See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: I do not have nor desire Health insurance .
Source:
self
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 23, 2010
Author: self
Post Date: 2010-03-23 03:12:36 by titorite
Keywords: None
Views: 410
Comments: 32
I do not have nor do I desire to purchase health insurance. I look after my own health. When things required me to go to a clinic or hospital I have always paid out of pocket. I was fine with this. Now I no longer have a right to my privacy. Now I will be required to share my private personal medical data with a government run entity. If I refuse to comply I will be punished by law, with a fine, until I come into compliance. Why is their no option to opt out?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: titorite (#0)
Because you most likely cannot guarantee self insurance. Many businesses and even political entities self insure their employees. Society via your elected representatives has decided they will not accept the possibility that you might become a financial liability to others.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
You are correct. I can not guarantee self insurance. I do not try too. I do not want health insurance. Understand? I feel comfortable being uninsured and paying any medical expenses I may incur out of pocket. No where in the Constitution did I read anything saying I must own insurance of any kind. I do not want insurance. It should not be forced on me if I do not want it.
I was out of a mandatory health care premium-paying system for a decade but when I went to see a university doctor about a gastro-intestinal problem he said he wouldn't look at me unless I joined the system, pointing out that each night's stay at the hospital would cost $5,000 which in itself was a racket because the hospital was provided and paid for by the state. The premium was a nominal amount, something like $30 a month but since I needed only a periodic exam to renew a pilot's license (which the plan wouldn't pay for) I "resigned" from it. With today's cash-strapped local governments premiums have to be mandatory to cover care for those who can't afford it or else it's higher taxes. Politicians feel safer with a multitude of taxes and fees; if all government expenditures were lumped into one tax they'd face a rebellion along the lines of Prop 13. Having individual medical records readily accessible by any doctor or hospital is a good idea. Makes the system more efficient than having a clerk waste time taking your medical history each time you seek a diagnosis or treatment.
I just got health insurance last month. I figured that I'm not getting any younger, and if the old ticker craps out or something, at least I can get rushed to the hospital and not have to worry about owing anything to anyone. It's Anthem Blue Cross for $152 per month, no big deal. It covers 100% of hospitalization.
Critter, you might be completely right as far as what's covered, but if I may, I suggest you read your policy very, very carefully. And that won't be easy by any means. They're written by lawyers for lawyers and usually leave room for lots of interpretation. Missed in this health care fight is that most insurance companies bite the large one, and there is actually lots of room for reform in that industry. Obama's bill empowers these bottom dwellers even further, so for all the dolts who think He "fixed" health care, think again.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
This may work for you but it does not work for me. I consider my medical information my private property. My responsibility to keep and maintain. In violation of the fourth and fifth amendment rights, I am now required to surrender my private medical data to a government run entity. I do not want to do this. I have a right to privacy. I do not want health insurance. It is wrong to compel me to purchase it. It is wrong to punish me if I refuse to purchase it. I can pay out of pocket. If I fail to pay I can suffer the civil litigation leveled against me. This new law violates my entitled constitutional rights to privacy and unlawfully compels me to surrender my information with out due process. I do not want health insurance. I do not want to give up my private personal medical information.
And I'm certain your records will stay within the confines of clerks and doctors once a single payer government plan is implemented. You are seriously short sighted.
