suasan m: A lot has happened since the writing of the preamble of the Constitution. The concepts of limited government and state's rights which were central at the time of the writing of that document have been eroded and virtually destroyed. Read some history. Stop taking a few words out of context. Then maybe you will understand what America was supposed to be about.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America..
Is this a license for government to do anything it wants so long as they declare it to be for the General Welfare?
Apparently in your view, crabs, the one paragraph supersedes the other pages of the document. Pages which contain much more specific statements of government power and limitations.
The main purpose of the government is not to protect individuals. The Constitution does have provisions protect the individual but it is protection FROM the government.
Is this a license for us to do anything we want so long as we declare it to be for the General Welfare?
See I replaced the words as you suggested. Such a concept, if implemented, would eventually violate the provisions of the Constitution. That is what I call un American. And you support such idiocy, crabs.
There are different types of health insurance. Some are much more effective than others. You seem to think that health insurance is a right. Well it isn't a LEGAL right. You may think it the compassionate thing to do. But so far the American people have determined that it will not be funded. So much for the concept of "us."
My response was to your accusation that I am unAmerican. See your post #239. That is a personal attack. If you can't take it, I suggest you don't resort to it yourself. But I don't expect it from the likes of you.
Crabs, you don't understand what American means. It doesn't surprise me that you believe I am unAmerican. But do the work and you will see I am much closer to the concept of what is American than you are. You are much closer to the concept of Marx.
replace the words "government" and "they" with the word "us"
Bodine:
The answer is still NO!
This is actually quite sad. You have relinquished within yourself the possibility that you could be a citizen of a democratic republic. What a victory for rightwing anti-democracy propaganda. The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves.
an American takes responsibility for their government
Oh I try. It is people like you that are distorting it. Your concepts aren't embedded in the American spirit. You concepts come from Europe. They are decadent concepts that have been proven failures.
susan m. it is painfully obvious you don't have a clue what the Constitution says beyond the preamble. Read it. You will find the Founding Fathers were not socialists as apparently you are.
crabs, you want to be "us." I don't want to be us. I despise you. As I am sure you despise me. I think your views, if implemented will destroy this country. Your kind have put it well down that path.
is it "every man for himself" or is it instead based on community and group participation?
It is a balance between the two. That is what the Constitution was about. You don't believe in that. You just believe in "us." An "us" that can do whatever the hell "us" wants to do.
no crabs, the us v. them concept comes from the fact that people like you want to ignore the history of this country. You want to ignore the written law of this country to achieve a socialist goal.
The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves.
They probably are if they could see the size, scope and federal power that it has today. They'd turn again probably if they saw how the average worker has to work until may to pay taxes.
I don't recall seeing an inalienible right to free healthcare.
Is it screwed up ? You bet. Having government come in and take it over would only exasparate the problem. Take a look at your next hospital bill. When they charge $32.00 for 2 tylenol and $40.00 for a blanket that they keep it's no wonder we are in the shape we are in and the premiums are what they are. My premiums for my family are fast approaching what are house payment is.
That being said people point to Canada. Go ask a few Canadiens how they feel about it. Most get private coverage if they can because the govt. program is so beareaucratic it's a nightmare. Need a liver, heart or kidney ? Good luck.
Why is it that our drug companies put forth many if not most of the new advancements ? Because there's millions in profit if they do. Take that incentive away and you have socialism or communism. You can probably count on one hand the number of advancements that come out of those countries. I'll get to the drug companies in a second. The Mayo clinic didn't happen on accident.
So what to do about it ? Why is it that as little as 30 years ago people really needed only major medical coverage. People paid for it on their own. My mom still has the reciept from my birth. It was about 75.00 for a 4 day stay. We've gone from that to what we have now.
My solution, 3 options. If it's federal you really have no choice but to participate. Give states the right to decide. In MN we have MNcare which is for poor and uninsured people. Let the states decide. The other and perhaps more palpable solutions is to partially subsidize the companies or hospitals themselves therefore reducing costs. Optiion 3 would be to engage in price controls which would eliminate many advancements IMO and be self defeating. Sure it'd be cheaper for your prescription but your chances for advancements on your disease would be lessened.
We the Peopleof the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare,and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and ourPosterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
There's some on this board who would love to see us live strictly by the Constution. and I mean literal word, by literal word.
I always thought if there were ever another revolution, it would be if this country was governed by strict constutionalists.
I know it's no place I'd want to live. Those Founding Fathers that we hold up as dieties. They didn't have all the answers. I think some of them lied to themselves.
so THX? have you paid back your parents all that money they spent to take care of you? for all that food of theirs that you ate? all the clothes they bought for you?
have you?
Actually....
I worked from the time I was 12 until I moved away from home at about 18 1/2 in the family business.
On top of that I got a "Real Job" when I was 16. I worked full time during the week at my "Real Job" as well as went to school full time. On the weekends I helped out in the family business.
btw: 90% of my income from my "Real job" went to support my family.
I'd say my parents made out ok in that deal.
Besides, who the hell do you think is going to take care of them should they become invalid?
his "us vs them" mentality won't allow it.
