Can a government force a society to pay for something they do not want? That is the question the courts will have to determine.

We live in a society of choice and now we lose yet another one of them. Now, according the the DEMOCRATIC plan, all Americans will have to pay for healthcare on a monthly basis according to the government. If you don't, you will be forced to pay a penalty. Sounds quite unamerican to me, but we are living in a society where the government knows what is better than the individual. What's next? You know politicans want to believe they are working hard to earn their keep, so what will be next on their agenda?

Will be an interesting election this November......

Thats the way it is here in Canada unless your on Social Assistance

what if your unemploed? Do you still have to pay?

Im all for the govt forcing the parents/guardians of all children 18 and under to have health insurance. But forcing me to have it is BS, unless the govt is also willing to provide a basic plan with a small standard premium that would provide limited coverage but anyone could afford. I.E. Major medical covering everything above $5,000. For say a set rate $200 per year.

As far as the current system is if you dont have insurance ANY ER still has to treat you and hundreds of thousands of legal and illegal citizens abuse this system. Leaving the gov't with the bill and alot of times they dont pay the hospitals, therefore forcing them to raise rates for people WHO ACTUALLY PAY.

Interestingly enough, the pay the penalty doesn't start till 2014. Wonder why that is? haha

As for those unemployed, I'm sure their will be exemptions. However, many were fooled into believing that it was going to be "free" healthcare. From what I understand, some will be subsidized depending on your income, but everyone WILL pay. When discussing adding 30 million to being covered, raising taxes on the wealthy will NOT be enough to cover the costs.

Here in Canada if your unemployed you can get a reduction in rate. Single is around 54-74$ Family 110-150$. Those premiums are for 3 month periods and if you dont pay them they just keep racking up. Most companies here have health care in there benifit packages so you never even notice it if working. The biggest difference between what you guys will have vs what we have? Our hospitals are ran and owned by the Gov and there are a few private clinics whereas all your medical industry in the USA is privatly owned

"Can a government force a society to pay for something they do not want? That is the question the courts will have to determine.

We live in a society of choice and now we lose yet another one of them. Now, according the the DEMOCRATIC plan, all Americans will have to pay for healthcare on a monthly basis according to the government. If you don't, you will be forced to pay a penalty. Sounds quite unamerican..."

Cmon Cher is that the best argument you have??

What about Auto insurance? The govt forces you to pay for it or PAY a penalty. Those evil democrats were probably behingd this too. definately unamerican bastards.

I do not know where you get the idea that the american people do not want an AFFORDABLE (to them) health plan?
Have you not heard any of the horror stories about people geting dropped from their insurance carrier because of illness? These people cannot get insurance unless they want to shell out $30-$40k a year?

I love how the republicans plan is to continue to do nothing. Yeah that has been working so well...

"What about Auto insurance? The govt forces you to pay for it or PAY a penalty. Those evil democrats were probably behingd this too. definately unamerican bastards."

You're missing the point. It's not about being evil. It's about be reponsible and allowing a free market system to exist. I would rather have that than government care. Why? Because, in most instances, free market works better than government.

"I do not know where you get the idea that the american people do not want an AFFORDABLE (to them) health plan?"

Who doesn't want affordable anything? The problem isn't that people want affordable, its can the government provide good quality care at an affordable rate. The federal government has a long track record of doing things poorly. Let's take one system as an example. The Social Security System. Even if you think it works well, realize that the government that set it up has now spent all its money through borrowing. I read somewhere that this year is the first tiem in which it will collect a negative on the system. That wouldn't be such a worry except there is no money left to borrow. What is going to happen in 20 years? The experts are saying that two things are going to happen: A) the government will be forced to raise taxes to pay for it B) the amount of real money that senior citizens will be decreasing significantly.

"Have you not heard any of the horror stories about people geting dropped from their insurance carrier because of illness? These people cannot get insurance unless they want to shell out $30-$40k a year?"

I still hear horror stories that go on in Canada and most of the socialized states in Europe. What does that mean?

"I love how the republicans plan is to continue to do nothing. Yeah that has been working so well..."

It's not about nothing. It's about handing it over to a system that is corrupt, mismanaged, and inefficent.

How stupid is that?

"It's not about nothing. It's about handing it over to a system that is corrupt, mismanaged, and inefficent.

How stupid is that?"

Wow cheers actually said something that made sense. Good job cheers.

Ahh the, they make us get auto insurance argument.

