How would you save the economy?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Pwning, Sep 9, 2011.

  1. PaleOne Tan IRL

    Last I checked the power to force citizens to buy a privately provided good wasnt listed..

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
    To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
    To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
    To provide and maintain a Navy;
    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof
     
  2. thorizdin Administrator

    The term "force" gets thrown around a lot but all it comes down to is a tax penalty if you don't buy insurance. As you note taxation is explicitly defined in the Constitution. The argument that the health reform is unconstitutional would have more validity IF the act criminalized not having health insurance but it does not.

    The first year the penalty is $95.00 which raises to $695.00 over several years, which of course can be adjusted by Congress.
     
  3. PaleOne Tan IRL

    I don't think you can call a "Fine" a "Tax" Historically we pay taxes when we purchase something not when we don't purchase something..
     
  4. thorizdin Administrator

    Trying to defend clarity in the tax code is kind of useless at this point. From a legal standpoint its not a fine and its not at all unusual to levy a variable tax based on conditions. Look at how businesses are taxed based on their classification for example, i.e. LLC versus C class etc. The reason that LLCs pay more in taxes is because their owners have less personal liability (in short form).
     
  5. Pwning Lord

    So how does this in any way stop illegals from delivering anchor babies or using the emergency rooms and never being billed? Having insurance should be a choice just like having credit cards or buying an expensive home or being a sucker and paying too much for things you cannot afford. What happened to individual choice, to succeed or fail based on your own decisions? Hand holding sucks, I agree with helping family and even friends in their times of need, but being penalized because of other people bad choices? America is not the Marine Corps, I do not expect anyone to be punished because their neighbor failed at life.
     
  6. Furyos Warlord

    I'm still waiting for the "Death Panels" that that were a purported inclusion of the health care reform.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/health/policy/14panel.html

    The problem is that a significant proportion of the voting population are mongloids that honestly believe in their heart of hearts that multi-millionaires and multi-billionaires actually do give a shit about their well-being.

    Reality check. They don't. Social programs benefit you. Stop voting against them.
     
  7. thorizdin Administrator

    Lets put aside "anchor babies" (which statistically are irrelevant at the macro level) just say for the moment that we can find a way to ensure that only legal citizens are able to get health care.

    The real issue is that lots of people say exactly what you are right now, "I am adult and I can make choices about my own health insurance." That's a very reasonable statement, except that's not how people behave. Now, before I go any further, I want to stress that I am NOT saying that you would behave this way but simply that the vast majority of Americans do.

    Americans (mostly young males) who choose to not get health insurance go along without a problem until something catastrophic happens. They are in an accident where there isn't another person at fault or they are diagnosed with a life threatening disease like cancer or a heart condition that wasn't detected. When Americans are confronted with the reality that without treatment they will die or be seriously debilitated they choose to fall back on the safety net and go to the hospital. You Pwning, may have such strong convictions about personal responsibilities that you would choose death over chemo therapy paid for by the government but very very very few other Americans will or do.

    The reality is the same as requiring auto-insurance. The cost to society as a whole is too high when someone without coverage gets seriously ill. Telling people to just go away and die if they don't have coverage won't happen in America (and shouldn't IMO) so we have to have a method that is fiscally responsible over the long term. Is the health reform perfect? Hell no, but it is a lot better than the current scenario of just hiding the costs by requiring hospitals to handle people without coverage.
     
  8. Ozzone Lord

    That will be up to the SCOTUS to decide.

    Breaking News: Federal Court Rules Obamacare Unconstitutional

    Prior to this, in Michigan, a lower court Federal Judge ruled it constitutional.

    Based on this, and the fact that there's disagreement over it's legality, this will end up being ruled in the Supreme Court. We can argue all day whether it's legal or not, it's up to the Supreme Court to have the final say.
     
  9. thorizdin Administrator

    Yeah, there was no doubt this was going to the Supreme Court.
     
  10. Garthilk General Badass

    Which do you belive is higher. The cost for healthcare, covering uninsured people when they get ill, or the cost of healthcare managing insured chronically sick individuals whom choose to eat suger while diabetic, or still smoke while having heart or lung failure? (IE people who intentionally make themselves sicker.)
     
  11. thorizdin Administrator

    The direct answer to your question is that treating even chronic diseases that are typically somewhat self-inflicted (emphysema, diabetes, heart conditions, high blood pressure) is always cheaper than managing several high expense interventions. However its much cheaper to prevent those conditions as much as possible.

    THIS is a complicated issue and one that will be (I think) the basis of the next big fight over health care/insurance. Somethings are pretty cut and dry, like smoking, but others are more tougher to deal with like exercise. Its pretty easy to say that everyone ought to get X amount of exercise per day/week but whose judgement determines what is and isn't "enough". The military struggles with this problem (hint, talk to an Army doctor about permanent waivers to get an idea of the complications).

    tldr; I think we need to learn to accept personal responsibility for minimum standards of healthy behavior but its gonna be damn contentious over who determines what is and isn't and who checks up on us.
     
