Question for people who like the Obamacare mandate

Little-Acorn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,444
Location
San Diego, CA
Suppose that Obamacare is upheld by the Supreme Court, including the mandate, as constitutional.
Sometime in the future, Republicans are voted into supermajorities in both the House and the Senate, and into the Presidency.

Congress then passes a law, and the President signs it, requiring everyone to purchase a gasoline-powered electrical generator capable of keeping every electrical appliance, tool, and light in their residence, running. (Including air conditioning, stove, clothes dryer, and everything else that uses electricity.) In case of power failure. Sooner or later you'll likely need one, and it can be a lifesaver in certain circumstances.

You don't like it, generators that size cost thousands of dollars, and you don't mind sitting in the dark for a few hours and using flashlights. And you can't afford a generator like that, it will put a huge financial burden on your family, that you can't handle at present. So you sue in court to have the law thrown out, similar to what a number of people are doing against Obamacare today.

But Obamacare was passed years ago and upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional, way back in 2012.

When you go up before the Federal judge to tell him why the generator-mandate should be thrown out, you'll have to tell him what law forbids the government from forcing you to spend thousands buy a generator. The Obamacare opponents cited the 10th amendment in 2012, but that challenge was ruled inapplicable in court.

Which law(s) will you cite?
 
Werbung:
If they say the mandate is 'constitutional', then America will have taken it's final, fatal blow, and never again be anything like the founders meant it to be.
 
The only way a mandate to buy health insurance should be upheld is if the uninsured get treated on the public dime. As long as they're just thrown out of the emergency rooms and made to fend for themselves, we have no business mandating that anyone have health insurance.
 
The only way a mandate to buy health insurance should be upheld is if the uninsured get treated on the public dime. As long as they're just thrown out of the emergency rooms and made to fend for themselves, we have no business mandating that anyone have health insurance.

Spoken like a true uninformed lib.

The uninsured have and are currently getting care provided by the public. Or, they pay for it themselves. How is it that you do not know this?
 
Not only that, we have LOTS of people that come from Canada and overseas, that have have heart problems that need things like pacemakers, they bring their medical files with them, show up here for 'vacation', and end up in a ER, and get all the treatment they need, and a shiny new pacemaker. And then they leave without a bill. Why? Because it is quicker than doing it in their own countries, or it's not covered for some reason....
 
Spoken like a true uninformed lib.

The uninsured have and are currently getting care provided by the public. Or, they pay for it themselves. How is it that you do not know this?
Really? No (bleep!) Sherlock.

So, since we pay for their medical care, why can't we insist that they take care of their own needs and not be dependent on the rest of us?
 
Really? No (bleep!) Sherlock.

So, since we pay for their medical care, why can't we insist that they take care of their own needs and not be dependent on the rest of us?

We should insist they take care of themselves. Problem is, a mandate forcing everyone to buy into a private industry policy does not do that.
 
Really?

How do you think we should do it?

Well, the liberal "government knows what's best for us" view would be that if someone says they can not afford health insurance, or to pay for health care, an investigation is opened, and their cable/satallite is removed, and their cell phones are removed, and excessive cars are taken away, if their house is excessive for their income, they are forced into something smaller... Then they have money for NEEDED medical stuff.

Thank goodness I'm not a liberal.
 
So, since we pay for their medical care, why can't we insist that they take care of their own needs and not be dependent on the rest of us?

What kind of dumb question is that?

There will always be those who can't afford HC insurance.

Why are you so heartless that you would refuse to help those in need?
 
What kind of dumb question is that?

There will always be those who can't afford HC insurance.

Why are you so heartless that you would refuse to help those in need?
Oh, I'm always willing to help those in need. The thing is, you see, I'm not willing to allow deadbeats to ramp up the cost of medical insurance by going uninsured and then passing the costs on to the rest of us, as is currently happening.

If we're willing to just turn them out in the street, then we have no right to insist they have insurance.
If we're going to pay for the uninsured, then we have a right to insist that they have coverage.
 
Werbung:
The only way a mandate to buy health insurance should be upheld is if the uninsured get treated on the public dime. As long as they're just thrown out of the emergency rooms and made to fend for themselves, we have no business mandating that anyone have health insurance.
The government has no right or business mandating that I buy a product just for existing... and the second I give them that power over me... GOD help us all.
 
Back
Top