TeenHelp
Support Forums Today's Posts

Get Advice Connect with TeenHelp Resources
HelpLINK Facebook     Twitter     Tumblr     Instagram    Hotlines    Safety Zone    Alternatives

You are not registered or have not logged in

Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!)

As a guest on TeenHelp you are only able to use some of our site's features. By registering an account you will be able to enjoy unlimited access to our site, and will be able to:

  • Connect with thousands of teenagers worldwide by actively taking part in our Support Forums and Chat Room.
  • Find others with similar interests in our Social Groups.
  • Express yourself through our Blogs, Picture Albums and User Profiles.
  • And much much more!

Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!


Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  (#1 (permalink)) Old
Khadra Offline
got hitched!! <3
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Khadra's Avatar
 
Name: Kathlene
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Lima, Peru

Posts: 736
Join Date: January 6th 2009

House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 06:02 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html

Quote:
-- The House of Representatives on Saturday night passed a sweeping health care bill by a vote of 220-215.
With the passage of H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, proponents of health care reform took an important step forward, but turning the bill into law remains uncertain.
It's unclear when the Senate will vote on a version of the health care legislation debated in that chamber. If the Senate passes its bill, the House and Senate bills would have to be reconciled into one document and voted on again.
The House Democrats needed 218 votes to ensure passage of the bill. On Saturday, it appeared the vote would come down to the wire, as the intentions of some conservative Democrats remained unknown.
In the final tally, 219 Democrats voted for the legislation, and 39 voted against it.
Rep. Joe Cao (R-Louisiana) was the only Republican who voted in favor of the bill.
Read the House bill (PDF)
Democrats began counting down with eight seconds left in the voting period and erupted in a loud cheer when the hotly debated legislation was passed. Republicans in the chamber stood across the floor, some with their arms folded.
"Oh what a night," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a news conference after the House adjourned its session for the night. She thanked President Obama and her colleagues who fought to get the bill passed.
The Republican National Committee released a statement after the vote.
"Today with help from their liberal House allies, President Obama and Nancy Pelosi finally got what they have been creating behind closed doors these past months -- a government-run health careexperiment that will increase families' health care costs, increase the deficit, increase taxes on small businesses and the middle class, and cut Medicare," the statement said.
Earlier, the House passed an amendment to pending health care legislation that prohibits federal funds for abortion services in the public option and in the insurance "exchange" the bill would create.
The vote passed 240-194.
Share your thoughts on the health care debate
A second amendment considered by the House, introduced by Minority Leader John Boehner, which would have substituted several sections of the health care bill dealing with insurance, did not pass. Legislators voted against the amendment 258-176.
The first amendment, introduced by anti-abortion Democrats, bans federal funds for abortion services in the public option and in the insurance "exchange" the bill would create. Its consideration was considered a big win for them and for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which used its power -- especially with conservative Democrats in swing congressional districts -- to help force other Democratic leaders to permit a vote that most of them oppose.
The prohibition, introduced by Democratic members, including Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Indiana, and Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, would exclude cases of rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger.
Republicans strongly supported the measure.
The GOP accounted for 174 of the votes in favor of the amendment, with 1 Republican voting "present." On the Democrats' side, 64 voted for the measure, and 194 voted against.
Earlier Saturday, President Obama said members of the House of Representatives face the chance of a lifetime as they consider the legislation.
After a meeting with the House Democratic leadership, the president said he told lawmakers that "opportunities like this come around maybe once in a generation."
"This is their moment, this is our moment, to live up to the trust that the American people have placed in us," Obama told reporters in the White House rose garden. "Even when it's hard, especially when it's hard, this is our moment to deliver."
Your thoughts?


It's not socialism. It's CIVILIZATION.
- a woman from Denmark (the happiest country on Earth)


Once you choose hope, anything is possible - Christopher Reeves

Drop a pm in my box if you ever need anything. I'll always do my best to help! <3

Last edited by Khadra; November 8th 2009 at 06:07 AM.
   
  (#2 (permalink)) Old
Teacher, mother - secret lover
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
-thesolitaryone-'s Avatar
 
Name: Ashleigh
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Perth, Australia

Posts: 18
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: November 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 09:18 AM

All I can say is: about bloody time.

I think it should be considered a human rights violation that so many Americans do not have access to health care.

I am Australian, and I can proudly say that if I get sick, I can go to the bloody hospital and get treated. And look: we have universal health-care and yet WE'RE NOT SOCIALIST!

I think this is a well-deserved slap in the face for the Repubs and the Blue-Dogs. Good on Joseph Cao for being the only Republican with balls enough to do the right thing.

The bill wasn't perfect, but anything is a right side better than the past.

And what I've noticed: many of those who have been against it on Twitter have been either: screaming it in all capital letters, or replacing the word "sucks" with "sux", therefore proving the point that the majority of those people are Bum-Crack University alumni.

-thesolitaryone-


Politically-obsessed, narrow-minded, outspoken and openly-partisan member of the Australian Liberal Party. Then there's nerd, bibliophile, occasional blogger, and general conveyer of epic nonsense.

Follow me and my Political ravings on Twitter,

and see my overly biased blog.


To people who think I'm mad: I will laugh at you, and then proceed to verbally beating you to the ground.

..On second thoughts, maybe I am mad.


