Skip to comments.Another type of socialized medicine
Posted on 03/21/2010 9:02:49 AM PDT by WOBBLY BOB
The effort by Republicans to sue the government for requiring everyone to have health insurance is based on flawed logic. The sponsor of the bill claims that requiring citizens to carry health insurance is like forcing everyone to buy a car.
This comparison is false based on how each decision affects other people. If I choose not to have an automobile, that decision affects only me and my immediate family members. However, if I choose not to buy health insurance, and I have a serious illness or injury, guess who pays when I show up at the emergency room taxpayers and health insurance policyholders.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
Someone should tell Steve that healthcare is not a "right"
----------------------------------------- Lest We've Forgotten, Health Care Is Not a Right
And if you don't have a car, I assume someone else pays for you ambulance ride. Or do they? Why not?
So your position is it’s better for 30 million Americans to be forced to buy health insurance under penalty of going to jail?
Why do Dems want insurance companies to have more customers? Why are drug companies supporting this? 30 million new customers?
You’re a sheeple.
But this is just a first step on the road to government-only healthcare?
Try again, Steve.
I’m thinking about some people I’ve met in my life, outstandingly irresponsible deadbeats every one. Make them buy an insurance policy instead of spending cash on booze or drugs? Hah! Putting the IRS on their tail? What is it about not getting blood out of a turnip that Obama and Pelosi don’t understand?
But we know who’ll pay the costs instead don’t we?
Sometimes I have to ask myself why it is I’ve worked hard all my life and paid my taxes even when I didn’t want to.
No Doofus, if affects others--millions of others. If you don't buy a car it affects the union thugs who build them. Don't you want to support your fellow travelers?
If you don't buy a car from the union thugs then they pressure Zero to strong arm us into bigger subsidies for them, and so on and so on...
Let’s follow Steve’s position logically. We are all interconnected and my failure to buy health insurance affects you. My unhealthy eating habits will subject me to increased risk so you should control what I eat. My interest in outdoor activities, skiing, surfing, sky diving, etc. will also increase risk and will have to be regulated. Kids’ sports will be out of the question. Do you know how many injuries occur? My bad genes passed to my children will cause them to have health issues that will cost us all money. That will require sterilization or if they are already conceived, abortion.
I shouldn’t be able to create an invention that increases health risks and existing dangerous items like guns and knives must be confiscated. Alcohol will need to be banned as its use increases health costs. We don’t even need to mention tobacco products.
Oh, you’re not going to ban all of these activities. Tax them you say. What is it about freedom that you don’t understand.
Nothing like looking at something completely backasswards. It is true that if you do not buy a car it affects only you and your family. That is why the state does not require you to buy insurance. When you do choose to buy a car, you become a menace to your neighbors and the state requires you to buy liability insurance in order to protect them from your idiotic driving. Comprehensive insurance is totally optional.
Flawed logic belongs to the writer of this becaue in our Constitution no where does it say that I am obligated to help pay for my neighbor.
Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for your emergency room services. That is wrong, and two wrongs don't make a right. Guess you didn't learn that in socialism, grade K.
“What is it about freedom that you dont understand.”
A better question would be, is there anything such people DO understand about freedom.