any purpose, perhaps to public funding for campaigns. You know, I care less about who they vote for than the fact that all people just get out there and use their right.

RRB gets something you don't, JB: if it's mandatory, it's not a right. That's why the Patrick Henry version of the Second Amendment didn't prevail: he would have required everyone to keep and bear arms, at which point it wouldn't have been a matter of freedom.

Now if you want an incentive... how about only those who vote get a deduction for dependents on their taxes?

 

[Kulindahr]

No, which is again why it is absurd to call this plan socialism.

This reform does not in any way change the fundamental capitalist nature of our health care.

It merely makes it a bit more fair and accessible (at least to some extent) to more people.

I'm still not convinced it won't harm vast numbers of people by requiring them to buy what will make them ineligible for the free or cheap care they currently get.

 

[Kulindahr]

The problem is it's harmful to Democracy when people neglect to vote.

True, but it's harmful to liberty when it's mandated.

If we had real democracy, with "NOTA" on the ballot, I bet a lot more people would vote.

And if the House had proportional representation within state delegations, I bet a bunch more would vote. The current system leaves lots of people unrepresented, which is why a lot of them don't vote.

There is no freedom to harm other people, and I take that pretty far.

I call reducing people's liberty harm, so you don't take that as far as I do -- you love mandating stuff.

That's why the health care mess they just dropped on us is bad -- it's contrary to liberty, and is thus harm.

Give people incentives to vote, fine. Or, better, require them to actually invest in the country, and only then let them vote, and thus encourage responsibility. There's nothing magic or holy about democracy, after all, which is why to the Founding Fathers it was merely a tool, and one to be treated cautiously.