Community | February 01, 2011 | 206 comments

Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance -In 1798

Image
WakeUpPeople
*Hopes this clarifies the founders' intent and any Constitutionality questions.*

In July of 1798, Congress passed – and President John Adams signed - “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” The law authorized the creation of a government operated marine hospital service and mandated that privately employed sailors be required to purchase health care insurance.

Keep in mind that the 5th Congress did not really need to struggle over the intentions of the drafters of the Constitutions in creating this Act as many of its members were the drafters of the Constitution.

And when the Bill came to the desk of President John Adams for signature, I think it’s safe to assume that the man in that chair had a pretty good grasp on what the framers had in mind.

Here’s how it happened.

During the early years of our union, the nation’s leaders realized that foreign trade would be essential to the young country’s ability to create a viable economy. To make it work, they relied on the nation’s private merchant ships – and the sailors that made them go – to be the instruments of this trade.

The problem was that a merchant mariner’s job was a difficult and dangerous undertaking in those days. Sailors were constantly hurting themselves, picking up weird tropical diseases, etc.

The troublesome reductions in manpower caused by back strains, twisted ankles and strange diseases often left a ship’s captain without enough sailors to get underway – a problem both bad for business and a strain on the nation’s economy.

But those were the days when members of Congress still used their collective heads to solve problems – not create them.

Realizing that a healthy maritime workforce was essential to the ability of our private merchant ships to engage in foreign trade, Congress and the President resolved to do something about it.

Enter “An Act for The Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen”.

I encourage you to read the law as, in those days, legislation was short, to the point and fairly easy to understand.

The law did a number of fascinating things.

First, it created the Marine Hospital Service, a series of hospitals built and operated by the federal government to treat injured and ailing privately employed sailors. This government provided healthcare service was to be paid for by a mandatory tax on the maritime sailors (a little more than 1% of a sailor’s wages), the same to be withheld from a sailor’s pay and turned over to the government by the ship’s owner. The payment of this tax for health care was not optional. If a sailor wanted to work, he had to pay up.

This is pretty much how it works today in the European nations that conduct socialized medical programs for its citizens – although 1% of wages doesn’t quite cut it any longer.

PLEASE READ MORE AT LINK....
  1. groups:
    Community,   I'm Right, You're Evil
  2. tags:
    Congress Health Care Founding Fathers Individual Mandate
  3. recommended by:
    WakeUpPeople
  4.     
    |

206 comments // Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance -In 1798

  • JohnA
    • +1
      JohnA  
    • The nation’s leaders realized that foreign trade would be essential to the young country’s ability to create a viable economy and merchant mariners would be key to that end. A specific law to a specific set of people who did a specific, a deemed necessary, job, under specific terms. It is quite a different thing to claim that providing health care to people doing a vital service to the country, just as my Grandfather who was a farmer during World War Two was deemed as doing a necessary job for the country, than to say we should give free health care to every deadbeat and illegal alien who happens along and contributes nothing to our economy.

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      Makes me want to live in Canada, where there is greater economic mobility, safety, and the people are more polite. So polite that they do "give free health care to every deadbeat and illegal alien who happens along and contributes nothing to our economy. "

    • 1 year ago
  • postlapsaria
    • +1
      postlapsaria  
    • JohnA:

      you're right!
      can't those deadbeats-- the young uneducated parents who work multiple jobs and still hover around the poverty line that will never come out from under the mountain of debt from childbirth costs, and nevermind if their kids ever get sick-- can't those assholes understand that i work hard for my money and i NEEDS to buy a new Movada watch EVERY spring.

      and don't get me started on those illegals, even though they'll continue to just go to emergency rooms because most illegal immigrants don't register for anything, ya know, kind of helps them hide in the shadows, even then, i bet they'll find a way to benefit from this or steal a job!

      why does everyone think we americans should look out for our fellow countrymen? the founding fathers didn't give a fuck about their black property (the human beings they shipped from africa) why should i give a fuck about the ethnic people who infest this great land i call MERICAH?!

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • juicie:

      Nobody is giving me free health care, with Obamacare, it will cost me more, and I'll be taxed more, to pay for other peoples. It's a lose-lose for me. Maybe I should move to Canada and live off the polite people's tax dollars.

