Where in the Constitution does it say the Fed gov should provide health care.

To raise and support Armies"

Again, please note the word "Armies". Plural. Not "Army".

The Air Force is just one more Army!

It *is* allowed for in the Constitution!

 

Agreed, It's in the best interests of America to provide healthcare, especially for those who are unable to afford it.

 

So for instance we could create an "Army that fights diseases" and call it a national health service and provide healthcare to all Americans, yes?

 

A better lifestyle, not better healthcare.

 

A good point so let's address a couple others. Where in the Constitution does it state that the Congress has the authority to control immigration and where in the Constitution does it state that non-citizens can't vote? We know that when the Constitution was ratified and the United States was created the Congress didn't pass any laws restricting immigration and that non-citizens voting was commonplace in the United States.

Of course under Obamacare the federal government doesn't provide health care. Health care is provided for by doctors, hospitals, and clinics.

Obamacare doesn't even provide insurance. Health insurance is provided for by private insurance companies and Medicaid is provided for by the States. The federal government does provide subsidies and funding to both the insurance companies and to the states for Medicare but it doesn't provide the actual insurance.

That's because only an estimated 45,000 American were dying annually because they lacked health insurance based upon a 2009 study and the bodies weren't left to decompose in the streets.
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...s-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/

 

Health care is an *individuals* responsibility or the responsibility of the State, not the federal government.

Go read Amendment 10 sometime!

The duty of the federal govenrment is to secure our rights!

 

OK ... you mean:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

covers the healthcare issue?
Good point ... but difficult to say if the duty to take care for the population is not being hindered out of it, or not?

 

Actually it's more related to stress. Europeans have far less stress than Americans typically. They get more time off from work and don't have as many financial worries because the government takes care of some essential requirements for the people like health care.

 

No, I am *NOT* playing word games. Post roads serve everyone generally. National defesne serves everyone generally.

Doctors serve individuals. Some individuals even have their own private doctor who has only one patient, that individual!

Food is a necessity of life. Should the government take over all agriculture? Housing is a necessity. Should government nationalize the housing industry?

If education is such a necessity then it is the responsibility of the State or the People to provide for it, not the federal government.

If health care is such a necessity then it is the responsibility of the State of the People to provide for it, not the federal government.

My two children graduated with Bachelors of Science with $2000 in debt each. They *worked* their butts off to avoid going into debt, both academically to get scholarships, and physically to cover all other expenses. The reason so many college age kids can't do that today is because of the minimum wage we have today that limits employment of unskilled youth. And the Marxist Democrats want to raise it even further! And then whine some more about how kids can't afford college!

 

Why isn't healthcare a responsibility of the employers. Arguably the Right of Property is violated if the employer is not funding the essential necessities of their employees and that would include health care.

Read Article I Section 8 that grants authority to the Congress to regulate interstate commerce and heath-care is a national issue that involves interstate commerce.

 

"Where in the Constitution does it say the Fed gov should provide health care."

or a police force, or a fire department, or roads and highways, the list goes on, but most people think we need these things

I prefer my taxes go to these things then needless 10+ year wars like Iraq, the war on drugs, ect...

 

"Fighting" disease is *NOT* national defense. Fighting against biological agents and such *is* part of the Army's charge, btw.

 

I never claimed it was a right.

 

How is it not national defense? The military freely admits that the health condition of US citizens is the single most detrimental factor to recruiting new soldiers.

Clearly if there was an Army that existed solely to improve the health of US citizens, that would improve the recruitable segment of Americans and improve national defense.

So we need a National Health Army as authorized by the Constitution.

 

I don't agree. The health of each citizen and his ability to contribute to the nation impacts the welfare of the nation. Having tens of millions of citizens without meadical coverage detracts from the general welfare.

I never thought that the ACA was the best solution to the US healthcare disaster. Your ideological rant is a feeble defense of the most expensive health care system on earth that dumps the inflated medical expenses of tens of millions uninsured on the tax payer.

If Medicare is anathema to your dogma, you'll just have to learn to live with it and the overwhelming support of Americans for it.

If your ideology supports the elimination of the massive federal annual subsidy that sustains coverage for those who gain coverage through their employers who have the bureaucratic burden inflicted on them, and you feel that every individual should negotiate individually with the insurance cartel in the free market, that is where you should focus.

 

Or, I pay higher taxes, and you get healthcare.......

 

If you think that the taxpayer being responsible for the inflated medical costs of tens of millions of uninsured Americans is the price that must be paid for ideological purity, so be it.

 

demonstrably untrue. There isn't a single military conflict in the last 30+ years that has defended American citizens. Those soldiers are fighting for special interests, not the defense of the nation.

a postman delivers mail to one individual at a time, not the general pubic. It is *individual* welfare. Lol

irrelevant. Healthcare is general welfare.

 

doesn't apply to healthcare, as it's not a commodity. Single payer is a vastly superior system.

nobody is advocating for equal outcome

and they are inferior to publicly funded PD or FD's.

nobody is advocating equal outcomes

 

If you would rather pay for the inflated cost that the tens of millions of uninsureds incur than have everyone lower their medical expenses by advantaging preventative care and paying for coverage to the extent they are able, that is your preference.

 

general welfare covers healthcare.

 

"To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization", Article 1, Section 8

Try Amendment 14: " Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. "

Oh, and look at this: "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

I'll let you look this up in the Constitution yourself. As many of my teachers told me, you'll retain it better that way.

Obamacare tells the private insurance companies what their policies must provide! It's the difference between Fascism, government control, and Socialism, government ownership.

Everyone accessing emergency care must be stabilized. So what did a lack of health insurance have to do with causing these people to die?

 

It *does* cover the health care issue. It is the responsibility of the States or the people themselves.

 

And they consider a 9% unemployment rate to be normal. As a result of their policies, including Socialism.

 

Employers began offering health insurance as a way to attract good employees during and after WWII. It is a BENEFIT, not a requirement.

Employers have no responsibility for the private lives of their employees, and that includes health care. Many businesses do *NOT* offer health insurance to their employees. It has nothing to do with the right to own property!

Health care is *NOT* provided on an interstate basis, at least in most cases. Do you travel out-of-state to see your doctor? Most people see a local doctor.

Insurance policies are not offered across state lines, what makes you think they are?

You have offered up a specious argument. Try again!