What the heck happened - 545 people vs 300 million people This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be - read it!! The article below is completely neutral, ...not anti republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinal has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgements made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering! 545 vs. 300,000,000 EVERY CITIZEN NEEDS TO READ THIS AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THIS JOURNALIST HAS SCRIPTED IN THIS MESSAGE. READ IT AND THEN REALLY THINK ABOUT OUR CURRENT POLITICAL DEBACLE. Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years. 545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.. Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits? Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does. One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes. Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits..... The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red .. If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way. There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do. Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess! Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper. What you do with this article now that you have read it......... Is up to you. This might be funny if it weren't so darned true. Be sure to read all the way to the end: Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table, At which he's fed. Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule. Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts Anyway! Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat. Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt. Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think.. Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries Tax his tears. Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ass. Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough. When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore. Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid... Put these words Upon his tomb, Taxes drove me to my doom...' When he's gone, Do not relax, Its time to apply The inheritance tax.. Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL license Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Excise Taxes Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax Gross Receipts Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Taxes Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Personal Property Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service Charge Tax Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax Recreational Vehicle Tax Sales Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service FeeTax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
Then don't do it. I won't.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or Which Constitution are you reading? There are at least two. Under one you're a Sovereign, a King on the land. Under the other you're a subject and can be compelled to do the bidding of the Beast. Intro: Sovereigns v UNITED STATES http://discharge-debt.com/id151.htm Are you a Sovereign or a "person" under the 14th Amendment? http://discharge-debt.com/id158.htm [CORPORATIONS are persons.] More in-dephth: The Two United States and the Law EXCERPT "....Our national Congress works for two nations foreign to each other, and by legal cunning both are called The United States. One is the Union of Sovereign States, under the Constitution, termed in this article the Continental United States. The other is a Legislative Democracy which has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, here termed the Federal United States. Very few people, when they see some "law" passed by Congress, ask themselves, "Which nation was Congress working for when it passed this or that so-called law?" Or, few ask, "Does this particular law apply to the Continental citizenry of the Republic, or does this particular law apply only to residents of the District of Columbia and other named enclaves, or territories, of the Democracy called the Federal United States?" Since these questions are seldom asked by the uninformed citizenry of the Republic, it was an open invitation for "cunning" political leadership to seek more power and authority over the entire citizenry of the Republic through the medium of "legalese." Congress deliberately failed in its duty to provide a medium of exchange for the citizenry of the Republic, in harmony with its Constitutional mandate. Instead, it created an abundance of commercial credit money for the Legislative Democracy, where it was not bound by Constitutional limitations. Then, after having created an emergency situation, and a tremendous depression in the Republic, Congress used its emergency authority to remove the remaining substance (gold and silver) from the medium of exchange belonging to the Republic, and made the negotiable instrument paper of the Legislative Democracy (Federal United States) a legal tender for Continental United States citizenry to use in the discharge of debts. At the same time, Congress granted the entire citizenry of the two nations the "benefit" of limited liability in the discharge of all debts by telling the citizenry that the gold and silver coins of the Republic were out of date and cumbersome. The citizens were told that gold and silver (substance) was no loner needed to pay their debts, that they were now "privileged" to discharge debt with this more "convenient" currency, issued by the Federal United States. Consequently, everyone was forced to "go modern," and to turn in their gold as a patriotic gesture. The entire news media complex went along with the scam and declared it to be a forward step for our democracy, no longer referring to America as a Republic. From that time on, it was a falling light for the Republic of 1776, and a rising light for Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal Democracy, which overcame the depression, which was caused by a created shortage of real money. There was created an abundance of debt paper money, so-called, in the form of interest-bearing negotiable instrument paper called Federal Reserve Notes, and other forms of paperwork credit instruments. Since all contracts since