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      dude, you are the one who brought up illegals...and you PM'ed me and told me to go back to where I came from...you are obviously a racist. Obamacare has nothing to do with it.

    • 1 year ago
  • postlapsaria
    • 0
      postlapsaria  
    • JohnA:

      i've gotta plead ignorance on this one, i wasn't trying to play a race card, i just wasn't aware that there was a large population of white american illegal aliens.

      when you used the phrase deadbeat illegal aliens, i just assumed you meant foreign people.

      Obama is a racist himself, so if i'm racist... maybe i could be president someday, IF Obama's left any america left for me. God Protect Us.

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • juicie:

      I am against illegal aliens no matter what race they are. Race is irrelevant, illegal is illegal, you are either here legally or your not. And I didn't PM you (whatever that means), you have me mistaken for someone else.

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • postlapsaria:

      There are white people in foreign countries, or so I'm told. Illegal is illegal, race is irrelevant. You're the one that brought up "our black property we shipped from Africa".

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      you did send me a private message (PM) like a year ago, and told me to go back where I came from because I said Joe Arpaio sucks and makes life hell for brown people in Maricopa.

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      you must spew off racist comments all the time, which is why you don't remember...it's no big deal to you... I have no doubt you are a racist.

    • 1 year ago
  • postlapsaria
    • -1
      postlapsaria  
    • JohnA:

      where not the slaves from africa black? again, i could be totally off base... i was just saying that the forefathers didn't think too highly of the people who were slaves=black people, so forefathers didn't think too highly of black people. no? my transitive math may be off.

      and ethnicity has nothing to do with race either. i said ethnic people. white danes are another ethnicity too.

      so it looks like you're going for the race card, other than stating the fact about black people i didn't say anything about race-- you did.

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • juicie:

      Didn't know exact numbers, but it doesn't suprise me. Like I said, illegal is illegal, you're either here legally or you're not. How you got here is irrelevant.

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
  • JohnA
  • postlapsaria
    • 0
      postlapsaria  
    • JohnA:

      it was a reference to their infinite wisdom. they know the threat of socialism so they gave us their perfect infallible document. i love the constitution so much i have a blanket with the preamble printed on it, and the bill of rights is listed on the pillows i keep my guns under!

      i want to do everything by the letter of the constitution, so if that means treating black people like three fifths of a man, and having to have long drawn out, filibuster ridden "debate" so that most americans get health care (in case they want to exercise their right to "life," you know even though they have liberty and some pursuit of happiness already, what more do they want, right?) and they can make sure they can take their kids to the doctor without having to skimp on groceries or making their rent that month, then so be it.

      i just hope the thing gets repealed because these extra few bucks (maybe $300 if I'm lucky and get rich this year) are going to KILL my lifestyle-- shit where's MY pursuit of happiness, right?

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      In an article about Joe Arpaio, I commented "F that puto", and I still stand by that comment.

      You then sent me a message and said "F you too puto, go back where you came from"

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      I guess I never let you know that this bothered me...mostly because my mother ran for political office, and because she is brown, we would get awful messages on our answering machine telling her to "go back where she came from".

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      Here's your chance to appologize....I respect your right to have an opinion, as long as you can keep from saying such ignorant things, I won't call you out.

      The "F you too puto", I can live with sorta...what did I ever do to you though?

      The "go back where you came from" is what really bothers me.

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • JohnA:

      thanks for the apology...I found the screenshot of it...here are your exact words:

      "F[censored]ck you too puto, go home to your own country, we don't have enough jobs for ourselves."

      If you still don't believe me I can upload the image...shall I do so?

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
  • JohnA
  • juicie
  • ilikebutter
    • 0
      ilikebutter  
    • I like the mandate argument that so many people argue is unconstitutional. The counter is often car insurance, seat belt laws, social security taxes, etc. The right argues you don't have to own car insurance if you don't drive on a public road (or wear a seatbelt) and if you don't work you aren't required to pay taxes.

      So, what is the most basic right we have, that cannot be taken away? To live where we want and how we want. However, it is illegal to be homeless in 48 states and P.R. If you are homeless, or cannot prove you have a minimum worth (often $50), you can be jailed or fined. Therefore, in the vast majority of this country we are required to do two things: 1) have a permanent residence; 2) carry proof of minimum amount of wealth. Argue all you want, but unfortunately these are the facts.

