Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Well... holy wow. Healthcare Bill UpheldFollow

#202 Jul 04 2012 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
On topic, I just read this rather sobering article about the stuff that ER at Grady Hospital in Atlanta has to deal with. (FYI: If you ever get sick at Dragon*Con, you'll end up at Grady.)

Interview with Dr. Brawley wrote:
In your book, you say that instead of having a healthcare “system,” we Americans live in a fragmented universe where famine and gluttony exist side by side. What do you mean? Cervical cancer is a good example of famine and gluttony. Ten years ago, most organizations that issue screening guidelines started saying that women who had two or three normal Pap smears in a row, and who were in a stable relationship, could go to every three years for Pap smears. And many doctors and many middle-class and upper-class women were outraged. They wanted their annual test. Every year about 4,290 women die from cervical cancer. The majority of them have never had a Pap smear, ever. And of those who have, the overwhelming majority had not had one within ten years of their diagnosis. The women who died never got the services they needed. Then you’ve got all the folks who are upset because we say they should be tested every three years instead of every year.
#203 Jul 04 2012 at 12:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Congress wasn't providing for the arming though, they were mandating that YOU provide your own armaments by buying them from a private third party.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#204 Jul 04 2012 at 12:44 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Congress wasn't providing for the arming though, they were mandating that YOU provide your own armaments by buying them from a private third party.


Actually it just said to equip themselves with them, it didn't say how. Important to remember is that in 1792, most men between the ages of 18 and 44 probably already had most of the stuff the law required or could easily get their hands on it from a local militia stockpile.
#205 Jul 04 2012 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Most people today already have the health insurance the law requires so, by that reasoning, saying everyone else has to get it from somewhere makes perfect sense. Thanks!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#206 Jul 04 2012 at 1:05 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Most people today already have the health insurance the law requires so, by that reasoning, saying everyone else has to get it from somewhere makes perfect sense. Thanks!


I would wager that the % of 18-44 yr old men who had a musket in 1792 is much larger than the % of people today who have private health insurance.
#207 Jul 04 2012 at 1:08 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
So again we're just down to arguing scale. Not whether or it's intrinsically right or wrong for the government to mandate this purchase, just the scale you feel is acceptable. Because the early US government had a majority who provably felt that it wasn't intrinsically wrong.

Edited, Jul 4th 2012 2:09pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#208 Jul 04 2012 at 1:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
So again we're just down to arguing scale. Not whether or it's intrinsically right or wrong for the government to mandate this purchase, just the scale you feel is acceptable. Because the early US government had a majority who provably felt that it wasn't intrinsically wrong.

Edited, Jul 4th 2012 2:09pm by Jophiel


I would argue that defense of the nation and personal health care coverage are vastly different things and should not be cast in the same light. It's also worth noting that there was no tax on people who didn't comply with the law in 1792. If you read the actual document from the Library of Congress, it reads more like a pamphlet on what you should do, instead of a law stating what you are recquired to do.
#209 Jul 04 2012 at 1:29 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Jophiel wrote:
So again we're just down to arguing scale.

Well, you're arguing about scale.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#210 Jul 04 2012 at 1:49 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
I would argue that defense of the nation and personal health care coverage are vastly different things and should not be cast in the same light

So now we're playing "when is a mandate to purchase items not really a mandate to purchase items"?
Quote:
If you read the actual document from the Library of Congress...

I did. It clearly stated that men were required to have these things. It then went on to list exemptions (various politicians, mail carriers, etc) and assorted other rules for forming militia. No where did it say "Haha... just kidding about that mandate!"
Twiz wrote:
Well, you're arguing about scale.

Sorry. I was short-handing "By understanding that Congress -- including many Framers and signed by George Washington -- accepted this mandate, arguments against it from an early Constitutional standpoint become merely an argument over scale."
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#211 Jul 04 2012 at 2:33 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
So you chose to ignore the fact that there were no penalties enumerated in the bill? If there are no penalties, no enforcement, how is it a mandate?
#212 Jul 04 2012 at 2:59 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,042 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
I would argue that defense of the nation and personal health care coverage are vastly different things and should not be cast in the same light.


And this is where your argument fundamentally falls apart. Both issues involve the lives and the welfare of the people in our country, fellow American citizens. When the invading armies arrive, it doesn't matter how many muskets we're armed with if we're all in diabetic comas or crippled with pain.
#213 Jul 04 2012 at 3:04 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Twiz wrote:
Well, you're arguing about scale.

Sorry. I was short-handing "By understanding that Congress -- including many Framers and signed by George Washington -- accepted this mandate, arguments against it from an early Constitutional standpoint become merely an argument over scale."

Who is trying to argue against the individual mandate from "an early Constitutional standpoint?"

I thought we were talking about the here and the now, not two hundred years ago. Don't you progs all believe that the Constitution is a living, breathing document that's subject to interpretation in the context of modern times?
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#214 Jul 04 2012 at 3:18 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, we have someone here right now twisting up to pretend the mandate to own a gun never really happened...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#215 Jul 04 2012 at 7:11 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,268 posts
They still have that in Switzerland.

