How wealth is created...

[mraynrand]

Could you please explain to me how ditching indigent care that the govt. has to cover so as not to bankrupt every hospital in the county in favor of an insurance network is going to bankrupt the country?

Woof! rrrruff! woof! (Translation: I don't understand you, human. please make sense to my doggie ears)

[wist43]

How is subcontracting government services unconstitutional? It keeps a WHOLE lot of people employed. Now the DOT is unconstitutional?

No, the DOT isn't unConstitutional...

"To establish post offices, and post roads"

The word "roads" actually appears in the Constitution. The Federal government has very few powers. The socialists have gotten around this by falsely interpreting the Constitution in the courts, and by pounding home "the living document" nonsense in the schools.

In effect, the way the Constitutution is interpreted today, the Federal Governement essentially has no restrictions upon it. "To promote the General Welfare"... which isn't a grant of power, and the "necessary and proper" clause, which also isn't a grant of power, have been used to loose the power of government upon the people.

Our founders warned us, and gave many examples of nations that went the way of democracy/socialism/anarachy/tyranny - Greece, Rome, Lycia, et al. We're following the same formula of self destruction, but the average citizen is too misinformed and ignorant to understand. And yes MJ, I'm sorry to say you fall into that catagory. Anyone who voted for Obama falls into that catagory.

Don't feel alone though, most Republicans are almost as ignorant, as they champion all manner of unConstitutionality as well. Although the leadership of the Republican Party has a more difficult task than does the leadership of the Democrat Party simply b/c the average Republican voter does tend to care more about freedom and is more likely to have an affinity for the principles of freedom contained within the Constitution, even if they don't understand how it is that the leadership of their party is betraying them.

Ignorance is bliss. Too late for me, I made the mistake of actually taking the time to read and learn about these things. Really, I wish I hadn't, b/c I know our country is dying and it can't be stopped... and, I'm truly sad about that. You want to talk about being a minority!!!!

It may take a few more years, a few more decades... but, our system of checks and balances, our capitalist system which is the engine that has driven the greatest economy the world has ever known, our Constitutional system - is being systematically and stealthily destroyed thru democracy; and, if you had ever read the Federalist Papers, and the Constitution you would see very quickly how much disdain our founders had for democracy. In fact, it was Karl Marx who called for Democracy as an effective avenue of imposing tyrrany upon the masses.

Sadly, none of this stuff is taught in the schools anymore, and the population is incredibly ignorant.

To answer your question, no the DOT is not unConstitutional, the FedGov meddling in just about any other business, is. Don't take my word for it, read it... or better yet, for your own peace of mind, don't. Ignorance IS bliss... and I'm not just saying that. Knowing the truth can be a burden, that is why I don't talk about these things much... Obama's populist nonsense brought me out of the woodwork though; and, as it happens, I've needed the distraction

[mraynrand]

Too bad none of it is Constitutional, i.e. none of it is even legal...

Ah, but that's right... who cares about the Constitution??? it only protects us FROM government.

Unbelievable. Really... I can't believe how ignorant you people are about how our Amercian system of government is supposed to work.

Katie bar the door... everybody's rights are up for grabs, everybody's money is up for grabs, everybody's property is up for grabs.

Wow

I am eager for the appointment of Cass Sunstein as Supreme Court Justice. There are all sorts of things that will be made available to us under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. Finally, we will have Justices who have empathy for what it's like to be poor, and for what it's like to be a single mom. Isn't that what Supreme Court justices are all about? A new age is dawning and I am wagging my tail with excitement!!!

[falco]

i stopped reading this thread 3 pages ago

[MJZiggy]

How is subcontracting government services unconstitutional? It keeps a WHOLE lot of people employed. Now the DOT is unconstitutional?

No, the DOT isn't unConstitutional...

"To establish post offices, and post roads"

The word "roads" actually appears in the Constitution. The Federal government has very few powers. The socialists have gotten around this by falsely interpreting the Constitution in the courts, and by pounding home "the living document" nonsense in the schools.

