Legal setback to US Healthcare Package

[beowulf 1]

I suspect the second group is much larger the the third group when it comes to bicycle transportation. I don't see myself ever using a bicycle to go back and fourth to work.

[winsor 236]

Quote

So why is it we can be forced to buy auto insurance, but it is being argued as unconstitutional to be forced to buy health insurance?

Because you do not have to drive, and thus do not have to have auto insurance. Also, it is not a Federal mandate.

The problem with the Government taking charge is simple - and typical. The principle is that there is a product or service that you, personally, could not afford to obtain with your own finances. However, if you give an affordable amount of money to a monumentally inefficient bureaucracy, they will somehow be able to obtain these services for you with the portion of the funds they did not absorb - even though they tend to pay more than market rates.

I like health care, and agree that we have a problem. It strikes me that the problem is not as portrayed by those seeking to address it, and that what they have enacted is anything but a solution.

Put another way, the people we have elected are clueless, and they are hell-bent on creating more problems than they are tasked with solving in the first place.

"Health Care Reform" is a dyed in the wool disaster in the making.


BSBD,

Winsor

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Driving is not a right. You do not have to buy auto insurance.

Only if, you want to re-new your driver's license, license tags and inspection sticker, here in Texas. Also, if and when someone gets stopped by police, they are asked for a driver's license and proof of insurance. If, you can't show proof of insurance, you get a ticket. You don't have to buy auto insurance but they can sure make it rough on you for not.


Chuck

His point is that you only have to buy car insurance to exercise the privilege of driving on public roads.

Thanks, for pointing that out. I must've mis-read it.


Chuck

[billvon 3,009]

>I suspect the second group is much larger the the third group when it
>comes to bicycle transportation.

I think you're right, but I still think that third group is pretty significant. Imagine if we could get even 10% of the cars off the road, and improve the health of those 10% at the same time. That would do a lot for both traffic and overall healthcare costs.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

There are a couple of problems with this, Bill. The first is tht bike lanes do not generate revenue for the states and municipalities. A person buys a bike and uses it without paying for fuel, etc. Governments do not like things that do not bring in revenue so this is out.

But occasionally they do support actions that save money. HOV lanes are an example of this. Pret-tax commuter benefits are another. If you can successfully reduce the traffic load, we don't have to take the incredibly expensive action of increasing road capacity, something that isn't really an option in most established cities.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>I suspect the second group is much larger the the third group when it
>comes to bicycle transportation.

I think you're right, but I still think that third group is pretty significant. Imagine if we could get even 10% of the cars off the road, and improve the health of those 10% at the same time. That would do a lot for both traffic and overall healthcare costs.

The drop in gas use when the prices passed $4 was less than 10% and dropped the price over 25%.

[billvon 3,009]

>The drop in gas use when the prices passed $4 was less than 10% and
>dropped the price over 25%.

Do you mean that using a bike dropped the price over 25%?

Personally, my criterion for "people think gas is really too expensive" is the day that people actually start slowing down to increase their fuel economy. That didn't happen here, even at $4/gallon.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

we don't have to take the incredibly expensive action of increasing road capacity

States and municipalities LOVE THIS. The local politician can say, "I drafted the legislation that created this new road and gave hundreds of people jobs." A new road is a wet dream for a politician. Think of Glenn Anderson and the 105 Freeway in Los Angeles.

What politicians don't like doing is maintaining roads and bridges. Keeping a road working gives no glory. There's no "Glenn Anderson Highway Maintenance Crew" out there. These funds are often simply diverted to other pet projects, because starting with nothing and putting up something is always more politically expedient.

Governments don't care about costs or needs. There are four ways to spend money:
(1) You can spend your money on yourself. You get what you want or need at the best price you can.
(2) You spend your money on somebody else. You'll give them what you think they should have at the best possible price.
(3) You spend other people's money on yourself. You'll get whatever you want and who cares about the price?
(4) You spend other people's money on others. You'll give them you you think they should have and who cares about the price?

Government is the last option. Government will spend money on that stuff that makes it look like the government is doing something. Bridges aren't maintained? Well, that can wait. Maintaining the current government building? Nope. They need to be torn down and turned into modern Taj Majals.

highways generate revenues. Building them generates votes. The best of both worlds!