Roosevelt's time have the colorable consideration of Federal Reserve Notes, instead of a genuine consideration of silver and gold coin, all contracts are colorable contracts, and not genuine contracts. [According to Black's Law Dictionary (1990), colorable means "That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the appearance of truth."] Consequently, a new colorable jurisdiction, called a statutory jurisdiction, had to be created to enforce the contracts. Soon the term colorable contract was changed to the term commercial agreement to fit circumstances of the new statutory jurisdiction, which is legislative, rather than judicial, in nature. This jurisdiction enforces commercial agreements upon implied consent, rather than full knowledge, as it is with the enforcement of contracts under the Common Law. All of our courts today sit as legislative Tribunals, and the so- called "statutes" of legislative bodies being enforced in these Legislative Tribunals are not "statutes" passed by the legislative branch of our three-branch Republic, but as "commercial obligations" to the Federal United States for anyone in the Federal United States or in the Continental United States who has used the equitable currency of the Federal United States and who has accepted the "benefit," or "privilege," of discharging his debts with the limited liability "benefit" offered to him by the Federal United States ... EXCEPT those who availed themselves of the remedy within this commercial system of law, which remedy is today found in Book 1 of the Uniform Commercial Code at Section 207. When used in conjunction with one's signature, a stamp stating "Without Prejudice U.C.C. 1-207" is sufficient to indicate to the magistrate of any of our present Legislative Tribunals (called "courts") that the signer of the document has reserved his Common Law right. He is not to be bound to the statute, or commercial obligation, of any commercial agreement that he did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally, as would be the case in any Common Law contract. Furthermore, pursuant to U.C.C. 1-103, the statute, being enforced as a commercial obligation of a commercial agreement, must now be construed in harmony with the old Common Law of America, where the tribunal/court must rule that the statute does not apply to the individual who is wise enough and informed enough to exercise the remedy provided in this new system of law. He retains his former status in the Republic and fully enjoys his unalienable rights, guaranteed to him by the Constitution of the Republic, while those about him "curse the darkness" of Commercial Law government, lacking the truth needed to free themselves from a slave status under the Federal United States, even while inhabiting territory foreign to its territorial venue. ADDENDUM U.C.C. 1-207:4 Sufficiency of reservation. Any expression indicating any intention to preserve rights is sufficient, such as "without prejudice," "under protest," "under reservation," or "with reservation of all our rights." The Code states an "explicit" reservation must be made. "Explicit" undoubtedly is used in place of "express" to indicate that the reservation must not only be "express" but it must also be "clear" that such a reservation was intended. The term "explicit" as used in U.C.C. 1-207 means "that which is so clearly stated or distinctively set forth that there is no doubt as to its meaning." ... U.C.C. 1-207:7 Effect of reservation of rights. The making of a valid reservation of rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses and prevents the loss of such right by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel .... U.C.C. 1-207:9 Failure to make reservation. When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof causes a loss of the right and bars its assertion at a later date .... U.C.C. 1-103:6 Common law. The Code is "Complementary" to the common law which remains in force except where displaced by the Code .... A statute should be construed in harmony with the common law unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law. ... "The Code cannot be read to preclude a common law action." EXAMPLE Your Honor, my use of "Without Prejudice UCC 1-207" above my signature on this document indicates that I have exercised the "Remedy" provided for me in the Uniform Commercial Code in Book 1 at Section 207, whereby I may reserve my Common Law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract, or agreement, that I have not entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And, that reservation serves notice upon all administrative agencies of government -- national, state and local -- that I do not, and will not, accept the liability associated with the "compelled" benefit of any unrevealed commercial agreement. http://www.supremelaw.org/library/freeman.html "Without Prejudice UCC 1-207" Note: I am still learning the ins and outs of this. I believe I heard from Tim Turner [see http://www.truthsetsusfree.com / http://americacanbefree.com ] they have changed the Code number. I think it might be UCC 1-307, but don't quote me on that. I am not sure if this is the same thing as the following, and the more I think about it, it may not be...but I'm not sure. Discharging Debt....How It Works "...the INCORPORATED UNITED STATES is bankrupt and under the terms of that bankruptcy the UNITED STATES is required to pay all your debts because there really is no lawful money after 1933 when president Roosevelt took away the gold standard. What you are doing with the bonding of debts process is sending an I.O.U. to the finance company or court etc.. This is a complex process in law but to this simply, this tells them that the UNITED STATES must by law of the bankruptcy pay your debts, when they redeem those bonds it reduces the national deficit by the amount of the bond. Paying a debt with debt instruments (I.E. Federal Reserve Notes) is like running a car on gas, which pollutes the air, but a bond is like running the same car on hydrogen, which actually cleans the dirty air it draws into the motor. You are killing two birds with one stone with a bond, first you are eliminating your debts and second you are reducing the national deficit...." http://discharge-debt.com/id122.htm My main problem at this point with this "health" bill [because I don't intend to be a part of it], is that I don't want to discharge debts for murdering unborn children or the elderly or the weak or whomever, nothwithstanding anything that comes out of the mouths of Obama or the whores in Congress to the contrary. They are all proven liars. Maybe the UCC 1-207 (or whatever) is my out to refuse to cooperate with the IRS at all: "You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe." -- John Adams, Second President of the United States. (1792-1801) The US Supreme Court has stated that because these rights existed antecedent [prior to] the formation of either the states or the national government they are outside the government's power to alter, modify, or abolish. edit: ...With these powerful rights in our hands, one might wonder what sort of "rights" are possessed by "citizens of the United States". The Poor Stepchild "citizen" If the Citizens of the states of the Union have their "unalienable rights", what then do "citizens of the United States" have? Frankly, not much of value. For the balance of this section, we will use the term "federal citizen" to denote a "citizen of the United States". A federal citizen has only those rights that have been granted to him by Congress by way of the numerous and various civil rights acts, and such rights as may have been invested in him by an activist US Supreme Court that felt it could legislate from the bench. Let's be clear - the "rights" of federal citizens are not given to them by God, as are our unalienable rights. Their rights are given to them by Congress alone, and the most significant point to understand and keep in mind is that, "What Congress giveth, Congress may taketh away". It has always been this way and it will always be this way. The only thing that may be surprising in all of this is that this is the first time you're hearing it! Most Americans have no idea that there are two "classes of citizenship", nor do they understand the vast distinction between the two, and what it means in their lives. ......" [ www.originalintent.org/edu/citizenship.php (another really good website)]. ============== God's law says Thou shalt not murder. Exodus 20:13. CorpUSA's "law" says the UNITED STATES was founded on the "Noahide Laws", wherein one may kill Christians and others who will not worship the Jews [and their god Lucifer] with impunity. See Merry Christmas AND OFF WITH YOUR HEAD http://www.public-action.com/christmas.html Now the Government Can Legally Kill Christians BY BEHEADING! by Dr. Lorraine Day [ http://www.takebackourrights.org/docs/noahidelaw.html ], and the same title by former Congressman Dannemeyer http://www.takebackourrights.org/docs/Christians.html The Noahide Laws are straight out of the Satanic Talmud: See the Truth About the Talmud, Judaism's Holiest Book by Michael Hoffman. http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html Search this: "Let your sons grow up to be lawyers that they may take Christians' property, and sons grow up to be doctors that they may take away Christians' lives." The bill calls for persons to be marked with an RFID chip on the back of the hand [Mark of the Beast?], and the Census has marked your door with GPS. Once all your information is in the national database, anytime the Jews' need the liver, or an eyeball, or kidney, all they have to do is check the database of cattle/chattel, and arrive at your door for you or your child or whomever. Search this: "If a Jew needs a liver Noachide cephas ministry". Search "Satan on Our Dollar http://jesus-is-savior.com " God told us to come out of Babylon. Time is getting real short. This "health" care bill is total Judeo-Masonic-British Communism. They have stolen our gold, our jobs, and they are killing our children. This is in total agreement with what God said they would do. He said they would raise up the staff against us AFTER THE MANNER OF EGYPT. What did they do there? They took the Israelites' straw and told them to produce the same tally of bricks, and they told the midwives to kill the newborn sons of the Israelites. See Isaiah 10:24/Exodus 1 and 5. ============== U.C.C. 1-103:6 Common law. The Code is "Complementary" to the common law which remains in force except where displaced by the Code .... A statute should be construed in harmony with the common law unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law. ... "The Code cannot be read to preclude a common law action." Interesting, but to be expected I guess....this government was founded on Lucifer, and has totally given itself over to him, or at least that's the way I see it. Now they're going up against the King of Kings.
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
yep. that's the reason the congressional bastards can opt out.
That was not my comment at all, rather it was a paraphrase of an insurance study as to the basis for the arbitrary program as stated by the government.
Good heavens, such language from a young lady, so early in the morning. Speaking so much ill will towards those that "serve" you.
I think it falls under "interstate commerce". You not having it affects interstate commerce, so the feds can regulate your having it. Or so they claim. Totally pathetic.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
You are prolly too young to recall when auto liability insurance first became mandatory, state by state, by increments???? The first laws allowed one to opt out, if you said you could self insure. That kept the insurance companies from raising their rates thru the roof. One by one that loophole fell by the wayside, the insurance companies loved it. Now that insurance scam has progressed to the point that if caught driving with no insurance there is a stiff fine etc etc. See the same pattern? No health insurance, we arrest you? They are slow but steady in applying the yoke upon our shoulders.
Cause society won't tolerate letting people like you bleed to death in an emergency room because you don't have insurance or ability to pay.
Because we are all in life and it's basic undeniable fact; that every one of us will eventually grow old and die, and it shouldn't break the bank, and all sickness and bad health occurring along the path to life's end is a common trust we all share the ownership of merely by being human.