2 problems. First they do not make you own a car, that is a choice. Second it is the states that make you get Car insurance not the federal government. Who has no constitutional authority to do so.

one of the worst things that I will never get about health care that leads to a MONOLOPY IN THE US is the fact that you can ONLY buy health insurance in the state that you live and/or work in... just what does that mean? the same person living in st. louis buying own private insurance would pay a different rate in any state. There are several other regulations that need to be relaxed and several others that need to be stiffened, how can the govt force you to buy health care when there is no national program or evern no national average rate???? private or nonprivate..........

And TR if the rates were $54-74 for a 3month period we wouldnt be having this argument. The best rate for single nonsmoking male in my area(and im in st. louis not LA or NY which has jacked up prices on everything) was $94 a month with a $2000 dectuble, and if you smoke its a extra $25+ a month........

Now compare ur rates to ours and tell me if thats fair.....government needs to reform health care before they start a new system which is what they are trying to do.

The old BS auto insurance argument. That dog won't hunt.

Auto insurance is required for the sole purpose of demonstrating financial capability to pay for damages/ injuries to OTHERS as a result of driving and to protect the bank that holds the note for the car until paid in full. Ditto any other LIABILITY insurance: Contractor's, builder's, etc. All 50 states do so, but under their OWN individual guidelines. It is NOT subject to the Commerce Clause.

Home insurance to protect the mortgage holder from losses to the loan and to cover losses of the homeowner...ditto renter's insurance. The are required to protect everyone's investment.

Health insurance is financial protection for you and you only, this is specifically why it is NOT obligatory and should remain that way. Your physical health does not affect the health and/or potential investment loss of others, there is no liability to others........therefore it should NOT be compulsory. I don't wanna hear the "taxpayers pick up the tab" argument either, those are laws of choice enacted by individual states, and individual liability remains.......the bill doesn't go away.. Life insurance is also voluntary, is requiring citizens to pay that next ?

Furthermore, Congress used (like many other things) the Commerce Clause as a legal basis to enact this monstrosity. Since individual states have unique laws and guidelines for each health insurance company to operate within their state as afforded in the 10th Amendment and in the body of the Constitution proper, the commerce clause is NOT applicable to REQUIRE purchase of health insurance. The only place it could be so is were the Fed regulate a UNIFORM standard of coverage, which Obamacare does NOT. Our AG in Virginia is leading the way to overturn trhis unconstitutional nonsense.

Individual states could attempt to compel individuals to purchase healthcare, yet IF the individual state constitutions even allowed for that, I doubt the legislation would pass.

For the Canadians, with all due respect, this AIN'T Canada. Your govt. is based on a different set of rules that allow more "wiggle room" for govt. instrusion. Your healthcare system is a joke by comparison to the USA. It is also slowly bankrupting your country, ditto Greece and the EU.

Is it really bankrupting our system? Seems to me our economy is rebounding faster then the US. Our Finacial Institutions arent asking for Gov Bailouts and there is alot of work for those that want to work.

The biggest difference between the USA and Canada Healthcare is simple. Our hospitals and care facilities are Gov owned not privately owned as they are in the USA. Care in the USA will become like buying a car, can't afford a new one well I guess its buy used. Doctors will be the same and so will hospitals.

The problem with those that don't have health insurance is it racks up the premiums, copays and deductibles of those that do.

The uninsured go to the hospital for routine illnesses, they (as a large group...there are exceptions) don't pay their bill either...this results in higher premiums, copays and deductibles for those that do. So basically the (responsible) insured end up paying for the (not as responsible) uninsured.

The other issues that cause Healthcare costs to continue to rise are Drug Companies, inefficient healthcare systems (Where I have spent 11 years working on lol), waste ande abuse of Medicare and lack of prevention and care.

Obesity is on the rise, the fact is this causes many health problems. Adml- smoking causes greater health problems and cost...(I smoke so I do understand how you feel) and life insurance companies charge a higher premium for smokers so it's not unheard of.

Do I think "mandated" federal health insurance is the answer? Honestly I have mixed feelings on it but I will say there are other, greater problems that have and will continue to cause healthcare costs to skyrocket....whether people are insured or not.

Gamer, I can't disagree with your point on elevated costs. However; this is where we go wrong and add even more cost...involving govt.

You can't legislate behavior and with the swipe of the pen remove stupidity and laziness...............when you add govt. programs and taxpayer freebees, you make the problem worse, not better. You encourage MORE of it.