-thesolitaryone-
   
  (#3 (permalink)) Old
Member
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
aproblemfreephilosophy's Avatar
 

Posts: 11
Join Date: November 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 04:55 PM

George Carlin had it right:

"Sooner or later, the people in America will realize that the government does not give a fuck about them. The government doesn't care about you or your children or your rights or your welfare or your safety. It simply doesn't give a fuck about you. It's interested in its own power, that's the only thing, keeping it and expanding it wherever possible."

This bill continues the trend of increasing the size and power of the government. The list of temporary privileges we have continues to get shorter as time goes on.

However, this bill is definitely better than doing nothing at all. Teddy Roosevelt said it best:

“In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing”
   
  (#4 (permalink)) Old
Blackwing Offline
I can't get enough
*********
 
Blackwing's Avatar
 
Name: Zack
Gender: Male
Location: Arizona(Usa)

Posts: 2,830
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 08:34 PM

Look how Government runs banks = Disaster.


  Send a message via AIM to Blackwing  
  (#5 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 09:03 PM

Thank the lord. This doesn't mean it's passed yet, we still need the Senate, which, again, is controlled by the Dems, so I think it'll pass. HOORAY!!




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#6 (permalink)) Old
BigBL87 Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
BigBL87's Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Illinois

Posts: 452
Join Date: April 10th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 10:12 PM

I think that the narrow margin of the vote shows how divided the nation is on the issue. When the vote only passes 220-215 in a heavily Democrat controlled Congress, you know it's a divisive issue.

Now, in a perfect world, universal health care is a great idea. If it is supportable, and doesn't result in rationing, I'm all for it. The fact is, though, that we don't live in a perfect world and I don't think that the bill, as passed, will be sustainable in the long term (much like Social Security, which the bill has been compared to, as SS funds are iffy for future generations). I also think that the "government option" is basically getting the foot in the door for a complete government takeover of health care, which as I stated before I believe is an admirable but unsustainable goal if we want to continue to have quality health care.
   
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
Member
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
hecanandWILLchangeyou's Avatar
 
Name: Emily
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Georgia( the U.S. state)

Posts: 549
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: August 26th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 10:24 PM

Even if it SHOULD become law that does not mean it will stay that way as devided as we are on the subject if enough American people object it WILL change maybe not the next day but it WILL change because I mean people do overthrow governments.
   
  (#8 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by aproblemfreephilosophy View Post
However, this bill is definitely better than doing nothing at all. Teddy Roosevelt said it best:

“In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing”
That's a terrible quote from a terrible president. Trust the guy who turned a severe recession into a depression lasting over a decade with his poorly thought out economic policy to try and justify doing bad over doing nothing.
   
  (#9 (permalink)) Old
Teacher, mother - secret lover
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
-thesolitaryone-'s Avatar
 
Name: Ashleigh
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Perth, Australia

Posts: 18
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: November 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 8th 2009, 11:48 PM

Quote:
I also think that the "government option" is basically getting the foot in the door for a complete government takeover of health care, which as I stated before I believe is an admirable but unsustainable goal if we want to continue to have quality health care.
I'm not so sure mate; most of the free world has universal health care, and although it has faults, it has shown to be exceedingly stable.


Politically-obsessed, narrow-minded, outspoken and openly-partisan member of the Australian Liberal Party. Then there's nerd, bibliophile, occasional blogger, and general conveyer of epic nonsense.

Follow me and my Political ravings on Twitter,

and see my overly biased blog.


To people who think I'm mad: I will laugh at you, and then proceed to verbally beating you to the ground.

..On second thoughts, maybe I am mad.


-thesolitaryone-
   
  (#10 (permalink)) Old
BigBL87 Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
BigBL87's Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Illinois

Posts: 452
Join Date: April 10th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 9th 2009, 09:00 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by -thesolitaryone- View Post
I'm not so sure mate; most of the free world has universal health care, and although it has faults, it has shown to be exceedingly stable.
We shall see. I personally think the faults that I have seen outweigh the benefits. Another thing that bugs me about the way the bill is currently set up (as I understand it), if I can't buy health insurance... I get fined. All opinions aside, I really have a hard time understanding the logic behind that. I can't afford it... so I get fined for money that I don't have...ok. That's even beyond the fact that I think mandating health insurance is unconstitutional.

Under our present system, the US has one of (if not THE) most advanced medical capabilities in the world. We also have much shorter wait times (especially for major surgeries and treatments) than most countries as well. IMO, government run health care will change that, as it has in virtually every country that has adopted such a system. I think there are ways to address the rising costs of health insurance without the government taking over, but with a liberal president and liberal controlled congress, any alternative isn't going to get significant ear time.

Honestly, the government run health care could probably work efficiently if it weren't for one thing: human nature. The biggest drag on government run health care is hypochondria and related disorders. If everyone would use the system, rather than some using and some taking advantage, there really wouldn't be that much of a problem from a logistical perspective. This also drives up the cost, which as I said before is in my opinion unsustainable in the long term, especially without adding taxes as Obama and the Congress claims to be planning to do.
   
  (#11 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 9th 2009, 05:30 PM

I wonder whether the 215 who voted against really should be in the position they're in....