In effect, the way the Constitutution is interpreted today, the Federal Governement essentially has no restrictions upon it. "To promote the General Welfare"... which isn't a grant of power, and the "necessary and proper" clause, which also isn't a grant of power, have been used to loose the power of government upon the people.

Our founders warned us, and gave many examples of nations that went the way of democracy/socialism/anarachy/tyranny - Greece, Rome, Lycia, et al. We're following the same formula of self destruction, but the average citizen is too misinformed and ignorant to understand. And yes MJ, I'm sorry to say you fall into that catagory. Anyone who voted for Obama falls into that catagory.

Don't feel alone though, most Republicans are almost as ignorant, as they champion all manner of unConstitutionality as well. Although the leadership of the Republican Party has a more difficult task than does the leadership of the Democrat Party simply b/c the average Republican voter does tend to care more about freedom and is more likely to have an affinity for the principles of freedom contained within the Constitution, even if they don't understand how it is that the leadership of their party is betraying them.

Ignorance is bliss. Too late for me, I made the mistake of actually taking the time to read and learn about these things. Really, I wish I hadn't, b/c I know our country is dying and it can't be stopped... and, I'm truly sad about that. You want to talk about being a minority!!!!

It may take a few more years, a few more decades... but, our system of checks and balances, our capitalist system which is the engine that has driven the greatest economy the world has ever known, our Constitutional system - is being systematically and stealthily destroyed thru democracy; and, if you had ever read the Federalist Papers, and the Constitution you would see very quickly how much disdain our founders had for democracy. In fact, it was Karl Marx who called for Democracy as an effective avenue of imposing tyrrany upon the masses.

Sadly, none of this stuff is taught in the schools anymore, and the population is incredibly ignorant.

To answer your question, no the DOT is not unConstitutional, the FedGov meddling in just about any other business, is. Don't take my word for it, read it... or better yet, for your own peace of mind, don't. Ignorance IS bliss... and I'm not just saying that. Knowing the truth can be a burden, that is why I don't talk about these things much... Obama's populist nonsense brought me out of the woodwork though; and, as it happens, I've needed the distraction

Yes, Mr. Rehnquist...

[wist43]

How is subcontracting government services unconstitutional? It keeps a WHOLE lot of people employed. Now the DOT is unconstitutional?

No, the DOT isn't unConstitutional...

"To establish post offices, and post roads"

The word "roads" actually appears in the Constitution. The Federal government has very few powers. The socialists have gotten around this by falsely interpreting the Constitution in the courts, and by pounding home "the living document" nonsense in the schools.

In effect, the way the Constitutution is interpreted today, the Federal Governement essentially has no restrictions upon it. "To promote the General Welfare"... which isn't a grant of power, and the "necessary and proper" clause, which also isn't a grant of power, have been used to loose the power of government upon the people.

Our founders warned us, and gave many examples of nations that went the way of democracy/socialism/anarachy/tyranny - Greece, Rome, Lycia, et al. We're following the same formula of self destruction, but the average citizen is too misinformed and ignorant to understand. And yes MJ, I'm sorry to say you fall into that catagory. Anyone who voted for Obama falls into that catagory.

Don't feel alone though, most Republicans are almost as ignorant, as they champion all manner of unConstitutionality as well. Although the leadership of the Republican Party has a more difficult task than does the leadership of the Democrat Party simply b/c the average Republican voter does tend to care more about freedom and is more likely to have an affinity for the principles of freedom contained within the Constitution, even if they don't understand how it is that the leadership of their party is betraying them.

Ignorance is bliss. Too late for me, I made the mistake of actually taking the time to read and learn about these things. Really, I wish I hadn't, b/c I know our country is dying and it can't be stopped... and, I'm truly sad about that. You want to talk about being a minority!!!!

