Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
I thought Scalia's justification of his position in this case vs. Gonzales v. Raich was pretty indefensible.
We can regulate marijuana with the commerce clause because there's no other way to regulate marijuana, but we can't with healthcare because there are other ways to regulate healthcare.
Kind of inventive, but totally made up.
|
Scalia?! Made up?!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostwriter
Pay the doctor/hospitals directly. Self insure. Fee for service.
This new entitlement is a big black hole for us to throw our collective money into. Watch for all the new taxes we will all pay to support this.
Why does a person have to buy insurance if he/she doesn't need it or want it? Why must I be coerced into buying a product I may not want and if I don't buy it I will be taxed for not buying it?
|
A person doesn't have to buy insurance. But if a person chooses not to buy it, they have to pay the penalty/tax because experience shows that the bolded rarely happens, doesn't work, and drives up the cost of health care for everyone else. A person's choice not to buy has an impact on me, on everyone else who is insured, on the government and on the economy.
Threaded Mode