To all those who oppose the Health Care Bill, you seem to be ignoring the fact that better doesn't necessarily mean best. Sure I'd rather if politicians didn't run healthcare facilities, but lets face it - if you need health care you need it. Who cares if it isn't fantastic - you NEED it and if this bill is going to give healthcare to people who currently can't obtain it then voting against it is pure immoral.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#12 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 9th 2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBL87 View Post
We shall see. I personally think the faults that I have seen outweigh the benefits. Another thing that bugs me about the way the bill is currently set up (as I understand it), if I can't buy health insurance... I get fined. All opinions aside, I really have a hard time understanding the logic behind that. I can't afford it... so I get fined for money that I don't have...ok. That's even beyond the fact that I think mandating health insurance is unconstitutional.
I am not entirely sure on your first point, do you have a source?

Quote:
Under our present system, the US has one of (if not THE) most advanced medical capabilities in the world. We also have much shorter wait times (especially for major surgeries and treatments) than most countries as well. IMO, government run health care will change that, as it has in virtually every country that has adopted such a system. I think there are ways to address the rising costs of health insurance without the government taking over, but with a liberal president and liberal controlled congress, any alternative isn't going to get significant ear time.
Untrue

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082101778.html

In most countries, wait times are actually shorter than in America... In some countries, wait time is practically zero
Quote:
Honestly, the government run health care could probably work efficiently if it weren't for one thing: human nature. The biggest drag on government run health care is hypochondria and related disorders. If everyone would use the system, rather than some using and some taking advantage, there really wouldn't be that much of a problem from a logistical perspective. This also drives up the cost, which as I said before is in my opinion unsustainable in the long term, especially without adding taxes as Obama and the Congress claims to be planning to do.
How can it not work in America, but it does in pretty much every developed country in the work?




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#13 (permalink)) Old
BigBL87 Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
BigBL87's Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Illinois

Posts: 452
Join Date: April 10th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 9th 2009, 10:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I wonder whether the 215 who voted against really should be in the position they're in....
It is ridiculous to villainize those who voted against this bill, IMO. Just about every member of congress I have heard interviewed agrees that health care reform is needed. I'm in the boat that agrees it is. MANY of the 215 that voted against the bill saw major problems in the implementation, not the goal.

DTLI, for each newspaper that you cite (The Washington Post, btw, is pretty liberal leaning and as such I would expect it to support this form of the bill), I can give you an example of a person who either had to come to the US to get a life saving treatment that would not have come in time in their home country or a person that died because they couldn't get such a treatment in time. That's the reason we have two sides to this argument.

As I am reading the bill, I have some BIG questions. For example, on pg. 91, there is a paragraph which reads:

(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in
this paragraph, the individual health insurance
issuer offering such coverage does not enroll
any individual in such coverage if the first effective
date of coverage is on or after the first
day of Y1.


That, to me, sounds like it will not allow me to buy my own individual coverage from an independent company after Year 1 of the bill taking effect. So much for my freedom of choice, it seems. The government option will become the only option over time. The government needs to be straight if this is the case, if you are taking over say it! Don't try to trick me into it.

Concerning the fine for not having health coverage, apparently it is called a "tax." FWIW, just because you call a cat a dog doesn't make it a dog...

From p. 297 of the bill:

SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual
who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at
any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed
a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross in 8
come for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in 10
section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.


If that's not fining me for not getting coverage, then I don't know what is. I'm all for health care reform, I just don't think this is the way to do it.
   
  (#14 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 10th 2009, 01:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBL87 View Post
DTLI, for each newspaper that you cite (The Washington Post, btw, is pretty liberal leaning and as such I would expect it to support this form of the bill), I can give you an example of a person who either had to come to the US to get a life saving treatment that would not have come in time in their home country or a person that died because they couldn't get such a treatment in time. That's the reason we have two sides to this argument.
Please, call me Cameron
And most of the people who come to the US for treatment are getting it paid for by their health care provider, be it the government, or some private institution that is strictly regulated by the government. They just come to the US because the specialist is not available in their country.

Quote:
As I am reading the bill, I have some BIG questions. For example, on pg. 91, there is a paragraph which reads:

(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in
this paragraph, the individual health insurance
issuer offering such coverage does not enroll
any individual in such coverage if the first effective
date of coverage is on or after the first
day of Y1.


That, to me, sounds like it will not allow me to buy my own individual coverage from an independent company after Year 1 of the bill taking effect. So much for my freedom of choice, it seems. The government option will become the only option over time. The government needs to be straight if this is the case, if you are taking over say it! Don't try to trick me into it.
This, I'm not exactly sure of what this is supposed to mean. I am e-mailing my senators about it.

Quote:
Concerning the fine for not having health coverage, apparently it is called a "tax." FWIW, just because you call a cat a dog doesn't make it a dog...

From p. 297 of the bill:

SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual
who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at
any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed
a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross in 8
come for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in 10
section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.


If that's not fining me for not getting coverage, then I don't know what is. I'm all for health care reform, I just don't think this is the way to do it.
What is subsection d?

Also, I'm looking on page 297 of the bill, and i don't find it, all I see is:
1 (i) a skilled nursing facility (as de-
2 fined in section 1819(a) of the Social Secu-
3 rity Act);
4 (ii) an inpatient rehabilitation facility
5 (described in section 1886(h)(1)(A) of such
6 Act);
7 (iii) a home health agency (as defined
8 in section 1861(o) of such Act); and
9 (iv) a long term care hospital (as de-
10 fined in section 1861(ccc) of such Act).
11 (B) OTHER TERMS .—The terms ‘‘applica-
12 ble condition’’, ‘‘applicable hospital’’, and ‘‘re-
13 admission’’ have the meanings given such terms
14 in section 1886(p)(5) of the Social Security
15 Act, as added by subsection (a)(1).
16 (d) PHYSICIANS.—
17 (1) STUDY.—The Secretary of Health and
18 Human Services shall conduct a study to determine
19 how the readmissions policy described in the pre-
20 vious subsections could be applied to physicians.
21 (2) CONSIDERATIONS.—In conducting the
22 study, the Secretary shall consider approaches such
23 as—
24 (A) creating a new code (or codes) and
25 payment amount (or amounts) under the fee




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)

Last edited by DoesThisLookInfected?; November 10th 2009 at 01:24 AM.
   