It may take a few more years, a few more decades... but, our system of checks and balances, our capitalist system which is the engine that has driven the greatest economy the world has ever known, our Constitutional system - is being systematically and stealthily destroyed thru democracy; and, if you had ever read the Federalist Papers, and the Constitution you would see very quickly how much disdain our founders had for democracy. In fact, it was Karl Marx who called for Democracy as an effective avenue of imposing tyrrany upon the masses.

Sadly, none of this stuff is taught in the schools anymore, and the population is incredibly ignorant.

To answer your question, no the DOT is not unConstitutional, the FedGov meddling in just about any other business, is. Don't take my word for it, read it... or better yet, for your own peace of mind, don't. Ignorance IS bliss... and I'm not just saying that. Knowing the truth can be a burden, that is why I don't talk about these things much... Obama's populist nonsense brought me out of the woodwork though; and, as it happens, I've needed the distraction

Yes, Mr. Rehnquist...

No need to take it personal MJ... you're the one who has no clue what the Constitution says, and then the hutspah to challenge me on it??? I gave you an intelligent answer to your ignorant question. Not my fault you've never read the Constitution or its supporting documentation.

Take solace though, you can spit on me thru the fence of the gulag before they send me off to the incinerator.

[MJZiggy]

If that's what you want, well ok, but I was gonna be nice and offer you one last life saver on your way.

[GK]

Cy, I agree with you that there is no inherent right to health care. It can be thought of like any other commodity, if that is how you choose to view it. I think it is wise to give health care to all citizens.

It sounds like you are for an every-man-for-himself society. I think the outcome would be brutally unpleasant and violent.

Cy: I am not for an "every man for himself" society. Our constitution is. That is the contract that I was born into, that defines my relationship with you. That is, I am not bound by what you think is wise.

Cy, I think you meant to say, "That is the contract into which I was born." Never end a sentence with a preposition.

Otherwise, nice work.

[GK]

[quote="MJZiggy"][quote="bobblehead"]

What if we give them insurance under a federal mandate and the result is a drop in the quality of the health care itself?

I have a friend, more like an ex-friend, who is extremely liberal. She accuses me of being a closet conservative, sorta hate me for it. The one point where she abandons her liberal stripes is with health care. She does not want the health care system to be expanded to include everybody, because she says there is not enough health care capacity to go around, she doesn't want to degrade her own access.

Hell, at least she is honest. I think her opinion is typical, she is just more honest than many. I think this is the main holdup in expanding health care to all - the ones who have don't want to share.

Your liberal friend appears to be consistent with her liberal misunderstanding of economics.

So she thinks there is a finite "pie" of healthcare, and if we allow more people to "get a piece of the pie," then she will get less? Is this how all people on the left think? Really? Does she think the earth is flat too? Does she believe in gravity? What other fundamental facts about life on earth do liberals completely not understand?

I am astonished that someone could believe that. She really believes that?

Let's start from the beginning. In a free society with the economic and financial infrastructure that America traditionally has had, there is not a limit to the amount of "stuff" that people can have. People can have, in theory, and infinite amount of food, clothing, televisions, gardening tools, model airplanes, camcorders, books by Noam Chomsky, healthcare, and yes, wealth. Yes, its true. Isn't that cool?

"How?" you may ask.

Wealth in America is just a reflection of what people want. Wealth is created out of thin air. Like magic. Here's an example. About a hundred years ago two bike makers form Ohio played around with an "aeroplane" prototype that they had. Wilbur and Orville Wright, through nothing but their creative minds and hard work, and literally a few dollars worth of raw materials, created a functional airplane. Now, a hundred years later, trillions of dollars of wealth have been created, thousands of people have become millionaires, millions of people have jobs, because of the airline industry. This astronomical amount of wealth was created out of nothing because those two people had creativity and worked hard. They created, out of thin air, trillions of dollars of wealth.

That is how our system works. Wealth and "plenty" are created out of thin air. Every minute of every day in America, millions of people are using their creativity to fill a need, in hopes that they can turn a profit doing it. Is your friend worried about buying an iMac, because if she does, then someone else will not be able to buy an iMac? Is she afraid to buy the latest Pixar DVD, because then it will not be available for someone else to buy? Does she think it is bad to hire a web designer, because then there will be fewer web designers available for the rest of society?