      For what it's worth, the argument itself is partisan and petty. Congress, wrongfully so, has been able to expand its power through the interstate commerce cause for decades. Right or wrong, like so many other arguments, it is the law and will be upheld. We should stop calling it the health care plan, or Obamacare, and face the facts...it is the health care LAW!

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
    • 0
      hammywill  
    • ilikebutter:

      True enough on all those points. I will argue though that because a thing is a law does not make it right. And, the Health Care "Law" is no longer Law. A federal court ruled it Unconstitutional, so it is no longer Law, barring any higher court injunction or reversal on appeal.

    • 1 year ago
  • postlapsaria
    • 0
      postlapsaria  
    • since we're talking about mandates--
      why can the state make me wear a seatbelt? why does the state give a shit if i make meth in a trailer on my property?

      i'm sure there's more questions in here but i've got to go see a man about a trailer.

    • 1 year ago
  • bike10
    • +1
      bike10  
    • Also Republican by the name of Teddy Roosevelt proposed idea of national health care. Boy would he not be welcomed in the Republican Party today.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
    • 0
      shanklinmike  
    • Yep, the Founding Fathers were statists.... sad,...and it eventually failed anyways.

      To REAL Freedom! The lack of institutionalized coercion!

    • 1 year ago
  • 200131294
    • +1
      200131294  
    • This is a terrible comparison. The act discussed levies a tax, something clearly defined as a power of the government by the constitution. The individual mandate requires us to participate and take part in a private industry. There's a clear difference. It's intellectually dishonest to not see the fallacy of this comparison.

    • 1 year ago
  • PzLuvHappeniz
    • 0
      PzLuvHappeniz  
    • I love when the far right uses the founding fathers to support their claims and they are always wrong, why the hell does glenn beck always quote tom paine????

    • 1 year ago
  • bailey78
  • PzLuvHappeniz
  • bailey78
    • 0
      bailey78  
    • PzLuvHappeniz:

      I don't believe that people like him have a real though of their own. they are out to attract attention to them selves and to the shows they promote. They are told what to say when to say it and who to say it to. Most of them just like to stir the shit so everybody has to smell the stench.

    • 1 year ago
  • PzLuvHappeniz
    • 0
      PzLuvHappeniz  
    • bailey78:

      much like palin, the only problem with her is that now that she isn't campaigning, she no longer has writers and spews whatever retarded drivel that can squeeze itself out of that tiny misguided mind of hers

    • 1 year ago
  • bailey78
  • PzLuvHappeniz
  • juicie
  • bailey78
  • bailey78
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • bailey78:

      I am married to a smart beautiful blonde (she was born blonde but it changed on its own to light brown)... and also dated a blonde who went to Princeton...so I don't buy into the stereotype

    • 1 year ago
  • bailey78
  • theblackveil
  • juicie
    • +1
      juicie  
    • My solution is to not force people to buy insurance, and instead have gov't provided single payer. You have to pay one way or another, through taxes or insurance fees. The cost of medical care is going up because of insurance companies. Canada is doing a good job of keeping the costs down, and if you still want private care that is available there too.

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
    • +1
      hammywill  
    • juicie:

      I am a proponent of the single payer option. Though the Democrats could have passed it when they had control of both houses, now it is too late as they only control a single house now.

    • 1 year ago
  • treewolf39
    • 0
      treewolf39  
    • hammywill:

      Single payer is the only way we are ever going to control raising costs,................ well perhaps doing away with the FED would help. Nothing is going to change with the new free flow of money in American politics; in other words We are fucked!