But I said I'm willing to share in the cost of health care! You are the one unwilling to contribute to my monthly life insurance premiums and sending my children to private school, which I see not only as a necessity, but as a right.
How can you be so callous and selfish?
the thing is, a group system of health care would do no harm to the individual and is a great benefit to the "we" (as well as to the individual).
I would be harmed. I'd be paying for someone else to receive what they should be paying for themselves. You're infringing not only upon my rights as a consumer, but as a wage earner.
You are the one unwilling to contribute to my monthly life insurance premiums and sending my children to private school, which I see not only as a necessity, but as a right.
what makes your child any more important than someone else's? let's give ALL children a good education, shall we? Your child have no MORE right to an education than any child.
and I do contribute to YOUR insurance policy. It's called Social Security, perhaps you have heard of it.
I would be harmed. I'd be paying for someone else to receive what they should be paying for themselves.
YOU wouldn't be paying for anything. WE would be paying for EVERYONE's health care, together. I would be paying for yours, you would be paying for mine. WE would be paying for OURS together. You do understand that WE can accomplish things TOGETHER that YOU can't accomplish alone, don't you?
YOU would be paying and YOU would be receiving benefits.
Just like you do now, only this way, instead of just your family being on the benefit list, EVERYONE is on the list.
suasan m: A lot has happened since the writing of the preamble of the Constitution. The concepts of limited government and state's rights which were central at the time of the writing of that document have been eroded and virtually destroyed. Read some history. Stop taking a few words out of context. Then maybe you will understand what America was supposed to be about.
his "us vs them" mentality won't allow it.
why not ask instead, "at what benefit?"
we all benefit from it.
now, ask yourself the cost of the "them" or "us" mentality
Is this a license for government to do anything it wants so long as they declare it to be for the General Welfare?
Wethe People, in order to form a more perfect Union
"at what benefit?"
Because in government the cost usually exceeds the benefit.
replace the words "government" and "they" with the word "us"
Apparently in your view, crabs, the one paragraph supersedes the other pages of the document. Pages which contain much more specific statements of government power and limitations.
nonsense.
replace the words "government" and "they" with the word "us"
The answer is still NO!
crabs wrote: nonsense.
not a rebuttal.
those are there to, within the framework of "we", protect the individual.
or maybe you didn't bother to read what I said about the need for the individual and how, when operating as a group, it must be protected.
the thing is, a group system of health care would do no harm to the individual and is a great benefit to the "we" (as well as to the individual).
then you aren't an American
there are some real tangible costs to "them and us" thinking
war and hate cost all of us (you included) plenty.
The main purpose of the government is not to protect individuals. The Constitution does have provisions protect the individual but it is protection FROM the government.
well, it was a response to an unsupported statement that the cost of behaving as a "we" is greater than the benefit.
you provided no support for the statement, so there was no support in my response.
then you aren't an American
You are a thoughtless, uneducated wonder.
do you have health insurance?
and if so, why is it cost effective and yet feel it isn't if done on a larger scale
See I replaced the words as you suggested. Such a concept, if implemented, would eventually violate the provisions of the Constitution. That is what I call un American. And you support such idiocy, crabs.
so, now you resort to personal attacks when you have no argument left on the subject
okay
sure
you must think America is a pretty dumb place if you have such little faith in us.
do you have health insurance?
There are different types of health insurance. Some are much more effective than others. You seem to think that health insurance is a right. Well it isn't a LEGAL right. You may think it the compassionate thing to do. But so far the American people have determined that it will not be funded. So much for the concept of "us."
My response was to your accusation that I am unAmerican. See your post #239. That is a personal attack. If you can't take it, I suggest you don't resort to it yourself. But I don't expect it from the likes of you.
still waiting for an explaination of how "family", "community", "state" and "nation" are fundementally different in concept.
your words ARE unAmerican
you go to great lengths to separate yourself from your government.
an American takes responsibility for their government.
Crabs, you don't understand what American means. It doesn't surprise me that you believe I am unAmerican. But do the work and you will see I am much closer to the concept of what is American than you are. You are much closer to the concept of Marx.
crab:
replace the words "government" and "they" with the word "us"
Bodine:
This is actually quite sad. You have relinquished within yourself the possibility that you could be a citizen of a democratic republic. What a victory for rightwing anti-democracy propaganda. The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves.
an American takes responsibility for their government
Oh I try. It is people like you that are distorting it. Your concepts aren't embedded in the American spirit. You concepts come from Europe. They are decadent concepts that have been proven failures.
you won't even say that it's your govenment.
you actually YELL that it's not your country (because, after all, what is a country but a government?)
you can't even bring yourself to say that you are a part of it, and take offense when I point out that you are.
susan m. it is painfully obvious you don't have a clue what the Constitution says beyond the preamble. Read it. You will find the Founding Fathers were not socialists as apparently you are.
crabs, you want to be "us." I don't want to be us. I despise you. As I am sure you despise me. I think your views, if implemented will destroy this country. Your kind have put it well down that path.
tell us, what is this "American" spirit you speak of.
is it "every man for himself" or is it instead based on community and group participation?
