Is it constitutional?

I assume you refer to Healthcare...
A national Health would render the question moot...
That's my preference.

As it is,... it is unaffordable to the average citizen,... but you can't live without it, without being a potential burden on society.

Neglecting routine, preventive care,... is essentially gambling, not only with your life, but with other people's money.
Should, serous illness occur, and that is more likely than not at some point in a lifetime,... the average individual cannot afford it without some sort of assistance program... Be that private or public...

Is fire or police protection "mandated commerce?...
How about national security?...

Well bot you bought the talking points I see.....

First, our fire, police, or the military is a service that the government provides. We are NOT mandated to be part of the police force, firemen, or army men. That is volunteer and has restrictions placed upon who can and can not join.

Lets extend you example using your examples......

If you are not of physical abilities to provide the needed requirements to perform a task, let say as a fireman, but since it is a government program, we can not discriminate, you might put your fellow fireman AND the public you hope to serve, at risk, because your need trumps their...... sorta selfish, eh?

Ok....
Lets extend that to healthcare then.
Bot, you drink too much, smoke dope/cigarettes, and drive an extremely fast motorcycle.
You are making me pay for your life choices and habits, because you could never afford insurance to cover your lifestyle, or you just don't want to spend money on such things.

I don't want to pay for you.....

Why should I?

Ok.......

Since I am in a certain income level, I get hammered, unlike so many politicians who decide these policies that IMPACT MY LIFE......

I will opt out and reduce my income, or hide it....darn, the law made me an OUTLAW, but if you are here illegally, as in against the law, that type of outlaw is politically ok.... go figger  

So, my options are pay more to cover others, or just become less, and demand more.

Gee, that seems sustainable, don't it....

And I didn't even get into how the government will manage "sin" in order to reduce/maintain cost to the program.

You fat smoking bacon eat'n lazy do nut'n can't pass a physical the gubbermint mandates for able bodies..... ah, yes  

BTW, my descriptor of you was in jest, and yes, we need a program that provides services to people in need of medical attention.
As a kid we had clinics that provided such, that charged on a sliding scale, free being to those who could not pay.
It worked great, was simple to manage.
Lets focus on those who fit this need, not on everyone else.

Bo told me I could keep my coverage, and it would not cost more,  why did he lie bot?

DesertRat wrote on 12/27/15 at 09:35:37:

Reverse that...
For the good of the individual, at the expense of the whole...
..or, more realistically,... for the good of the vast majority of us, at the expense of the vast majority of us...
No one chooses or wants, cancer or a heart problem... no one chooses to have their child born less than perfect...

...and,.. we do have building codes, and insurance requirements...

We even have a national health,... it's just that not everyone can get it...
Medicare/Medicaid... and it has the highest satisfaction rate, and lowest cost, of any insurer in the US...

As a FREE person

What does that mean?

Do you not owe an obligation to others?

Are you not being selfish to think you can supply your own needs?

What about others who can't?

Do you fight your own fires, police your own presence against threat?

And do you fight your own battles too?

Do you know how self supporting is wrong?

Do you know by your very thoughts and actions you are dissing victim-hood?

Are you god?  

Do you not know you ain't s'pose to be your brothers keeper, NO, but his enabler  

DANG.....this drywall, taping, muding, sanding is NOT fun, it makes painting seem a joy ( remodeling wife's bath, from new tile floor to skylight, and everything between ) ARG, break over  

Serowbot wrote on 12/27/15 at 11:43:24:


I can do you one better bot.....

A national sales tax on all consuming.
Anybody consume, you just paid into the system and are thus invested.
No more write offs, nada, no more deductions, nada, no more brackets, nada, no charity, business, NOTHING....
It would be a tax that is collected at the local level, and they get their cut, then county, sate, federal.....
No more to WASHINGTON THEN BACK to where its needed.

It will never happen, however, even if TRUMP is elected  

BTW, I am almost there. I am gathering data presently to see how/when to collect, and how to claim my SS, and how to hang on to what little I have.

Is mandating participation in commerce constitutional?

"Congress cannot mandate any American to engage in commerce against their will."

Any other examples, besides OblamoCare, where Congress has asserted its Commerce clause authority to require the purchase of a private product?

So, tell me again, are we truly FREE? What next?

A majority of black robed government employees who have not demonstrated a desire to engage in intellectual honesty telling me what the Constitution says doesn't impress me.
The collectivist mindset has no bounds.


It's not Constitutional to tell a business owner who they must serve. Should a business owner choose to discriminate for or against any segment of society, say, open a bar and serve only midgets and women over six feet tall. His money. His risk. If the market is there, then he can profit. Few of you can even grasp the concept of freedom. Not exactly your fault, since freedom, like free enterprise, have never been seen by anyone alive here.
Our Constitution was thrown out before any of u s were alive.
At least the facade was still in place when prohibition was enacted. Rather than someone just Saying, That is illegal now, they Did amend the constitution.
Look around. License, user fees, begging permission, keeping records to prove your innocence, and it's all NORMAL. Amazing, watching people WATCHING their rights turned into privileges, while they chant about how free they are.
Go read the commerce clause. Consider the mindset of the People who wrote it. You REALLY believe that they Meant to give a centralized government such complete control?
Regular, Regulate, keeping things EVEN.
Not allowing any state to unfairly tax products, lay tariffs,
THINK.

How can anyone who has an ounce of honesty question the desire of the authors of the Constitution in the second amendment?
They had to fight against tyranny. Tyrants who wanted to control the People. Unarmed People are not the Sovereign.
The people are the Sovereign in America.
Good grief. Just because it's become normal doesn't make it RIGHT.