  (#15 (permalink)) Old
BigBL87 Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
BigBL87's Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Illinois

Posts: 452
Join Date: April 10th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 10th 2009, 01:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesThisLookInfected? View Post
What is subsection d?
‘‘(d) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The requirements of this subsection are met with respect to any individual for any period if such individual (and each qualifying child of such individual) is covered by acceptable coverage at all times during such period.
(2) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE.—For purposes of this section, the term 'acceptable coverage’ means any of the following:
(A) QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN COVERAGE.—Coverage under a qualified health benefits plan (as defined in section 100(c) of the ).
(B) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE; COVERAGE UNDER GRANDFATHERED EMPLOYMENT-BASED HEALTH PLAN. Coverage under a grandfathered health insurance coverage (as defined in subsection (a) of section 202 of the ) or under a current employment-based health plan (within the meaning of subsection (b) of such section).
(C) MEDICARE.—Coverage under part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act.
(D) MEDICAID.—Coverage for medical as22
sistance under title XIX of the Social Security Act.
(E) MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPENDENTS (INCLUDING TRICARE).—
Coverage under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, including similar coverage furnished under section 1781 of title 38 of such Code.
(F) VA.—Coverage under the veteran’s health care program under chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code.
(G) MEMBERS OF INDIAN TRIBES.— Health care services made available through the Indian Health Service, a tribal organization (as defined in section 4 of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act), or an urban Indian organization (as defined in such section) to members of an Indian tribe (as defined in such section).
(H) OTHER COVERAGE.—Such other health benefits coverage as the Secretary, in coordination with the Health Choices Commissioner, recognizes for purposes of this subsection.

I am using this:
http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Which appears to be the bill as introcuded. Do you have a more recent version? I can't find one on the House website.
   
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 10th 2009, 01:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBL87 View Post
‘‘(d) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The requirements of this subsection are met with respect to any individual for any period if such individual (and each qualifying child of such individual) is covered by acceptable coverage at all times during such period.
(2) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE.—For purposes of this section, the term 'acceptable coverage’ means any of the following:
(A) QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN COVERAGE.—Coverage under a qualified health benefits plan (as defined in section 100(c) of the ).
(B) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE; COVERAGE UNDER GRANDFATHERED EMPLOYMENT-BASED HEALTH PLAN. Coverage under a grandfathered health insurance coverage (as defined in subsection (a) of section 202 of the ) or under a current employment-based health plan (within the meaning of subsection (b) of such section).
(C) MEDICARE.—Coverage under part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act.
(D) MEDICAID.—Coverage for medical as22
sistance under title XIX of the Social Security Act.
(E) MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPENDENTS (INCLUDING TRICARE).—
Coverage under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, including similar coverage furnished under section 1781 of title 38 of such Code.
(F) VA.—Coverage under the veteran’s health care program under chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code.
(G) MEMBERS OF INDIAN TRIBES.— Health care services made available through the Indian Health Service, a tribal organization (as defined in section 4 of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act), or an urban Indian organization (as defined in such section) to members of an Indian tribe (as defined in such section).
(H) OTHER COVERAGE.—Such other health benefits coverage as the Secretary, in coordination with the Health Choices Commissioner, recognizes for purposes of this subsection.

I am using this:
http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Which appears to be the bill as introcuded. Do you have a more recent version? I can't find one on the House website.
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/...CA09001xml.pdf
Well, never mind, I have an earlier version. Mine is in July, yours is in October.
I have to read through this a little bit, then I'll get back to you. But overall, I suppose I agree with you...




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#17 (permalink)) Old
MadPoet Offline
You're the Original <3
Outside, huh?
**********
 
MadPoet's Avatar
 
Name: Amanda.
Age: 24
Gender: Female.
Location: Michigan.

Posts: 4,685
Blog Entries: 121
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 10th 2009, 04:24 AM

More idiocy? Come on!!! Change all the policies, like the health care policy, so that the people who never bothered to make something of their lives and earn their own darn health care get a free ride, while the people who earned it themselves have to suffer and go through change. This 'looking out for the weaker Americans' business is bologna. There's nothing wrong with the health care for a lot of us, so why should those of us have to change it?





A lonely soul in a land of broken hearts


   
  (#18 (permalink)) Old
Xujhan Offline
Resident Atheist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Xujhan's Avatar
 
Name: Fletcher
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 2,024
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 10th 2009, 05:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Concrete Girl View Post
More idiocy? Come on!!! Change all the policies, like the health care policy, so that the people who never bothered to make something of their lives and earn their own darn health care get a free ride, while the people who earned it themselves have to suffer and go through change. This 'looking out for the weaker Americans' business is bologna. There's nothing wrong with the health care for a lot of us, so why should those of us have to change it?
Because a lot of people are not in the position of being magically able to transform effort into dollars, especially in this economy. People who are born poor are not at fault for it, yet you'd have them punished none-the-less. That's why "the lot of you" should change what you have.