Why is their no option to opt out? Must you really ask this? Nevertheless, here's why; Because this "health care" bill really isn't about healch care. It's a back-door way to get you to hand over all of your most personal information, stuff like what's on the long form for the census that you wouldn't otherwise give the government. Here they'll tell you that it's "for your own good" so that "health care" can be properly and appropriately administered to you. Haven't you seen that health database ad with all of the doctors in the audience giving the man's health history for him? Lockheed Martin I believe. Why has that been airing recently? [that's a clue] It is because your government is now so intrusive, so totalitarian (with much worse to come mind you, make absolutely no mistake about that), and so intent on controlling every aspect of your life. Why? Well, because as both Bushes told us, there's a "New World Order" afoot. It will make George Orwell's 1984 come to life. Many of us have warned about this for years if not decades, yet have been branded as kooks. Nevertheless, many seem to be perfectly fine with this NWO. So by giving you an option to "opt out," that would circumvent "their" plans now, wouldn't it. This doesn't necessarily apply to you, but it's funny how Americans, and people throughout history really, but modern Americans in particular, only understand certain things with a good swift kick in the ass, but that kick in the ass changes things permanently such that it's too late to do anything about it. And make no mistake, all of these pigs in government that appear to be feigning disgust are really simply concerned for their jobs, they don't give a crap about you any more than anyone in China does. Not only is there no option to opt-out, there will be more coercion for you to "opt-in" to other programs in the future, such as RFID tagging or its equivalent. Once the FedGov has your "medical" info in its database, game over! That is why they couldn't make it voluntary as Medicare is. Even though effectively there is no choice but to take Medicare they could not make it mandatory, and that may be the achilles heel of this nightmarish Orwellian Brave New World of Obamacare®© or NWO Care®© as it would be more rightly called. The point of this bill is as you put it summed up in one word: C-O-N-T-R-O-L. Control over records, over your choices. Alternatives such as Chiropractic, Naturopathic and Herbal Medicine are not covered under Obamacare®© and the next step will be attempts to outlaw them. Big Pharma/NWO, the real author of this bill does not want competition. As well people who turn to alternatives might actually, heaven forbid, get well - for eugenics and population reduction through increased mortality is also part of the plan.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
My health insurance was for $300.00 a month just for me. It really did not pay anything because of the deductible. I basically had to pay 100% for every doctor visit because I never met the deductible. As far as prescriptions go it is cheaper for me not to use the insurance. Now if I had a catastrophic event the insurance would kick in they would pay 75%. If it was a million dollar bill I would not be able to afford the 25% and would have to go bankrupt anyway. I had my husband take me off the insurance because I felt I was paying for nothing. There are many things I have not heard about this health insurance bill such as 1. Putting caps on what the insurance companies can charge. 2. Pay rates for what your out of pocket expenses can be. 3. What the bill does to stop price gouging. With these things in mind basically it sounds like the insurance companies can do whatever they want to us. We can be charged whatever and forced to pay out of pocket whatever they decide to tell us to pay. This is nothing more than a ploy to steel more money from the people. They will more than likely put the money in the general fund and continue their theft.
I understand quite well. However as I stated before, society governed by those you helped elect, has decided that if you cannot or will not insure yourself, they will force it upon you. Thats not my view, that is the will of society. Their argument, whether right or wrong, is now the law of the land. The only argument we have is that, medical care should be provided for those in need, not make it a welfare program for millionaires. The person worth millions pays the exact same rate for medicare as I do. Rename Social Security and Medicare as Social Welfare, based on need, that is the only way out of this quagmire. Will it happen??? Of course not.
I saw this on the net..winners and losers... The Winners And Losers In The Health Care Bill The winners are mainly immigrants, abortion clinics, pill mills, doctors, physician owned medical labs, and the poor.
This is another one of my MAJOR!!!! concerns as a Homeopathic Massage Therapist. Also why I do not care for health insurance. Me and my family are among some of the healthiest people I know. Everyone in my family also understands basic first aid. My two siblings took it the next level and became paramedics while I choose a different health field. A field that is threatened along with my constitutional rights. (although I am gonna look into the U.C.C. stuff. That seemed very interesting.) I don't know what will happen to my registration. I don't know if advising a proper diet with out corn syrup or aspartame will be frowned upon. I don't accept insurance or credit cards. Cash or Check only. Will I be required to change that policy under this new bill? Because I wont. I will not change how I run my business. I will not submit to health care I do not require nor desire. I will not share my private medical information with government entities. I will not use VeriMed to facilitate medical transactions. I will not comply. I will not accept punishment for my non compliance. I may be facing radical changes to my life as I have been living it. I'll face those changes as they come over the next four years. It's ominous, I'm not afraid but concerned. What horrible change has been wrought.
