|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The Awesome Republican Primary Thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Why not just pass a law against that then? Seems odd to fine people for not buying insurance to further that goal. They did pass a law that outlawed denial of insurance based on pre-existing conditions. It's called the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. There's a bit more in there than just regulating insurance denials...
The whole point of the mandate is to get healthy people into the risk pools so that it lowers the overall risk of the group which then leads to lower premiums. So you force them into the pool through threat of punishment? Fining people for not joining in is racketeering.
The insurance companies lose money on sick people, so they need healthy people to make up for it. If only sick people get health insurance then the cost goes up for everyone. But healthy people might not need insurance. This just means that the system is broken. You don't force people off the bus and into buying a car because the automotive market can't support the dealers without more people driving. No, the dealers that fail close up shop because they're unsustainable. People go find a car somewhere else. Now, I realize the differences between the healthcare market and the analogy, but the principles are similiar enough. The ACA just seems like a backwards means to the end. "Oh, this shit's all fucked up? Let's force more people into it, that'll straighten it out!"
What's stopping people from forming groups and bartering with the insurance companies and making plans? Why would you need the federal government involved for that? Why not use the federal government? Because they just mess everything up. They can't even keep the government, itself, up and running. They're approval rating is abyssmal. Why would you want to use them?
The federal government IS the people. The ACA is the people creating groups that can collectively bargain with insurance companies. Yeah right. How many of The People were involved in the act or even know what it entails? How many of The People are going to have to be forced into complying with it through threat of punishment? Yeah, they're really on board with this one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
First, remember that if it was not for us old farts you wouldn't have computers. Second, you have gotta be nuts if you want a direct democracy. Really totally blindingly nuts. Haven't you been complaining about the "crazies out there" all over this board? Yea but we have crazies all over our parliaments, and senates.
Second, you have gotta be nuts if you want a direct democracy. Really totally blindingly nuts. Why you worried about minorities you can protect them via the constitution, or via veto rights, say 51% of a minority vote can veto a law directed t words minorities. You can fix all the potential problems a direct deomcracy would bring, but you get rid of all the problems a normal representative democracy brings. Like corruption, the potential for abuse, how many politicians actually do what they promise during election, and how many get re elected. How many politicians actually look out for their voters, and how many look out for their financial backers. All of this and more would be gone in a direct democracy.
First, remember that if it was not for us old farts you wouldn't have computers. It was intended as i joke i get it technology went on and you couldn't keep up. The same way i probably couldn't start a fire rubbing 2 sticks together or not burn a meal cooking it in a bread oven ... You cant punch a few buttons on a computer Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
But I can start a fire just rubbing sticks together, cook a meal in a bread oven (even one I've made myself) and can still write an operating system from scratch.
Direct democracy only works when there is an informed electorate and we have done away with that concept. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Catholic Scientist writes:
Actually, it's more like providing a subsidized bus service for people who can't afford cars - and encouraging people to use the bus service by restricting single-occupant vehicles, etc. It's funny that you You don't force people off the bus and into buying a car because the automotive market can't support the dealers without more people driving.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually we did push everybody off the electric trolley cars and onto the buses.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Direct democracy only works when there is an informed electorate and we have done away with that concept. Any kind of democracy needs an informed electorate. But a direct democracy would inform you when you vote for a law to be passed you would most likely read it. When you vote for a budget you would most likely find a pie chart where you can plainly see that killing big bird wont solve our financial situation.....
But I can start a fire just rubbing sticks together, cook a meal in a bread oven (even one I've made myself) and can still write an operating system from scratch. Yea well that just means your not an old fart you are just an old person I was talking about people that couldn't turn on a computer to save their life. Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Any kind of democracy needs an informed electorate. But a direct democracy would inform you when you vote for a law to be passed you would most likely read it. When you vote for a budget you would most likely find a pie chart where you can plainly see that killing big bird wont solve our financial situation..... Why would that be any different in your direct democracy than it is today?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
quote: Fixed that for you. If you have to set up a racket to save the bus company, then maybe its time to look for a mode of transportation that actually works and can sustain itself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Why would that be any different in your direct democracy than it is today?