The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
  Send a message via MSN to Xujhan  
  (#19 (permalink)) Old
MadPoet Offline
You're the Original <3
Outside, huh?
**********
 
MadPoet's Avatar
 
Name: Amanda.
Age: 24
Gender: Female.
Location: Michigan.

Posts: 4,685
Blog Entries: 121
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 11th 2009, 12:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan View Post
Because a lot of people are not in the position of being magically able to transform effort into dollars, especially in this economy. People who are born poor are not at fault for it, yet you'd have them punished none-the-less. That's why "the lot of you" should change what you have.
Fair enough, but it doesn't seem fair to me that people who are happy with their health care should have to be forced to change their health care if they don't feel that's in their best interest.

I'm not saying that people who struggle with money shouldn't be helped, but I don't think that people who can afford health care should be forced to change their health care plan so those people are helped.

I don't know all there is to know about the new health care crap, but I'm going to take an educated guess and say that this health care plan isn't going to be free. It's obviously going to take billions of dollars to change the health care plan so drastically. And let me guess who that money will come from - the people who hold stable jobs and are able to afford their health care. Just like people with a decent amount of money are forced to pay taxes that go towards people on welfare. Why would anyone want their hard earned money taken from them and invested into something that they don't even agree with to begin with?





A lonely soul in a land of broken hearts


   
  (#20 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 11th 2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Concrete Girl View Post
Fair enough, but it doesn't seem fair to me that people who are happy with their health care should have to be forced to change their health care if they don't feel that's in their best interest.

But theur health care plan won't be changed. If you want to use private healthcare, you still can, however there will also be the option of quasi-free public healthcare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Concrete Girl View Post
Just like people with a decent amount of money are forced to pay taxes that go towards people on welfare. Why would anyone want their hard earned money taken from them and invested into something that they don't even agree with to begin with?
Well it's the same as always - if you earn $2.2billion and don't "agree" with taxes, should you be forced to pay them? Of course! You can't pick and choose laws to suit yourself - if you want to give to people who have less than they need, you're going to have to take from people who have more than they need.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#21 (permalink)) Old
BigBL87 Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
BigBL87's Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Illinois

Posts: 452
Join Date: April 10th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 11th 2009, 07:36 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
But theur health care plan won't be changed. If you want to use private healthcare, you still can, however there will also be the option of quasi-free public healthcare.
The wording of the bill, though (as seen in the part that I quoted), seems eventually make the public option the only option.

Last edited by BigBL87; November 11th 2009 at 09:48 PM.
   
  (#22 (permalink)) Old
Member
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
hecanandWILLchangeyou's Avatar
 
Name: Emily
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Georgia( the U.S. state)

Posts: 549
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: August 26th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 11th 2009, 07:57 PM

I don't like it if I NEED health care I NEED it and if I can afford it why should I have to wait?
   
  (#23 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 11th 2009, 09:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Well it's the same as always - if you earn $2.2billion and don't "agree" with taxes, should you be forced to pay them?
No.

mootblox
   
  (#24 (permalink)) Old
Casey. Offline
Dance with me
I can't get enough
*********
 
Casey.'s Avatar
 
Name: Casey
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere in my mind

Posts: 2,343
Blog Entries: 337
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 12th 2009, 04:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Concrete Girl View Post
More idiocy? Come on!!! Change all the policies, like the health care policy, so that the people who never bothered to make something of their lives and earn their own darn health care get a free ride, while the people who earned it themselves have to suffer and go through change. This 'looking out for the weaker Americans' business is bologna. There's nothing wrong with the health care for a lot of us, so why should those of us have to change it?
I don't see how this is idiocy. The reforms are not perfect, but this is not a perfect world. Some reforms, are better than no reforms. And Amanda, my family can't afford health care, we use free clinics in our area, which aren't the best around, and school nurses. Four people work part-full time, and yet we still can't afford it. It doesn't mean we don't try to do something with our lives, it's just no a necessity, when you realize that choosing between lights, water, and heat, or medical coverage.. In some states, it really is down to the choice, it doesn't mean people are lazy or don't care, it's just out of their reach.


She whispered to her own reflection "I will be strong."

"I am not what has happened to me.I am what I have chosen to become."- Carl Jung

"If ye harm none, do as ye wish."

Sometimes things just happen.


Smile through the tears.


PM me

  Send a message via Yahoo to Casey.  
  (#25 (permalink)) Old
John 6:29 Offline
Romans 2:6-8
I've been here a while
********
 
John 6:29's Avatar
 
Name: Michael
Gender: Male
Location: Michigan

Posts: 1,300
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: July 9th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 12th 2009, 06:04 AM

You realize were paying 10 years for 5 years treatment and we still need senate to pass, which the house only won by a couple votes. It's probably not going to go through.
  Send a message via AIM to John 6:29 Send a message via MSN to John 6:29  
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 12th 2009, 06:18 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
No.
OK, so lets rephrase that. If a person believes that killing isn't wrong, does that give him the right to kill? It's the same issue.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#27 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 12th 2009, 09:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
OK, so lets rephrase that. If a person believes that killing isn't wrong, does that give him the right to kill? It's the same issue.
That's an awful analogy, because one scenario involves someone opposing agggression against themselves, and the other involves someone agressing against another.
   