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +3
      JanforGore  
    • Did it extend to all colonists? And what was the quality of care? Amputations without sterilization while awake? It was certainly a different time and they needed seaman for trade and war. Anyway, regardless of what happened then, now it is insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and corporations that will profit most from everyone being mandated to purchase health insurance.That wasn't the case then.This is the one part of the law I do not agree with simply because it is a profit maker for the very insurance companies that have helped to ruin healthcare in this country. I prefer a public option that is conducive to people supporting it. Not a backdoor mechanism to support insurance companies, and I don't see how this mandate does anything but help them. And now it is getting to be a partisan battle where Republicans only oppose it as "unconstitutional" because it is 'Obama's" law, and Democrats are now trying to show the fed can do it because it is "Obama's Law. I don't care whose law it is, I will not support any law that profits insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies more than they already have profited at the actual expense of health. Health, which is the main issue which seems to have gotten lost in all the partisan one upping.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • +3
      PressCore  
    • JanforGore:

      Well expressed. My grandfather Giovani Narduzzo had his leg amputated
      all the way up, without any laudanum in 1896 when he was 21 years old.
      The NYC doctor gave him some whiskey to drink and something to bite on.
      It's a miracle my grandfather survived the agony, shock & loss of blood,
      (and near alcohol poisoning...thank God he drank wine and was tough)
      During the Civil War there were so many casualties, and the doctors were
      such drunken hacks, that they simply amputated entire limbs rather than
      simply extract bullets & shrapnel. They had to have morphine handy on
      their farms before they were drafted because they had to depend on
      themselves. There were more morphine addicts/amputees who returned
      as survivors from the Civil War than Russian soldiers returning from
      the 1980 Russian invasion of Afghanistan. I watch the History channel
      every day. My DVR has many timers set to record their programming
      which I review for Journalistic research. I appreciate you're being one
      of the voices of reason here on this site, Jan. Thanks for straightening
      them out for all of us who don't want Corporate Gummint Fascism rammed
      down our throats.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • PressCore:

      Wow, amazing that he survived. It certainly wasn't a picnic to get shot with a musket in those days or hit by a cannonball. And you are correct, surgery was without anesthetic, infection was rampant, and many died. Healthcare quality , well, quality wasn't what it was. It was barbaric. Which is the point that even though you pay for coverage it isn't assured you will get quality. We should be striving more for that ( which means preventative healthcare measures through our food and environmental policies) instead of playing politics with peoples' lives. Thanks for your response.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • +1
      PressCore  
    • JanforGore:

      You're welcome. My grandfather was the strongest man I've ever known and
      served.( My brother and I were helping him tend a large organic garden when
      I was 10 years old; Sicilians are Mediterraneans with very healthy diets ).He
      was a very God fearing man with a lot of intestinal fortitude, and faith in his
      family. He relished the saga of the West. And was comparable to the type of
      man Theodore Roosevelt proved to be-tough as ironwood.

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
    • +1
      lunaticrichard  
    • what i hate the most is the insurance company's role in all this . They are the one's who should be on trail for mass murder , among other things.
      it seems most people in leading positions only have one religion ; profit .
      And the messias is the dollar.
      they have lost what it means to be human .

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • +2
      PressCore  
    • lunaticrichard:

      An inspirtional quote for you today from my I Google home page, Heer.
      " Love wears a hem that extends to the dust, to sweap clean all the streets
      and ways. For mercy's sake it vows to leave noone untouched. Because
      Love can, it must, and stays ! " Mother Theresa

    • 1 year ago
  • Nabe8
  • lunaticrichard
    • +3
      lunaticrichard  
    • The problem with americans ,they dont have a clue how much a society can benefit from healthcare for all ,
      not just for the one's who can pay the bill .
      The problem with most americans is that they have no concern for thier neigbours or country men. You are all little scrooge's , in love with the dollar in your pocket .
      You dont seem to get that the first freedom is health . And most republicans let baby's die because mom doesnt have the cash to pay the doctor obscene amounts of money . I will never understand people like that . America is one of the richest nations on the planet , yet for instance cubans are healthier then americans are. We in the netherlands have mandatory healthcare for all and we are the most liberated people in the world , i dare to say , the most free in the world.
      A wise man onece said ;
      One can judge a society on the way they treat their prisoners .
      D need to say more ?

      ps ; dont comment on the dutch if you dont know anything about us .