  12. Sauer Inactive Chapter Member

    This is what passes for a logical, well thought position on the left. Allow me to work my magic on this brilliant piece of prose.

    The problem is that a significant proportion of the voting population are leftist drones and bottom feeders that honestly believe in their heart of hearts that Democrats actually do give a shit about their well-being.

    Reality check. They don't. Social programs create Democrat dependent voting blocks. Stop, collaborate, and listen.

    Where are all the success stories from the War on Poverty? I can point to plenty of failures. Look at the black family before the War on Poverty and after. Detroit was once the center of American capitalism and home to a vibrant black middle class. 40 years of Democrat rule and Unionism destroyed that town. Just one example, but a visually stunning example if you care to take a tour of Detroit on youtube.

    In the end, all the left can do is create boogie men and make emotional pleas. Their ideology is insanity as defined by Einstein. The quoted post is a perfect example.
     
  13. Remec Lord

    Please keep in mind that i am not american...but i like you guys.

    I think there are several things that your government can do to help get you all out of this funk.

    1.) Stop the trial lawyers....put limits on these slip and fall cases, etc...
    2.) Suspend the capital gains tax for 24 months.
    3.) Force companies that make record profits in a recession to hire, or be taxed at a higher rate.
     
  14. Sauer Inactive Chapter Member

    We don't need to learn to accept anything. Leftist need to learn that the federal governments powers are confined to those laid out in the Constitution.

    I understand that leftist don't like constraints placed on government. No problem. Amend the Constitution.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
     
  15. Kenai Lord

    Simple Solution: 15% tax ... across the board, no loop-holes, no exceptions ... period!

    oh ... and shoot all the lawyers ... :D
     
  16. Pwning Lord

    I have a solution and it is amazing!

    First we take half of what everyone earns across the board with taxes.
    Then we let the feds take over every hospital in America.
    Then we let everyone use the hospitals for anything and everything they can possibly get out of it!

    After we give away our hospitals, then we let the feds take over every restaurant, car dealer, grocery store, electric company, cable company, and anything else privately owned.

    Of course after they own everything we will just become drones, everyone will be employed, and everything will be free, and we wont even have paychecks anymore, or bills, we just work and live like kings!

    Everyone with me, raise your hand! We'll call ourselves the Empire of America and all of us can wear black suits with red armbands!

    C'mon guys, lets share and take care of each other, it's only the right thing to do, no such thing as too much government or too much government control, I trust the government with everything in my life, there is no way they would ever take advantage of me or do bad things with our money or livelihood.
     
  17. thorizdin Administrator

    I'm going to repost this and see if anyone actually offers insight on how to solve this or just punts back to conspiracy theories. If we're gonna have a debate then lets debate but the response is gonna be ignore factual posts to focus on tin foil hat parties I'll stop now.

    The real issue is that lots of people say exactly what you are right now, "I am adult and I can make choices about my own health insurance." That's a very reasonable statement, except that's not how people behave. Now, before I go any further, I want to stress that I am NOT saying that you would behave this way but simply that the vast majority of Americans do.

    Americans (mostly young males) who choose to not get health insurance go along without a problem until something catastrophic happens. They are in an accident where there isn't another person at fault or they are diagnosed with a life threatening disease like cancer or a heart condition that wasn't detected. When Americans are confronted with the reality that without treatment they will die or be seriously debilitated they choose to fall back on the safety net and go to the hospital. You Pwning, may have such strong convictions about personal responsibilities that you would choose death over chemo therapy paid for by the government but very very very few other Americans will or do.

    The reality is the same as requiring auto-insurance. The cost to society as a whole is too high when someone without coverage gets seriously ill. Telling people to just go away and die if they don't have coverage won't happen in America (and shouldn't IMO) so we have to have a method that is fiscally responsible over the long term. Is the health reform perfect? Hell no, but it is a lot better than the current scenario of just hiding the costs by requiring hospitals to handle people without coverage.
     
  18. Sauer Inactive Chapter Member

    I reject your premise because its flawed. I can choose not to own a car and thus not have auto insurance. And you are mixing state powers with federal powers. Car insurance requirements are state issues.

    What part of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to REQUIRE citizens to purchase a product. I am not asking for similar laws, I am asking for the specific part of the Constitution.

    There are ways to address the people who show up in emergency rooms without insurance. Something similar to student loans. You can't BK away the debt.
     
  19. thorizdin Administrator

    Taxation is specifically granted to Congress. You can, and I am certain this is the issue that the Supreme Court will be asked answer, assert that this shouldn't be done as part of the tax code but that how it was done.

    Do you really think that hasn't been attempted? How is someone who doesn't have health insurance going to pay back a 1.2 million dollar loan in their lifetime? (that's the average cost for 2 year treatment for skin cancer).
     
  20. Ozzone Lord

    Well if you want a real debate...

    So, the solution is to do nothing about the behavior and just force everyone to pay for their bad behavior?
     

Share This Page