  (#28 (permalink)) Old
Gidig Offline
Optimistic pessimist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Gidig's Avatar
 
Name: Maria
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Colorado

Posts: 2,123
Blog Entries: 390
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 13th 2009, 02:21 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ABC123 View Post
I don't like it if I NEED health care I NEED it and if I can afford it why should I have to wait?
That's great if you can afford thousands and thousands of dollars to battle cancer. If you have the money to get treated when you've come down with a disease. I don't want to speak for anyone else, but I certainly can not pay.



The best wayout is always through~
-Robert Frost

Proud member of the LGBT community.

   
  (#29 (permalink)) Old
Grizabella Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Grizabella's Avatar
 
Name: Jessica
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Vancouver

Posts: 1,305
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 13th 2009, 06:37 AM

Sometimes you have to pay for things you don't want. I have no children, nor do I ever intend to. But I still have to pay taxes going towards public schools and paying teachers. Tough luck for me and all the other child-free people. If you personally don't need health care, congratulations on having money. But a democracy is not all "mine mine mine" it's "ours ours ours." Sometimes you have to pay for a service you may not personally need, with the understanding that other people are paying for services you use which they might not personally need. Society in general needs health care. Society in general needs schools. Society in general needs a mail service. Whether or not a few citizens don't need one of those particular services is not the point - the point is we all pay for all of them, and the ones we personally need will always be there.


Not around so much now that school's started

"Live a good life.
If there are gods and they are just,
then they will not care how devout you have been,
but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by.
If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them.
If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life
that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
Marcus Aurelius
   
  (#30 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 13th 2009, 06:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
That's an awful analogy, because one scenario involves someone opposing agggression against themselves, and the other involves someone agressing against another.
No. Requiring money is not "aggression", nor will it ever be.

The simple fact is that people who are able to afford to pay taxes got where they are thanks to the investment their parents made in them. The poorer classes remain poor because there isn't enough money in the family to make that investment. By demanding taxes from the richer classes, you put in place a system whereby some of the fruits of that investment may allow the poorer classes to invest themselves in education, thus levelling the conditions of a country's citizens.

By refusing to pay taxes you attempt to keep the chaste-like cycle of poverty in place, by ensuring that in most cases only well-off families can afford to raise well-off children (In this I'm ignoring of course people who refuse to pay taxes for idiological reasons, although the effects are the same). So you take the money your parents put into your education and raising without question while refusing to help others get to the position you are in, making a net profit, purely because you believe yourself that is "right". That is very similar to murder in my eyes.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#31 (permalink)) Old
Member
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
hecanandWILLchangeyou's Avatar
 
Name: Emily
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Location: Georgia( the U.S. state)

Posts: 549
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: August 26th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 13th 2009, 08:10 PM

I don't care if we HAVE it. It's just that I am afraid that that will One Day become the ONLY choice and I don't want that. I also do not feel the government has the right to tell ADULTS that they MUST carry coverage.
   
  (#32 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 13th 2009, 09:29 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
No. Requiring money is not "aggression", nor will it ever be.
Haha right. I'll be sure to remind you of that if you ever get mugged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
The simple fact is that people who are able to afford to pay taxes got where they are thanks to the investment their parents made in them. The poorer classes remain poor because there isn't enough money in the family to make that investment. By demanding taxes from the richer classes, you put in place a system whereby some of the fruits of that investment may allow the poorer classes to invest themselves in education, thus levelling the conditions of a country's citizens.
So where does this fact come from?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
So you take the money your parents put into your education and raising without question
Why would it be questioned? That money is recieved with the agreement of all parties concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
That is very similar to murder in my eyes.
And I can say that eating icecream is very similar to murder in my eyes, but unless I could give a compelling reason why this is (which I couldn't), I would just be making a huge non sequitur.
   
  (#33 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 14th 2009, 09:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Haha right. I'll be sure to remind you of that if you ever get mugged.
The difference between asking for taxes and mugging is the guy who's mugging you has a) a ****ing knife in his hand (don't start going on about the government being some sort of authoritarian mafia - we've been there before...) and b) is stealing your money (and I've already outlined that taxes aren't a form of stealing, so don't go there).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
So where does this fact come from?
I'm not even going to argue this - seriously, ask any sociologist about the cycle of poverty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Why would it be questioned? That money is recieved with the agreement of all parties concerned.
You are still getting a good job and a good life because you were in a position to take that money. That is the cycle of poverty. You stay poor because you start poor, you stay rich because you start rich. That is the issue that should be questioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
And I can say that eating icecream is very similar to murder in my eyes, but unless I could give a compelling reason why this is (which I couldn't), I would just be making a huge non sequitur.
I wouldn't call the conclusion to a thought-out argument a non sequitur. Or do you think that's a non sequitur in itself?
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#34 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 15th 2009, 02:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
The difference between asking for taxes and mugging is the guy who's mugging you has a) a ****ing knife in his hand
And of course the police and military carry no weapons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
don't start going on about the government being some sort of authoritarian mafia - we've been there before.
Have we? Care to refresh my memory as to how you tried to show that it isn't?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
and b) is stealing your money (and I've already outlined that taxes aren't a form of stealing, so don't go there).
Wow, you seriously posted this without noticing the circular reasoning?