They also have compulsory health insurance. So whatever.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#216 Jul 05 2012 at 1:09 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
And military service is compulsory in Israel. Different countries, different social contract.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#217 Jul 05 2012 at 3:27 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,268 posts
A few years ago a bunch of olde people were pushing for national service to return to the UK.

I'm exempt either way, but it just seems like a silly idea.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#218 Jul 05 2012 at 8:11 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Well, we have someone here right now twisting up to pretend the mandate to own a gun never really happened...


I never said it didn't happen. I said two things. First that there was no mandate to purchase a weapon from a private company and, second, that there was no PENALTY stated in the law, a fact you seem to have ignored now three times. Without there being a penalty for not obtaining a musket, it isn't much of a mandate.
#219 Jul 05 2012 at 8:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Yeah, I'm ignoring it because you're trying to make up definitions that don't exist. If the government says something is required of you, it's a mandate. Maybe you think there was no negative downside to showing up without any weapons, I don't know. I'm not even interested in combing through 18th century military code to see if/what the punishment was for failure to come equipped. I don't have to because the government saying this is required of you is the plain and simple definition of a mandate. It may have been a weak mandate. It may have been a well enforced one. It doesn't matter because either way, it was a mandate.

Quote:
First that there was no mandate to purchase a weapon from a private company

Nonsense. Where do you think weapons comes from? The big gun tree out back? They're purchased from companies that manufacture guns. Maybe the local militia took it upon itself to buy guns for everyone in the tri-county area --- they were still bought for everyone from private companies based on this requirement. That's like saying only individually bought insurance policies count for the insurance mandate. The government doesn't care if you get insured yourself, via employer, via a union, via government program, via non-profit co-op or what. Just that you have it. Most of those options boil back to a private insurance company getting paid, right? Just like you can buy your own gun, get one from the local militia, get one as a present on your 10th birthday or whatever else and it was still a purchase from a private company. There's no difference.

Edited, Jul 5th 2012 9:27am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#220 Jul 05 2012 at 8:31 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
You can keep making that argument, but it's still as weak as the mandate in the Militia Act of 1792 was. I'm also not sure why we're arguing this. We all know the ACA doesn't contain a mandate. It just taxes you for deciding to partake of government funded healthcare.

Edited, Jul 5th 2012 9:39am by Bigdaddyjug
#221 Jul 05 2012 at 8:45 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You can keep making that argument, but it's still as week as the mandate in the Militia Act of 1792 was.

You mean valid and real? Well, beats your counter-argument I guess.
Quote:
I'm also not sure why we're arguing this.

Well, you're welcome to just agree with me Smiley: grin
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#222 Jul 05 2012 at 9:13 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You can keep making that argument, but it's still as week as the mandate in the Militia Act of 1792 was.

You mean valid and real? Well, beats your counter-argument I guess.
Quote:
I'm also not sure why we're arguing this.

Well, you're welcome to just agree with me Smiley: grin


Somebody in another thread told me I needed to take gbaji's place until he gets back.

I was under the impression he was the comic relief. How am I doing so far?
#223 Jul 05 2012 at 9:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Somebody in another thread told me I needed to take gbaji's place until he gets back. I was under the impression he was the comic relief. How am I doing so far?


You're less entertaining than a poke in the eye with a toothpick.
#224 Jul 05 2012 at 9:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Somebody in another thread told me I needed to take gbaji's place until he gets back. I was under the impression he was the comic relief. How am I doing so far?


You're less entertaining than a poke in the eye with a toothpick.


Think that means he's doing it right; needs more words though.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#225 Jul 05 2012 at 9:20 AM Rating: Good
someproteinguy wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Somebody in another thread told me I needed to take gbaji's place until he gets back. I was under the impression he was the comic relief. How am I doing so far?


You're less entertaining than a poke in the eye with a toothpick.


Think that means he's doing it right; needs more words though.


Well he's certainly got the "making pointless arguments repeatedly without supporting credentials or evidence" thing nailed.
#226 Jul 05 2012 at 9:39 AM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Somebody in another thread told me I needed to take gbaji's place until he gets back. I was under the impression he was the comic relief. How am I doing so far?


You're less entertaining than a poke in the eye with a toothpick.


Think that means he's doing it right; needs more words though.


Now you're just confusing me, SPG. In another thread you told me you liked my posts better because they were less verbose.

And Brown, what argument am I making without supporting evidence. Joph compared the Militia Act of 1792 to the ACA. My argument is they are different because the MA1792 does not enumerate a penalty. There's already a link directly to the act in the LOC's database, and in the entire act there is no penalty listed. My other argument is that the mandates themselves are different. The ACA clearly states you have to buy private health insurance. The MA1792 just says you have to provide yourself with a musket. If you neighbor happens to have two muskets and he says you can use his if the militia ever gets called up, there's no need for you to buy one from a private company.

Or did you mean to say that I'm making arguments with no supporting evidence that you care to acknowledge?

If that's the case, I really do feel like gbaji.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 265 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (265)