I pay for my own healthcare and that of my family.
Where in the Constitution does it call for my tax dollars to go towards the cost of care for others?
Liberals say that conservatives dont care about the Constitution. Please direct me to the section that requires America to be a welfare state.
This is as ignorant as Bushs Shamnesty Bill.
I pay for my own, so should everyone else. Medicaide is in place for low income families.
2007-09-18
08:49:21
·
24 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
SATANS- I see, so our military should be privatley funded? Maybe we shouldnt have a military all together huh?
Youre comparing oranges to basketballs.
2007-09-18
08:59:06 ·
update #1
BERT- Im all for tax credits so I dont disagree with you. Incidentally better schools improve property values but again, Im not opposed to your complaint.
2007-09-18
09:01:16 ·
update #2
EDIT..BERT...Thats about as ignorant an argument as Ive seen. Roads are part of your property and state taxes dolt. If you dont like it, MOVE!!!!!!!!!
2007-09-18
09:14:20 ·
update #3
Lindsey- WHOS BETTER WELFARE?? Yours or mine? I already pay for my own..... Sorry..
2007-09-18
09:15:28 ·
update #4
Any liberal can tell you that it's encompassed by the "General Welfare" clause.
Bert, you don't pay for my brats to go to government schools. I want them to get an education, not an indoctrination, so I pay for them to go to private school.
WWII was paid for by bonds -- and the boost to the economy got us out of the depression and lead to the post-war boom, the tax revenue from which more than paid back the bonds.
If you want the government to do something, then amend the constitution. That's the rulebook.
Most of the uninsured in this country that hillary is so worried about are young people who don't feel the need for health insurance. Been there, done that. My god, my Dad was self-employed and without health insurance. How did I survive?
2007-09-18 09:20:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
If the Framers were the least bit concerned about health care, they would have made mention to it, when cities and towns were being devastated by the likes of smallpox, chickenpox, typhoid, diphtheria, polio, and measles. Instead, the town folks just burned the blankets, buried the dead, and went on. Now the liberals would like us to believe that it was implied under the pursuit of happiness or to promote the general welfare. Well at least they got the Welfare part right.
I will also say in response to Bert: That the Constitution does not set up public education, or transportation, or police departments, fire departments, and a host of other "services" so to claim that they are Constitutionally protected is also incorrect. That would include social security and medicaid. What is protected is your right to bear arms, right to a speedy and public trial, etc. Those are constitutionally protected "rights", because they are IN the constitution. If you don't like the fact that the constitution does not include these services, then amend the constitution, not go through the judges and courts claiming it's your right.
2007-09-18 08:58:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by libsticker 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
The same part that lists the separation of church and state, the right to an abortion, and the right to sit at home, do nothing, yet live off of the taxpayers.
The short answer: does not exist.
Bert T the anti-Republican did say something correct. There is no right to an education in the Constitution. This is another example of judicial activism.
We all do use the roads, police, fire. These are infrastructure issues. Our goods travel on roads, so we should pay for them. The police, fire, FBI, etc protect the country as a whole. We should pay for that.
2007-09-18 09:03:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Chainsaw 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Ok, so now it's a question of where it is in the constitution. I'll make 2 arguments here.
1. It is. Take a look at one of the first lines. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Absolutely NONE of these are attainable without health. Everyone, therefore, should have access to health care so that they can attain them.
2. Even if it isn't, does that mean we should ignore it? Remember, the constitution was made by our founding fathers more than 2 centuries ago. They didn't know what government controlled health care even was, let alone what an HMO would be. We change the constitution on an irregular basis for the reason that they did not know everything that would happen down the line. So why does that matter?
As for Medicaid, it is the largest refusal health care program in the U.S., and does everything in its power to refuse providing for these people. More importantly, it doesn't cover any of the normal health care we're familiar with, but rather just deals in emergency health care.
2007-09-18 09:02:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by whiteflame55 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
My tax money, my tax money. Is there anyone here that agrees with how their tax dollars are being spent? From either side? I truly doubt it. While your tax money going to health care pisses you off, government subsidies pisses me off. So? Where in the constitution does it say supporting corporations and banks is an entitlement? Or farmers for that matter. What part says rebuilding Lebanon or putting a billion dollar 4 wheeler on Mars is an entitlement? Social programs are not the only thing your tax money is spent on but all you conservatives seem to think so. You don't complain about the billions spent on aid to other countries, only about helping other Americans. By the way, I don't agree with government supported health care. I think capitalism should be removed from the healthcare sector.
2007-09-18 09:24:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are right...when i lost my job and my husband was starting a new one we paid for a temp insurance to cover us...it mainly covered major health expenses, but we paid for our family to be covered....others need to pay for themselves...I dont like paying into welfare or soc sec, especially since i have used neither and by the time i retire soc sec i am sure will be bankrupt (which is why i have an ira) I like to provide for my family and not have other do it for me, but then again i was raised to have pride in that. I have absolutly no desire to fund anyone else's family. I dont want this "universal healthcare!" Yes, our insurance co. need to go thru some type of reform to help us out for the better, but this universal stuff is no good. We do not need a society that is dependent on the government any more than it is already!
Bert T: I would rather pay for the school system than for the healthcare, if they are poor there is medicaide, but i would rather teach people to better themselves so that they can afford their own things and make better choice and not grow up to be on the medicaide program
2007-09-18 09:07:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by tll 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Everyone has access to health care right now, go to the nearest emergency room and see if anyone without insurance is turned away. You won't.
Where will this program end?
Why stop at health insurance…so what if I’m healthy, but can’t afford to eat or have a nice place to live. When will I be getting food and shelter allowances? After all, it’s just promoting the “general welfare”.
I’ve noticed that Hillary’s page doesn’t make any reference to limiting litigations. Makes me wonder from whom she’s collecting money. Imagine the layers of over site committees that this scheme will require. Someone will get rich from this.
2007-09-18 10:41:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by GIVRO 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Judging by your ignorance, you probably don't care that the Bush administration has completely abandoned the constitution to hurt Americans, yet when some people want to help Americans, you get bent.
All of you anti Healthcare people sound like spoiled little children. Did your parents not teach you to share? We're not asking you to fund someones breast implants, we're talking about healthcare that EVERYONE will benefit from. Wait until someone you know get's sick and then declined by their insurance or Medicaid....if they aren't eligible for either, are you just going to tell YOUR friend or family member "tough luck". It's easy to say that everyone can get treatment but the reality is much different.
2007-09-18 12:30:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Where does the constitution guarantee us anything these days. I see that our freedom of speech has been taken away from us. The constitution is just an old piece of paper!!! The government uses it to suite their own needs.
Now to answer your question about health care. How can someone be denied treatement for, let's say cancer??? This is the United States of America. Yet, you go into any emergency room and see who is getting treatment. They are from south of the border. However, if someone walks in with cancer and no insurance----sorry.
2007-09-18 10:26:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by cwigg 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems.
Plus, you ALREADY pick up the tab for the uninsured in the form of higher and higher healthcare costs.
Do you really think that hospitals are going to write off ALL uninsured care as a loss?????????
2007-09-18 12:05:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by John Doe 1st 4
·
0⤊
0⤋