"The government isn't stealing your money like a mugger, because the mugger is stealing your money and the government isn't."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I'm not even going to argue this - seriously, ask any sociologist about the cycle of poverty.
I'm fairly certain people can and have raised themselves out of poverty. And in the absense of government regulation they would potentially have many more opportunities to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
You are still getting a good job and a good life because you were in a position to take that money.
So?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
That is the cycle of poverty. You stay poor because you start poor, you stay rich because you start rich. That is the issue that should be questioned.
Only people do go between rich and poor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I wouldn't call the conclusion to a thought-out argument a non sequitur.
The very definition of a non-sequitur is a conclusion which doesn't follow from the argument, and I'm not seeing how you lept from "people can succeed easier if they are born into a rich family" to "not paying taxes is murder".
   
  (#35 (permalink)) Old
Teacher, mother - secret lover
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
-thesolitaryone-'s Avatar
 
Name: Ashleigh
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Perth, Australia

Posts: 18
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: November 8th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 15th 2009, 06:36 AM

Quote:
And of course the police and military carry no weapons
And of course the police and militia constantly follow you around at gunpoint, ensuring you pay all your taxes on income and purchases.

An armed defence/enforcement system is a part of any country which doesn't want complete chaos. That's a flawed analogy.


Politically-obsessed, narrow-minded, outspoken and openly-partisan member of the Australian Liberal Party. Then there's nerd, bibliophile, occasional blogger, and general conveyer of epic nonsense.

Follow me and my Political ravings on Twitter,

and see my overly biased blog.


To people who think I'm mad: I will laugh at you, and then proceed to verbally beating you to the ground.

..On second thoughts, maybe I am mad.


-thesolitaryone-
   
  (#36 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 15th 2009, 04:00 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Have we? Care to refresh my memory as to how you tried to show that it isn't?
I didn't have to. The second you claimed that the government is going around shooting everyone who doesn't agree with it I won the argument on sanity grounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Wow, you seriously posted this without noticing the circular reasoning?
Making one point (taxes aren't stealing it) then expanding on it (the government's taxes aren't stealing) isn't circular reasoning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
I'm fairly certain people can and have raised themselves out of poverty. And in the absense of government regulation they would potentially have many more opportunities to do so.
Firstly yes, people can raise themselves out of poverty, but there's less of a chance of them doing that if they're poor in the first place, for economic reasons more tha anything else (again basic sociology). And secondly, when we didn't have governments subsidising the poor, we had a two-tier system. Of course you won't remember that because Australia was settled as a convict holding pen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
So?
Well, you think which family you were born into dictating your wealth is fair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Only people do go between rich and poor.
Again, I don't deny that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
The very definition of a non-sequitur is a conclusion which doesn't follow from the argument, and I'm not seeing how you lept from "people can succeed easier if they are born into a rich family" to "not paying taxes is murder".
I didn't. There was the issue of the injustice of the cycle of poverty in between.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#37 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 15th 2009, 10:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by -thesolitaryone- View Post
And of course the police and militia constantly follow you around at gunpoint, ensuring you pay all your taxes on income and purchases.
Strawman. I never said government employees with guns are following us around with our every move, merely that our obedience to the government is ultimately ensured through armed government employees, something I'm sure you can't argue against.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I didn't have to. The second you claimed that the government is going around shooting everyone who doesn't agree with it I won the argument on sanity grounds.
Again, strawman. "The government controls people through it's ability to use violence" =/= "Lol all governments are commiting genocide this very minute".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Making one point (taxes aren't stealing it) then expanding on it (the government's taxes aren't stealing) isn't circular reasoning.
You didn't make any point in the first place. As you clearly show in the quote just above this, your only argument is accusing me of being crazy because I'm saying something which, despite your inability to refute it aside from name calling, you're denying because it clashes with your worldview of governments as nice peaceful organisations only here to help everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
And secondly, when we didn't have governments subsidising the poor, we had a two-tier system.
When was this?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Well, you think which family you were born into dictating your wealth is fair?
I think any scenario based on free interaction is fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I didn't. There was the issue of the injustice of the cycle of poverty in between.
I'm still failing to see where 'not paying taxes is murder' logically comes into it.
   
  (#38 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 16th 2009, 06:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Strawman. I never said government employees with guns are following us around with our every move, merely that our obedience to the government is ultimately ensured through armed government employees, something I'm sure you can't argue against.

Again, strawman. "The government controls people through it's ability to use violence" =/= "Lol all governments are commiting genocide this very minute".
I think that you're forgetting that if there wasn't an eventual threat of violence then there would be no way to keep any society under control. If you want a united society then you need at least a minimal amount of control - not so much that it encroaches on people's liberties, but enough to keep society together.

These controls permit us to try to build a society that we would like to live in. Most people would like to live in a society that helps the poor get out of poverty, one which offers free healthcare to those who can't afford it, and which supports good initiatives taken by it's citizens. For all that you need money, hence the idea of taxing the rich. In order to ensure that money comes in, you need to create an incentive, followed by the threat of a court appearance, followed by the threat of imprisonment and fining. It's a necessary evil in order to make a good action.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
You didn't make any point in the first place. As you clearly show in the quote just above this, your only argument is accusing me of being crazy because I'm saying something which, despite your inability to refute it aside from name calling, you're denying because it clashes with your worldview of governments as nice peaceful organisations only here to help everyone.
Firstly, my only instance of name-calling was saying that your argument was insane, which it was since you explicitly said that the government was using armed aggression to keep its people under control.