    • 1 year ago
  • floydyboy
    • +1
      floydyboy  
    • lunaticrichard:

      It's because we as a country have no pride anymore. We only care about ourselves, not our country, or our neighbours. It used to be people knew & cared about their neighbours & wanted to help others who are in need. Now most people don't give a sh*t about anyone but themselves, we all have fences between our homes where we used to have footpaths.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • +1
      PressCore  
    • lunaticrichard:

      I voted your comment up, Heer lunatic richard. I am of Dutch/German descent
      on my dad's side of the family. My grandmother's name was Snyder. ( perhaps
      of the Frisia part of the U.K. of the Netherlands, perhaps not. I haven't yet done
      very much research on my family tree and genealogy ) But my dad had reddish
      blond hair and very light blue eyes. I plan to live in Amsterdam by means of
      resident foreign alien status once qualified to by Dutch Government in the
      future. I've studied all I can of the Dutch culture and way of life. And I admire
      greatly your p.o.v. Having researched your avatar, I find we have 3 of 4 things
      in common. So I'm hoping you'll understand that I have endless respect for the
      Hollandische in the European Union, and from South Africa. Hoping to keep an
      open mind. I'm for a decent, bona fide universal health care system in the USA.

      I'm of the opinion that if it were administered by a charitable not for profit system
      by Christian orders like the Franciscans, and managed by competent, prudent
      financial business managers, we Americans could rise to the challenge of being
      all our brothers' keepers. I keep thinking of people like Aescepalous (pardon the
      spell check debility) and Hippocrates, being myself greatly interested in the field
      of medicine. I've studied natural health science for nearly 40 years, and believe
      in holistic medicine which one German firm is renown for since the mid 1800s.
      But the scene here in the USA is quite different than where you live, or France
      or Switzerland, or the Scandanavian countries. Sadly, it might take the financial
      collapse of our corrupt debt based economy & money system before people
      realize that health is the 1st wealth. And to live in a natural way that miminizes
      the extreme excessive damand on health care resources to restore the balance.

      My kin on my mom's side are farmers/carpenters from Sicily. We've always
      been close to the land,and have always rejected the money corrupting
      influences that have enabled Big Pharma to have the Government they've
      bought to institute the Prohibition of Cannabis, which has inconscionably led
      to the rise of Organized Crime in the USA and Mexico. Many don't realize if
      we now lived as prudently & modestly as colonial Americans did using cheap
      & dependable natural products made of Hemp..And Cannabis wonder drugs
      immunizing us against 90% of all known infectious and degenerative diseases,
      we would not have the situation we now have in the American culture. Being Dutch/American, I greatly respect the Dutch medical establishment. If all
      Americans held to the Christian belief not to seek to own the world and thus
      loose our souls, we wouldn't have the corrupt, rotten to the core scene we
      have with health care here now. Sadly, it all boils down to domination by money,
      and Corporatist domination of the Government here to hold our safety hostage
      to perpetuating that corrupt system. Nobamacare took 2 steps forward at the
      cost of 10 steps back. As a law student I know it will be all our undoing unless
      & until the Supreme Court rules the individual mandate Unconstitutional. And
      sends it back to Congress to do it the right way without Corporate Bribery to
      use the Government to Coerce us deeper into their Slavery.

    • 1 year ago
  • uShine
  • lunaticrichard
  • 200131294
    • +1
      200131294  
    • Umm, there is a big difference between the government taxing someone, which they have every right to, and the government forcing someone to buy a private product or to engage with a private industry. This argument is unsound because it is nothing like the health care reform in relation to the individual mandate. I think you could compare it to medicare, but not health care reform.

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
    • +1
      lunaticrichard  
    • 200131294:

      It should never be a private owned company that does healthcare for all.
      Then you know it will only be for the rich . because the only thing a company is in for is profit . The only way it will work if it's run by the governement . And they should only do it if they want the best possible healthcare for all . Rich and poor.

    • 1 year ago
  • 200131294
    • +1
      200131294  
    • lunaticrichard:

      I was commenting that the bill discussed in the article is not a good comparison to the individual mandate in the health care bill as the author suggested. But because you brought it up, I'll engage.
      I argue that government should not provide healthcare for all. The reason we have such great medical procedures and knowledge is because of profit and private companies. If we have government run healthcare for all then the entire process will suffer because there is no profit involved. A government run monopoly of our healthcare system will work about as well as other government run monopolies. Department of Motor vehicles is terrible at efficiency and saving money, our education system is a joke, public services such as trash collecting is better done by private companies interested in profit. I think the best example is if you compare the United States Postal Services to private companies like UPS and Fedex. These companies revolutionized the trade because of profit. They also work better and can turn a profit unlike the USPS. The best way to provide for everyone is for the government to provide funds in the forms of vouchers and then turn the rest of it over to the free market. That way, rich and poor can receive healthcare and the competition that made our healthcare industry, and every other industry, so great is preserved.