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Quote

we don't have to take the incredibly expensive action of increasing road capacity

States and municipalities LOVE THIS. The local politician can say, "I drafted the legislation that created this new road and gave hundreds of people jobs." A new road is a wet dream for a politician. Think of Glenn Anderson and the 105 Freeway in Los Angeles.

What politicians don't like doing is maintaining roads and bridges. Keeping a road working gives no glory. There's no "Glenn Anderson Highway Maintenance Crew" out there. These funds are often simply diverted to other pet projects, because starting with nothing and putting up something is always more politically expedient.

There is a huge amount of highway maintenance going on in Illinois right now. More than I can recall in the previous 33 years that I've lived here. Pretty much all of it is overdue, too.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

>I suspect the second group is much larger the the third group when it
>comes to bicycle transportation.

I think you're right, but I still think that third group is pretty significant. Imagine if we could get even 10% of the cars off the road, and improve the health of those 10% at the same time. That would do a lot for both traffic and overall healthcare costs.

I think that percentage would depend on the time of year and weather.

Right now it's 100 degrees outside and it would really suck to be riding a bike to work and back. Even though it's cooler in the morning it's not that much cooler and I would need a shower once I got to work. It just wouldn't work out.

[lawrocket 3]

Indeed. All it takes is a bridge collapse in Minnesota.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Yeah, but biking is a vast left wing conspiracy to promote a UN takeover of the USA.

Is that before or after Guam capsizes?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

It's a quesiton of federalism - a federal government designed to unite the states.

Many, many people in the USA don't understand this. It's a continuing failure of our education system.

And I do not think this is an error of the system. It is as intended

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Yeah, but biking is a vast left wing conspiracy to promote a UN takeover of the USA.

Is that before or after Guam capsizes?

It's not going to capsize, it's going to tip over.
Much like log rolling - it could be good clean fun.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Yeah, but biking is a vast left wing conspiracy to promote a UN takeover of the USA.

Is that before or after Guam capsizes?

It's not going to capsize, it's going to tip over.
Much like log rolling - it could be good clean fun.

Don't trip!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Yeah, but biking is a vast left wing conspiracy to promote a UN takeover of the USA.

Is that before or after Guam capsizes?

It's not going to capsize, it's going to tip over.
Much like log rolling - it could be good clean fun.

Don't trip!

He's been tripping a LONG time now . . . that advice should have been given LONG ago.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[jmdlr 0]

Like the prop 8 ruling, the health care debate will probably hit the current USSC and the 5-4 conservative majority will strike it down as unconstitutional. If you want to lower health care cost then follow the Texas lead and limit frivolous law suits. The result, a double digit drop in cost the first year!

[JSBIRD 1]

Quote

.... clip ....
Driving is not a right. .... clip ....

I do not agree that your stament is correct, based on my research.

Yes, there is indeed a Right to Drive "safely".

"The streets belong to the public and are primarily for the use of the public in the ordinary way." — Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140 (1924) –
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/264/140.html#144

What is the "ordinary way" we use our public highways for personal travel today? Driving the automobile, of course. A hundred years ago, the "ordinary way" would have been the horse and buggy, and nobody would have even attempted to deny that Right. Yet, today, through deceptive court rulings, our Right of Locomotion ordinarily used for personal travel on our public highways is routinely being violated by every state.

And, in further support of our Right to Drive the ordinary Locomotion of the day on our public highways, there is the following court ruling. Note it’s use of the word "ordinarily", meaning the Right of Locomotion ordinarily used:

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any state is a right secured by the 14th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." – Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) –
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/179/270.html#274

And then, in very explicit terms, our Right to Drive Automobiles is recognized by this court:

"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky 731, 17 SW2d 1012, and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith 154 S.E. 579.

Driver Licensing is based on the presumption that we somehow owe it to society to demonstrate that we are unlikely harm any others in the process of Driving. But, the following court ruling clearly states that we inherently OWE NOTHING.

"[The Individual] owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." — Hale vs. Hinkel, 201 US 43, 74-75 –
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/201/43.html#74

Furthermore, Driver Licensing serves no purpose to highway safety that laws against endangerment didn’t already serve. Read more on this issue at: http://proffsl.110mb.com/driver_licensing.php
References :
Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140 (1924) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/264/140.html#144

Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) – http://laws.findlaw.com/us/179/270.html#274

359

"Now I've settled down,
in a quiet little town,
and forgot about everything"