Secondly, may I add that I'm an ex-individual anarchist, and I dislike the Irish government to the extent that I've put my name on the French electoral register so that at least my vote may be used for something. I'm not claiming that all governments are presided over by a cuddly teddy bear. I am however stating two facts - the disruption caused by governments is minor compared to the good they do to society, and without taxes we would not be able to run many of services we take for granted and would end up with a two-tiered state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
When was this?
Depends on the country. I do believe the first country to lose its stable two-tiered economic system was France, in the French Revolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
I'm still failing to see where 'not paying taxes is murder' logically comes into it.
I didn't say that. I said that the fallacious belief that you can do something purely because you believe yourself it is right to do so comes up in both cases. You can only stretch personal freedoms so far.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#39 (permalink)) Old
Frosty Offline
Member
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Frosty's Avatar
 
Age: 28

Posts: 790
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 16th 2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I think that you're forgetting that if there wasn't an eventual threat of violence then there would be no way to keep any society under control.
Of course some form of violence is necessary, but there is a difference between the necessary and moral i.e. self defence, defence of others against agression etc. and the unnecessary and immoral i.e. 'give us your money or we will use violence against you'. The former is the type of action one takes against an attacker or mugger, the latter is tyhe actions of the mugger themself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
These controls permit us to try to build a society that we would like to live in. Most people would like to live in a society that helps the poor get out of poverty, one which offers free healthcare to those who can't afford it, and which supports good initiatives taken by it's citizens.
Then let them create their own institutions peacefully to do this. That's how people should satisfy their preferences. Most people want nice clothes too, but it would be immoral to rob people for this end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Firstly, my only instance of name-calling was saying that your argument was insane, which it was since you explicitly said that the government was using armed aggression to keep its people under control.
Yet you concede in this very post that the threat of government aggression is used to control people?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Secondly, may I add that I'm an ex-individual anarchist, and I dislike the Irish government to the extent that I've put my name on the French electoral register so that at least my vote may be used for something. I'm not claiming that all governments are presided over by a cuddly teddy bear.
So why are you no longer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I am however stating two facts - the disruption caused by governments is minor compared to the good they do to society, and without taxes we would not be able to run many of services we take for granted and would end up with a two-tiered state.
Facts require proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
Depends on the country. I do believe the first country to lose its stable two-tiered economic system was France, in the French Revolution.
You mean the French Revolution where they overthrew the two-tiered system created through feudalism and government favoured elite?

Yeah feel free to keep using that as an example of free market capitalism creating a two-tier society.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Of V View Post
I didn't say that. I said that the fallacious belief that you can do something purely because you believe yourself it is right to do so comes up in both cases. You can only stretch personal freedoms so far.
Only the right to not be taxed follows logically from self-ownership and property rights. The right to murder has no such logical backing.
   
  (#40 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: House passes health reform bill - November 17th 2009, 07:03 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Of course some form of violence is necessary, but there is a difference between the necessary and moral i.e. self defence, defence of others against agression etc. and the unnecessary and immoral i.e. 'give us your money or we will use violence against you'. The former is the type of action one takes against an attacker or mugger, the latter is the actions of the mugger themself.
We would see "give us money so we can get the starving guy on the street some food" as moral, even if there was the vague threat of violence behind it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Then let them create their own institutions peacefully to do this. That's how people should satisfy their preferences. Most people want nice clothes too, but it would be immoral to rob people for this end.
So - lets create an institution that does what governments do instead of using the government to do it? Different name, same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Yet you concede in this very post that the threat of government aggression is used to control people?
I concede that the eventual threat of violence down the line is a necessary power for a government or any authority for that matter. I do not for once believe that the government is using the threat of violence from the outset. If someone defies the government's actions, then defies a request to appear at court, then defies requests from the police that he appear at court, then the threat of violence is justified (putting the question of whether the government deserves that money aside) - it's the logical next step. If someone turns up at your house with a gun demanding money, that isn't justifiable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
So why are you no longer?
Because I realised that for an anarchistic society to function, you'd need to effectively kill off 95% of the population. Do you really believe that your average person would say "I'm still hungry, but if I eat someone else's food they won't have any for themselves, so I won't"? No, they'd say "hey, lets rob the pizzeria, and why not shoot a few niggers on the way". Very, very few people have the moral responsibility necessary to prevent themselves from doing what is naturally wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Facts require proof.
Proof that a government is necessary above, and compare the amount of money given to worthy causes and in subsidies with politician's salaries for another piece of evidence.

For the latter - well, if you could run anything without money, you'd be a billionare by now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
You mean the French Revolution where they overthrew the two-tiered system created through feudalism and government favoured elite?

Yeah feel free to keep using that as an example of free market capitalism creating a two-tier society.
It is essentially the same thing. A refusal to transfer wealth between the wealthy and the poor invariably leads to a two-tiered system. It doesn't matter how "open" free-market capitalism is, you still need capital to create more capital. Leave a completely free market for long enough and you end up with the wealthy capital-owners whipping the backs of the capital-free poor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Only the right to not be taxed follows logically from self-ownership and property rights. The right to murder has no such logical backing.
However, if by relinquishing the rather abstract right to "not be taxed" you secure others' more basic rights, like the rights to food, shelter, education etc., then it's the obvious moral step. You can't possibly protect all perceived rights without them starting to infringe on one another.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
bill, health, house, passes, reform

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All material copyright ©1998-2019, TeenHelp.
Terms | Legal | Privacy | Conduct | Complaints

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search engine optimization by vBSEO.
Theme developed in association with vBStyles.