NOTHING the public sector does costs less and becomes more efficient than the private sector.....NOTHING. Prim arily because EVERYTHING in the public sector is funded by the private one....dead overhead.

Savings do not magically appear, costs WILL elevate because you are now removing even MORE money from the private sector to pay for the public one AND adding more levels of beauraucracy and costs. It's like a MD's office adding another layer of staff below the nurses and doctors.

Where liberals REALLY don't get it is that govt. does NOT create wealth, it may print money, but it doesn't create value...thus wealth. It does not create a good or service, it mandates the goods and services of others. It seizes it from citizens and redistributes it. If it doesn't create wealth OR a good or service, howe on earth can it be MORE efficient and CUT costs ? It can't.

This is why every govt. program always costs 4-5 times more than advertised and costs 10 times more than the same service in the private sector.

We in the US are going to be paying six years of taxes for four years of services.
The taxes start in six months, but the benefits do not start for four years.
Is this not digging a hole that can never be filled?

The Bush tax cuts also expire on 1/1/2011.
All those financial incentives for investing are going away.
Tax rates are going up 3 to 5 percent per bracket.
Seeing the 2011 tax table in April 2012 is going to hurt, physically, mentally, philosophically.

Proto

I remember this guy named brainwashed that posted the identical thing about Clinton in 1993.

If I remember correctly in 1993 when Clinton raised taxes on the richest 1%, and the S&L scandal under Bush was winding down, the stock market under Clinton was soaring to dizzying new heights.

I am hoping the same thing happens, the bank scandal under Bush winds down and maybe we can have 1990's Prosperity.

T7

That is the comical thinking that got us here in the first place. People are so ignorant about economics that they simply believe, Clinton President things went good, therefore, we need another Clinton. Not realizing that government spending had nothing to do with Clinton. Sure we collected more in taxes, but least we forget that the credit regulation under Clinton which led to the banking crisis of today was guided under his leadership. Oh well, let's only remember the good and the immediate things Clinton didn't do. However, wasn't he President that the time? Yeah, let's give him all the credit. :0)

I don't want to ever hear how Dems are so good with the economy again.........EVER.

Congress holds the purse strings, the reason Clinton gets so much credit is from the actions of a REPUBLICAN congress 6 of 8 years during his terms.

Bush gets blamed for everything, let's remember of the 8 years he was President he had control of Congress for 2 of 8 years.

The VERY regulations and policies that led to this current problem were enacted by Democrats, for their constituancy.........making people make loans that they KNEW no one could pay back.. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd-----Fannie and Freddie.

Obama has spent and projected more spending in 18 MONTHS, than ALL PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS COMBINED from Washington to GWB. With a more than willing DEMOCRAT congress. That includes all the wars too folks. For what ? A huge taxpayer slush fund for his union constituents, and now this monstrosity of health care.

A little perspective. Usually when it hits 95 degrees plus for a week the first time in summer, the Sunday paper usually has 20-30 ads fro HVAC related jobs and has 10-20 every week after that for a few weeks.

It has been above 95 degrees in Central VA now for 3 weeks, and for the last three weeks there have been ZERO ads in the Sunday paper.....ZERO, ZILTCH, NADA.

In 22 years in and around the trade, I have NEVER seen this. With Tax rates going up across the board, unemployment extended past the 3 months where it used to be to almost a full year, and the helathcare costs,fees and taxes coming in 2011....NOBODY IS GOING TO HIRE ANYONE.

EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT POLICY HURTS THE ECONOMY. Clinton wised up after his shillacking in 1994 and saved hims administration and recieved a lot of credit from the actions of a REPUBLICAN congress. Stop to consider how much their negative rhetoric (parroited in the media) contirbutes ? When Bush's economic numbers were better than Clinton's on EVERY level, they were talking it down.

Remember, the President sets the agenda with the bully pulpet, congress FUNDS and ENACTS the policies. Another example: for all the DEM bitching about the Iraq war for purely political reason (after voting for the war).....why did they not defund it ? SImple.

Until now, Dems have always had to hide who they truly were and what they wanted. Now with supermajorities and an egomaniac in the White House, they are pushing everything they can through, because they realize they will NEVER have the opportunity again and that it will take super-supermajorities to REPEAL this stuff over a presidential veto (which is what over 60% opf the population wants).


Long story short, until there is a Republican President again, we are stuck with this crap.