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
    • -1
      lunaticrichard  
    • 200131294:

      As with many things it depends mostly on the people who run these things . I live in the netherlands and we have mandatory healthcare . since the war if i am not mistaken .
      profit doesnt drive invention in my opinion . people do . And the environment they work in and compitition is a great part of it. The drive to do the best you can mostly depends on other things.
      we pay for our monthly due for that . And it works well for all . I meant governement controld . not run'd by .
      I dont know if i agree that provit drove the innovation at say the post office.
      but the point is taken .
      and for the most part i agree with your comment.

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
    • +3
      hammywill  
    • 200131294:

      You are forgetting that there are socialized forms of education and health care all over the world that are efficient and better than what is provided in the United States. All at a much lower cost. Your notion that socializing those industries were their downfall does not stand.

      Japan's entire Health Care industry is mandated by law to be Non Profit, and there everyone has coverage, and better quality care than in the United States.

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
  • juicie
  • 200131294
    • 0
      200131294  
    • juicie:

      Privatization is better than socialization in almost every industry. Japan's hospitals run on non-profit, not the entire system. Doctors, equipment manufacturers and nearly everything else is done by and for profit. With the USPS, its a black hole for money, with profit involved, companies are forced to innovate or go out of business, with employees at the USPS, there is no incentive to work harder or better. I've lost alot of mail in our system before. But with Fedex, I'm getting the best service possible because they want my business, the people at the USPS are often times rude because they know I can't go anywhere else for the prices. How much do you think is wasted in the USPS? Even though you can mail a letter for 50 cents, we as a society is losing massive amounts of tax money.

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
    • 0
      hammywill  
    • 200131294:

      Except that the USPS is a private contractor that does not use Tax Payer Dollars. It has not received any Tax Payer money since the 1980's. I am not sure exactly where you get the notion that there is no motivation to work harder *shrug*.

      Non-profit does not mean no one get paid. Again, not sure where you get that absurd notion either. Every single Socialized medical system in the world provides better quality care at a lower per capita cost that the United States' system.

    • 1 year ago
  • juicie
    • 0
      juicie  
    • 200131294:

      With monopolies (and networks are natural monopolies) there needs to be lots of effective regulation. Monopolies can charge twice as much and give half the quality. The government needs to be an impartial referee, or partial to the people. The problem is the fat cats have the politicians in the bag, and now we live in a plutocracy.

    • 1 year ago
  • 200131294
    • 0
      200131294  
    • Image
    • hammywill:

      You are simply wrong about the USPS. Check out the third paragraph of this article...http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/will-obama-create-post-office-health-care

      Secondly, I'll concede that profit is not the only motivator, but it is by far the best. Profit and greed pushes us to work harder than good intentions.

      And in response to Juice, I am well aware that monopolies are bad for our country and I support the power of the government to prevent them. That does not mean I support government run monopolies as with our public education system and the idea of single payer health reform. A government run monopoly is worse than a private one because not only do they control the market, but they can suppress competition with guns and they are able to run deficits,

    • 1 year ago
  • jubal
    • +3
      jubal  
    • Just goes to show you that those that say they deny healthcare today because they are defending the constitution and or are following the logic and mandates of the founding fathers are just completely full of shit.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • +1
      PressCore  
    • jubal:

      I agree with yourself and Kennymotown's p.o.v.s. Healthcare should be a
      Constitutional Amendment enumerated for all those who can't or won't
      understand what the 10th Amendment's definition of unenumerated rights
      means. George Mason collaborated with Thomas Jefferson when the
      founding fathers drafted the Constitution in Philadelphia in 1776. T.J
      refused to sign it unless & until all 13 States ratified the Bill of Rights.
      Since the Declaration of Independence was his handiwork,and regarded
      in law as the preceding document to the Constitution itself, he had no
      conscionable choice other than to hold off after asserting that every
      person has an inalienable human right to life, Liberty and the pursuit
      of happiness. Those unable to heal, won't logically have any kind of life.
      Life only follows from having one's health. It's the equilibrium that exists
      minute by minute to continue to maintain our fragile life force within our
      mortal shells, and tether our souls to this mortal coil.