That's the thing. If something is good (a good doctor giving good care, a website that helps people handle simple medical conditions at home, a new type of medical imaging), and its creator is allowed to pursue a profit, then there will always be enough of it.

But, what about running out of raw materials? That does not apply to healthcare in 99% of cases. Healthcare requires a minimum of raw materials. Rather, healthcare primarily requires human intelligence and creativity.

The only way that there could be a finite amount of healthcare is if government were to artificially limit the pursuit of profit by people who are in a position to provide healthcare for us.

So if your friend wants to expand healthcare for more people, and wants to have type of services in healthcare that we cannot even imagine right now, she should support a system introduces market forces into healthcare.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Cy, I agree with you that there is no inherent right to health care. It can be thought of like any other commodity, if that is how you choose to view it. I think it is wise to give health care to all citizens.

It sounds like you are for an every-man-for-himself society. I think the outcome would be brutally unpleasant and violent.

Cy: I am not for an "every man for himself" society. Our constitution is. That is the contract that I was born into, that defines my relationship with you. That is, I am not bound by what you think is wise.

You are not bound to what I think, and you know I never suggested such a thing. But we do have a society and a government which responds to the public will. The government spends some of your money helping people.

Your notion that the constitution has created a society of totally independent operators is an extreme view. I'm not saying it is irrational, I'm sure you can (with a little help from Wist) document your interpretation by quoting the founding fathers. But the country is very far removed from your thinking.

[bobblehead]

Cy, I agree with you that there is no inherent right to health care. It can be thought of like any other commodity, if that is how you choose to view it. I think it is wise to give health care to all citizens.

It sounds like you are for an every-man-for-himself society. I think the outcome would be brutally unpleasant and violent.

Cy: I am not for an "every man for himself" society. Our constitution is. That is the contract that I was born into, that defines my relationship with you. That is, I am not bound by what you think is wise.

You are not bound to what I think, and you know I never suggested such a thing. But we do have a society and a government which responds to the public will. The government spends some of your money helping people.

Your notion that the constitution has created a society of totally independent operators is an extreme view. I'm not saying it is irrational, I'm sure you can (with a little help from Wist) document your interpretation by quoting the founding fathers. But the country is very far removed from your thinking.

No taxation without representation...it is simply wrong to run a deficit and pass it on to those who are not able to vote yet. And I don't care what the public will is...once upon a time the public will allowed for burning witches, slavery, and all sorts of shit that was fundamentally wrong....big gov't that isn't paid for by the people using it is fundamentally wrong. Anything other than a flat tax and a balanced budget can never be correct in my personal opinion.

[HowardRoark]

But we do have a society and a government which responds to the public will. The government spends some of your money helping people.

Your notion that the constitution has created a society of totally independent operators is an extreme view. I'm not saying it is irrational, I'm sure you can (with a little help from Wist) document your interpretation by quoting the founding fathers. But the country is very far removed from your thinking.

QF......something, or something.

[Harlan Huckleby]

So if your friend wants to expand healthcare for more people, and wants to have type of services in healthcare that we cannot even imagine right now, she should support a system introduces market forces into healthcare.

In theory this may be true. But there are practical realities that the market can't address.

A market breaks down in serving high-risk people. IT is not humane to deny sick people health insurance, but that's exactly what market pressures lead to.

[mraynrand]

It is not humane to deny sick people health insurance

Then you should purchase it for them. If you have any possessions remaining, sell it all combine it with your cash and buy insurance for the sick. It is the humane thing to do.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It is not humane to deny sick people health insurance

Then you should purchase it for them. If you have any possessions remaining, sell it all combine it with your cash and buy insurance for the sick. It is the humane thing to do.

I'm sure a lot of republicans share your attitude. How's the Grand Old Party doing these days?