Yes today you vote for a guy to read the law for you and vote on it, in a direct democracy you would have to read it and vote for it. Or even propose a law. Giving you significantly more information then before. Now you get your information from the news like a law was passed 180 votes to 160 yey, did my guy vote for it, what did the law actually say you don't get those answers on the news you would have to check yourself but you don't. My way you would be forced to at least look at the law, if not read it before you vote. Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
So you force them into the pool through threat of punishment? Fining people for not joining in is racketeering.
The power to tax is clearly given to the Congress in the Constitution. Take it up with the Supreme Court . . . oh wait, somebody already did.
But healthy people might not need insurance. Why not? Are healthy people immune to getting sick in the future, or suffering a serious accident?
Now, I realize the differences between the healthcare market and the analogy, but the principles are similiar enough. The ACA just seems like a backwards means to the end. I agree. The problem is that it props up the broken for-profit system. We need a single payer, government run system now, not later. We are paying twice what other countries are paying for the same healthcare. The current system makes no sense. However, a large majority of American voters are against a single payer, government run system. For that reason, no such plan can pass Congress.
Because they just mess everything up. They can't even keep the government, itself, up and running. They're approval rating is abyssmal. Why would you want to use them? Looking across the globe, the government run systems outshine our for-profit system that came before the ACA, and the system that is largely kept in place now.
Yeah right. How many of The People were involved in the act or even know what it entails? How many of The People are going to have to be forced into complying with it through threat of punishment? Yeah, they're really on board with this one. Have you heard of a democratic process? This is where people vote on candidates that then represent them in government. People voted for candidates that ran on healthcare reform, and those candidates won. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
You don't have to look very hard. Try anywhere in the civilized world for a start. If you have to set up a racket to save the bus company, then maybe its time to look for a mode of transportation that actually works and can sustain itself. Fining people for non-compliance may or may not be going too far. It seems to be in the same category as fining people for not wearing seatbelts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
That's not quite how things work here.
First, many laws and budgetary items are voted on directly; it is only at the State and Federal level that real Representation gets involved. Locally we even televise city and county meetings so everyone can watch and see exactly what is decided and who decides it. No one watches. At the Federal level we also have 24/7 coverage of what happens. Nobody watches. At the Federal level we also have every bill, every iteration for both House and Senate readily available online. Nobody reads them. So since all the information is there already, why do you expect your direct democracy to be any different?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The power to tax is clearly given to the Congress in the Constitution. Take it up with the Supreme Court . . . oh wait, somebody already did. You're joking, right? They re-defined the fine into being a tax so that it would become constitutional. A rose is a rose by any other name. You will be fined if you don't get health insurance.
I agree. The problem is that it props up the broken for-profit system. Yeah, and assumes that the people are slaves to insurance companies and are too stupid to figure it out without Big Brother holding their hand.
We need a single payer, government run system now, not later. No... Our. Government. Sucks. They'd just fuck it up like they do everything else.
We are paying twice what other countries are paying for the same healthcare. The current system makes no sense. Its for profit!
Looking across the globe, the government run systems outshine our for-profit system that came before the ACA, and the system that is largely kept in place now. "Those governments over there can run their little countries so therefore our different government over here can run this huge country just as well" Sorry, I'm not buying that.
People voted for candidates that ran on healthcare reform, and those candidates won. Oh, I thought it was:
quote: That's not the same.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member
|
Governments collect taxes.
Governments provide services. Governments provide tax incentives to people who do certain things. The ACA is nothing but the government collecting taxes and providing services, with tax incentives for people who do certain things. What's the problem?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined:
|
Its for profit! And "either we make our profit or you die" is perfectly acceptable"? Even the very right of center in Canada feel that it is not acceptable that someone dies because they are poor. It doesn't matter to us if they "deserve" to be poor or not. Within the bounds of what is possible we believe a society is only that if they take care of one another, a mob is the alternative to a society and there is more than one country taking the path from a society to a mob. Eventually the mob turns into a failed state.
No... Our. Government. Sucks. They'd just fuck it up like they do everything else. Yupe, a failed state or one aborning while we watch.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024