    • 1 year ago
  • JohnA
    • -4
      JohnA  
    • Wait, first you're going to say The Constitution wasn't written by people with any knowledge of the internet or technology, so they couldn't have known the future. Now to defend the law, your saying they did foresee the future and they did foresee the future. So which is it?

    • 1 year ago
  • WakeUpPeople
  • mikem0487
  • ImAlwaysRight
  • hammywill
    • +1
      hammywill  
    • ImAlwaysRight:

      Except that you have no understanding of regulating of maritime matters. There is a long established precedence in Admiralty Law for these sort of things, and Admiralty Law is not regulated under the Constitution.

    • 1 year ago
  • mitekillem
    • +1
      mitekillem  
    • JohnA:

      No. They were acting on a situation that was occurring in their time. Don't you read?
      The fact is that congress and the president of the time, passed a law, guaranteeing sailors health care - at a cost to them. This would be exactly the same as Medicare if medicare actually covered everything...which is the same as government provided health care, otherwise known as "socialized" medicine.

      Not only was this done over 200 years ago, but it was enacted by many of the Founding Fathers.
      So, you can't question what they "would have done". -They did this. This is proof, by action, that they would've supported free health care for the working class.

      The writer of this article basically just took away the argument many have used against Health Care reform.
      They will have to find another argument.
      The founding fathers enacted free health care into law.

    • 1 year ago
  • hammywill
    • +1
      hammywill  
    • mitekillem:

      Unfortunately, they never mandated this for the States at large because the Federal Government has no Constitutional Jurisdiction to do such a thing. As well, regulating Maritime matters is separate from the Constitution, Admiralty Law and jurisdiction supersedes any National charters. You do not have the same rights and protections as a Sailor as you do as a citizen. This is a long standing International Legal tradition that still is in effect today.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
    • 0
      PressCore  
    • hammywill:

      I trust you know that by trying to reason with those who use presumption,
      raw force, and emotion to forstall any replies your case in point may well
      fall on deaf ears, and not penetrate the armor of a closed mind. My grandad
      was an Italian Navy sailor (a cook ) on one of the first Dreadnaught Battleships
      in the very late 1800s. He might not have read Mutiny on ther Bounty, or
      known of keelhauling and flogging through the fleet...(He actualy liked to
      read Zane Grey's Under the Tonto Rim, being a Western fan as I am )
      But he was in the military service too. And he was also in the maritime.
      He would have understood your point, as I do. You are correct.

    • 1 year ago
  • PressCore
  • JohnA
  • navider
  • jubal
  • ImAlwaysRight
  • hammywill
    • +1
      hammywill  
    • ImAlwaysRight:

      So your solution is to force people to buy a product from one of those evil corporations so they can have more consumers that are not allowed to NOT buy their product? Do you realize that Insurance companies stock prices shot through the ROOF when this Bill passed?

      There are, and were FAR better solutions. It may be unattainable now, since the Democrats fed Insurance companies more consumers that can now be legally penalized for NOT buying a product from a private, for profit company. When they held the Majority in both houses a Public Option could have been passed. I wonder who that Political Party REALLY works for?

      There is also another solution, make Health Insurance Not For Profit.

      See how easy all that is..yet, none of that passed in a Democratically controlled House OR Senate. So let me ask you, who are they really working for?

