Jump to content

Affordable Health Care is passed.


kvnchrist

Recommended Posts

As for me, as long as there still will be the extra $550/month Blue Cross was going to tack onto my health insurance policy they counter-offered me after I applied for a $200/month policy, it will be cheaper for me to pay the penalty, simply to be able to buy food. I simply can't afford to give Blue Cross more for coverage each month than I'd pay for a house mortgage each month. It's a no-brainer to make the choice between $1000/year penalty and $9000/year for coverage. If, however, the Health Care Affordability Act can bring my coverage cost to about $200/month, it is more palpable than it presently appears. We will see what implementation of the law brings about.

 

To Beriellord: that $95/year penalty is only for the first year, then it jumps up to about $1000/year by year 3 or 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It is a bit funny how the same people who are saying "GOVERNMENT FORCE IS EVIL!" also support the draft. Just throwing that out there.

 

I don't even know why I post here anymore since most of the members completely ignore logic and history. Half of the people here are supporting someone who straight up said they believed in a Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory.

 

Since no one seems to notice, I will say it again. Society is built on taxation and threatening people with consequences. Sorry if you don't like that, but that it how the world works.

 

A lot of you are replying to my posts based on emotion. Not even making real counter arguments or bringing up serious discussions. Simply because I use the word "force" you instantly consider it bad. You can say government force is bad all you want, but try and show me a large society that could work without it. Even when humans lived in tribal societies, there was still a leader figure that forced certain laws. Unless you wish to be blissfully ignorant of history, you can't honestly say that government force is not required.

Edited by marharth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a bit funny how the same people who are saying "GOVERNMENT FORCE IS EVIL!" also support the draft. Just throwing that out there.

 

Since no one seems to notice, I will say it again. Society is built on taxation and threatening people with consequences. Sorry if you don't like that, but that it how the world works.

 

I am kinda curious how the civil rights act forces me to do anything at all? And threatens me with violence? Really? Could you quote that particular part please? I seem to have missed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a bit funny how the same people who are saying "GOVERNMENT FORCE IS EVIL!" also support the draft. Just throwing that out there.

 

Since no one seems to notice, I will say it again. Society is built on taxation and threatening people with consequences. Sorry if you don't like that, but that it how the world works.

 

I am kinda curious how the civil rights act forces me to do anything at all? And threatens me with violence? Really? Could you quote that particular part please? I seem to have missed it.

I wasn't even the person who said that. I believe that was eodx9000's post. I was replying to what he said, and referring to taxation and other programs. I was replying to him because I found it strange that he would considering forcing people to follow a law like the civil rights bill would be a bad thing.

 

I said "What is wrong with civil rights? Why do you consider a lot of those policies bad?" And he replied with "Every single one uses violence to force people into complying with something that is a moral or relative issue."

 

Sounds pretty racist in my opinion. A good portion of the people here agree with him, so yea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

marharth, you didn't use the word force, other people did. You're the one that doesn't seem to understand that taxation IS force! Every new law is backed up with the threat of government force. Force is wrong yet you want to give more and more power to the only people on the planet that can legally use force to impose their will. Think about it for a while.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am kinda curious how the civil rights act forces me to do anything at all? And threatens me with violence? Really? Could you quote that particular part please? I seem to have missed it.

As much as I am loath to help out the 'non existent unnamed' if you violate someones Civil Rights there are federal penalties attached, from fines to incarnation. So the application of 'force' or coercion by the government is in effect even though the main thrust of the legislation is protective, it does have a coercive element. :wink:

Edited by Aurielius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am kinda curious how the civil rights act forces me to do anything at all? And threatens me with violence? Really? Could you quote that particular part please? I seem to have missed it.

As much as I am loath to help out the 'non existent unnamed' if you violate someones Civil Rights there are federal penalties attached, from fines to incarnation. So the application of 'force' or coercion by the government is in effect even though the main thrust of the legislation is protective, it does have a coercive element. :wink:

Didn't a moderator already warn you for doing something similar? If you want to ignore me then ignore me.

 

Also csg, yes taxation is force. My point is that it is a necessary force.

 

My overall point is that force is necessary in pretty much all laws.

Edited by marharth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a mincing of terms to me, in an effort to make things appear worse than they really are...... Just depends on what picture you are trying to paint.

 

 

HeyYou, seems as though Aurielius got lectured in an above post for attempting to help out. Sometimes one cannot win. Ah well. I will attempt to clarify what he was saying to you in agreement with that other person. (and I do not really agree with your thought that it is mincing of words here). If there is a law in place meant to protect someone's civil rights, you are right in that it is not "forcing" you to do anything. However, if you do violate that law, there are penalties attached to that violation. You must pay those penalties. In effect, you are "forced" to obey the law. Personally, I do not find anything wrong with that. We live (theoretically) in a democratic society, and that is our structure. I have no problem obeying the law most of the time. If I have a problem with a law I tend to speak out about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@HY

Just an observation: we seem to spending an inordinate amount of imaginary ink debating whether there is coercion in the application of any law. If there was no coercive element to a law then they would just be congressional resolutions not actual bills. A law with no teeth is simply a suggestion to be followed or ignored at one's whim.

 

@Granny

You did understand the underlying intent but it was an unappreciated assist, it seems that some would prefer to sink rather than take a helping hand.

"The best laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft a-gley" (Burns)....such is life. :wallbash:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...