There is much more to the country than the government, crabs.
is it "every man for himself" or is it instead based on community and group participation?
It is a balance between the two. That is what the Constitution was about. You don't believe in that. You just believe in "us." An "us" that can do whatever the hell "us" wants to do.
and there is what the "them or us" concept gets you
hate.
I don't despise you, on the contrary, you are a fellow American. I love our country and the people who comprise it.
You obviously don't.
no crabs, the us v. them concept comes from the fact that people like you want to ignore the history of this country. You want to ignore the written law of this country to achieve a socialist goal.
I don't despise you, on the contrary, you are a fellow American.
Oh cut the crap.
you didn't even read my post about the individual, did you
why don't you go back and read it
crabgrass 3/18/03 6:51pm
what law am I ignoring?
Susan M,
They probably are if they could see the size, scope and federal power that it has today. They'd turn again probably if they saw how the average worker has to work until may to pay taxes.
I don't recall seeing an inalienible right to free healthcare.
Is it screwed up ? You bet. Having government come in and take it over would only exasparate the problem. Take a look at your next hospital bill. When they charge $32.00 for 2 tylenol and $40.00 for a blanket that they keep it's no wonder we are in the shape we are in and the premiums are what they are. My premiums for my family are fast approaching what are house payment is.
That being said people point to Canada. Go ask a few Canadiens how they feel about it. Most get private coverage if they can because the govt. program is so beareaucratic it's a nightmare. Need a liver, heart or kidney ? Good luck.
Why is it that our drug companies put forth many if not most of the new advancements ? Because there's millions in profit if they do. Take that incentive away and you have socialism or communism. You can probably count on one hand the number of advancements that come out of those countries. I'll get to the drug companies in a second. The Mayo clinic didn't happen on accident.
So what to do about it ? Why is it that as little as 30 years ago people really needed only major medical coverage. People paid for it on their own. My mom still has the reciept from my birth. It was about 75.00 for a 4 day stay. We've gone from that to what we have now.
My solution, 3 options. If it's federal you really have no choice but to participate. Give states the right to decide. In MN we have MNcare which is for poor and uninsured people. Let the states decide. The other and perhaps more palpable solutions is to partially subsidize the companies or hospitals themselves therefore reducing costs. Optiion 3 would be to engage in price controls which would eliminate many advancements IMO and be self defeating. Sure it'd be cheaper for your prescription but your chances for advancements on your disease would be lessened.
what law am I ignoring?
The Consitution.
you mean the one that starts with
We the Peopleof the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare,and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and
ourPosterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
that one?
There's some on this board who would love to see us live strictly by the Constution. and I mean literal word, by literal word.
I always thought if there were ever another revolution, it would be if this country was governed by strict constutionalists.
I know it's no place I'd want to live. Those Founding Fathers that we hold up as dieties. They didn't have all the answers. I think some of them lied to themselves.
The only two comprehensive posts in the last 70 or so
Lance Brown 3/19/03 2:47pm
Luv2Fly 3/19/03 3:34pm
not that yours was bad Rick, just that reading thru jethro and crabbys posts made my head spin...
Not a bit wordy?
us and them
us and them
us and them
us and them
us and them
us and them
us and them
it's a pox on humanity
still waiting for that explanation of how, outside of scale, there is a fundemental difference between family, community, state and nation
so THX? have you paid back your parents all that money they spent to take care of you? for all that food of theirs that you ate? all the clothes they bought for you?
have you?
Actually....
I worked from the time I was 12 until I moved away from home at about 18 1/2 in the family business.
On top of that I got a "Real Job" when I was 16. I worked full time during the week at my "Real Job" as well as went to school full time. On the weekends I helped out in the family business.
btw: 90% of my income from my "Real job" went to support my family.
I'd say my parents made out ok in that deal.
Besides, who the hell do you think is going to take care of them should they become invalid?
his "us vs them" mentality won't allow it.
But I said I'm willing to share in the cost of health care! You are the one unwilling to contribute to my monthly life insurance premiums and sending my children to private school, which I see not only as a necessity, but as a right.
How can you be so callous and selfish?
the thing is, a group system of health care would do no harm to the individual and is a great benefit to the "we" (as well as to the individual).
I would be harmed. I'd be paying for someone else to receive what they should be paying for themselves. You're infringing not only upon my rights as a consumer, but as a wage earner.
what makes your child any more important than someone else's? let's give ALL children a good education, shall we? Your child have no MORE right to an education than any child.
and I do contribute to YOUR insurance policy. It's called Social Security, perhaps you have heard of it.
YOU wouldn't be paying for anything. WE would be paying for EVERYONE's health care, together. I would be paying for yours, you would be paying for mine. WE would be paying for OURS together. You do understand that WE can accomplish things TOGETHER that YOU can't accomplish alone, don't you?
YOU would be paying and YOU would be receiving benefits.
Just like you do now, only this way, instead of just your family being on the benefit list, EVERYONE is on the list.
EVERYONE contributes, EVERYONE benefits
Family business huh
So, you couldn't get a job on your own?
sounds like an "us" operation to me.