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
    • 0
      lunaticrichard  
    • southrabbit:

      The problem is the people dont rule. We have gone from a democracy to burocracy ( is that right ?) ! We have gotten so swamped by rule's and regulations , by scams and fake democratic powers , that we are now ruled by the elite again . Just as in roman day's , but now we dont get to see one but 10 emperors in a boardroom.
      What have we become, as people that we are ruled by minority only because people dont go and vote ! In last years , the voting population has not even reached 50 % !!!!! Think about that ....... in good voting years it has been maybe 40 % tops ! where is the rest ?
      People dont believe in politics anymore . It's as clear as day .... And it's the same in many "democratic " country's around the globe . The netherlands, Germany , france etc ....
      Democracy means : rule by MAJORITY .
      When are we ? And will that do as we hope ? Freedom is mostly in the mind now . We live so close together on this planet that we cant just do as we please . We have to have rules . As we all know . And we have to care for the one's that cant care for themselfs , whatever the reasons are . And we want to be healthy , all of us do . So we have to pay for it and pay for those who cant pay for themselfs. that is the right way . And if you are religous : it's the way of god and the cristian way .
      If you can save a life, would you ? I you dont want to , go and move to antartica . There you can watch your neigbour freeze to death to your harts content.

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
  • lunaticrichard
    • 0
      lunaticrichard  
    • ImAlwaysRight:

      Amen brother , amen! ( i love that phrase)
      America has this great constitution and it's raped by all side's ! That's what's great about Obama in my vieuw ; The man actualy thought and believed he could change the dino's in the white house and on capitol hill , got his ass kicked and still maneged to get healthcare trough . ( although they now seem to have found a loophole to rewind it again . wich is stupid and almost racist .)
      America realy could be the greatest country on earth and the envy off all the "free world"
      If americans wouldnt be so afraid of socialist idea's , wich are not all bad or stupid or lead to comunism or loss off freedom.

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
  • lifestudentno83
    • +6
      lifestudentno83  
    • SOCIALISM! OUR FOREFATHERS WERE KILLING OUR SENIOR CITIZENS WITH DEATH PANELS! GLENN BECK WAS RIGHT!!!

      AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! THIS IS ALL OBAMA'S FAULT(somehow)!

      ...On a serious note, can we please establish a heath care system that DOESN'T KILL people while it robs them? Ideally, I would prefer neither.

    • 1 year ago
  • lifestudentno83
  • lunaticrichard
  • kennymotown
    • +5
      kennymotown  
    • We are on the right track with this one WakeUpPeople, if you want to communicate with the opposition that insists that health care is not a right, you have to think like the said mother fuckers.

    • 1 year ago
  • ayipis
    • -5
      ayipis  
    • kennymotown:

      what gives you the "RIGHT" to leech off the people?? LOL

      here is a good question..do think you pro socialist people would survive back then?? probably not..i dont think your concept of socialism is the same as john adams..LOL

      get a job and pay your taxes..if you would spend as much time and effort as you do trying to justify leeching off taxpayers as you would looking for a job...you would well off..but then again you think like a socialist

    • 1 year ago
  • postlapsaria
    • +2
      postlapsaria  
    • ayipis:

      right on brother!

      you teach them about leeching on this free message board that you post on all hours of the day -- i'm sure you work AROUND your posting though, so i won't even question the time -- you spread your righteous message of paying taxes, which pay for social services we all use -- not socialist though!

      you put the L in lol my man! I love you my fellow american hero!

    • 1 year ago
  • lunaticrichard
    • 0
      lunaticrichard  
    • ayipis:

      who care's if they would have or not ? W live in this day and age , with all the benefits that our forefathers have given us . That's what they worked and died for ! So we could have healthcare for all, no poverty,good education and happy live's ! I pay taxes so someone can eat who cant work for his food or is too sick to do so ! I dont want to pay tax ,so the director of some big company can drive a merc and have a milion dollar home . I will gladly pay even more if i would know that it would help poor people have a better life or education ! I dont mind if i have a little less so that others dont die or starve .
      That is the best thing you can do with your cash .
      What ever happend to ; give us your poor, your sick and the down trodden ?

    • 1 year ago
  • telcod
    • +3
      telcod  
    • Well they just didn't know about communism and creeping socialism back them. They could just not see the benefit of paying double for same health insurance, most industrial countries enjoy (and many non industrial countries for that matter) like we enlightened amerikans today. In fact if they had known this back then, they could have scrapped the medical insurance thing and saved us all from the cold war. I'm sure Sarah Palin would agree with me on this point if she weren't looking for Russia out her back window.

    • 1 year ago
  • hanzdogy
  • kennymotown
1 - 100 of 206
more from Community:

top videos