Fine? hehe, I will throw their fines away. They mess with me they better be ready to die, I won't put up with brain dead idiots with uniforms on.
God is always good!
Oh sure another Internet poster chimes in. Beyond the BS... can you help me? 'cause I think you are either stupid or silly as there is no detail about your plans.
Really makes no difference to me who knows that I have a g-i tract "attached" where it shouldn't be or an iguenal hernia, etc.; actually the more people know, the greater the possibility that I might get some helpful advice. Only problem that might occur is if some trouble-making miscreant were to latch onto something that might be related to driving and report it to the bureaucracy then I might have to go through a bunch of time-consuming tests, etc. I've never bothered with life insurance which for the most part is a waste of money.
Not really. Any politician who rejects the advice of the Israeli lobby doesn't get elected. With the aloofness of American voters to get involved in organizational aspects of candidate selection and funding raising this is the Catch-22 of politics. That's the way it works, not the way you were taught in high school civics.
You can't help it. You're a screaming World Marxist, Collectivist, anti- American tool for the feral beast and nothing will change that. Have a nice day.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
Why is their no option to opt out?
#2. To: titorite (#0)
#3. To: Cynicom (#1)
#4. To: Cynicom (#1)
#5. To: titorite (#0)
#6. To: titorite (#0)
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#7. To: Critter (#6)
#8. To: Critter (#6)
#9. To: Tatarewicz (#5)
(Edited)
Having individual medical records readily accessible by any doctor or hospital is a good idea. Makes the system more efficient than having a clerk waste time taking your medical history each time you seek a diagnosis or treatment.
#10. To: Tatarewicz (#5)
Having individual medical records readily accessible by any doctor or hospital is a good idea. Makes the system more efficient than having a clerk waste time taking your medical history each time you seek a diagnosis or treatment.
#11. To: titorite, 4 (#0)
#12. To: titorite (#9)
I do not want health insurance. I do not want to give up my private personal medical information.
die kill ~~ Me
#13. To: titorite (#4)
(Edited)
No where in the Constitution did I read anything saying I must own insurance of any kind. I do not want insurance. It should not be forced on me if I do not want it.
Sovereigns verses inferior Commercialized Courts within the entire sub-Corporatism STATES/TERRITORIES UNDER THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION. By Ed Brannum
#14. To: Eric Stratton (#2)
Not only is there no option to opt-out, there will be more coercion for you to "opt-in" to other programs in the future, such as RFID tagging or its equivalent. Once the FedGov has your "medical" info in its database, game over!
#15. To: Eric Stratton (#3)
Wrong Cyni, you're too bright to miss the boat on this one.
#16. To: christine (#14)
that's the reason the congressional bastards can opt out.
#17. To: titorite (#4)
No where in the Constitution did I read anything saying I must own insurance of any kind.
#18. To: Cynicom (#15)
#19. To: Eric Stratton (#18)
#20. To: titorite (#0)
#21. To: titorite (#0)
"Why is their no option to opt out?"
TEXT DOLPHIN To 44144
#22. To: Eric Stratton, titorite, all (#2)
To: titorite
#23. To: Critter, ALL (#6)
#24. To: titorite (#4)
I do not want health insurance. Understand?
#25. To: MiracleRose7 (#23)
3. What the bill does to stop price gouging.
#26. To: Original_Intent (#22)
Alternatives such as Chiropractic, Naturopathic and Herbal Medicine are not covered under Obamacare®© and the next step will be attempts to outlaw them.
#27. To: titorite (#0)
#28. To: RickyJ (#27)
They mess with me they better be ready to die, I won't put up with brain dead idiots with uniforms on.
#29. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
#30. To: Lod (#11)
Do not let (politicians) shift the blame...to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject.
#31. To: Ferret (#21)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#32. To: Original_Intent (#22)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest