Judge rules Obamacare unconstitutional, endangering coverage for 20 million

[Ridgerunner]

While I’m inclined to agree if one takes a radical view of it, relying on voluntary efforts including organizational ones has been widely untried for so long that I don’t think anybody can really say it’s so.

 

[dvdjs]

relying on voluntary efforts including organizational ones has been widely untried for so long that I don’t think anybody can really say it’s so

I suppose that that reality may be taken as a measure of our confidence in the relying on purely voluntary efforts.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I suppose that that reality may be taken as a measure of our confidence in the relying on purely voluntary efforts.

Maybe. But there is ideological opposition to that just as there is to things deemed “welfare”. And it can be observed that government often “farms out” its functions to organizations, charitable and otherwise, that can perform better than it can. Since we know that, the remaining question is whether contribution would fail if not coerced. One can speculate about that all day long.

In considering any of that, we are obliged as Catholics to consider subsidiarity. There are undoubtedly things that can be effectively dealt with only at higher levels of government.

 

[petra22]

Don’t the states have some responsibilities??? Or is the Federal Government going to take it ALL over??? Just wondering…

 

[Metis1]

Almost two years after taking power, where’s the Republican solutions that they kept on saying they were going to put forth? Where’s even their proposals? I’ve heard far louder crickets.

 

[ProVobis]

Seems the Republicans care more for the farmers and ranchers. There is no problem getting Democratic support for farm bills and government flood insurance. And the deficit increases.

 

[MonteRCMS]

Almost two years after taking power, where’s the Republican solutions that they kept on saying they were going to put forth? Where’s even their proposals? I’ve heard far louder crickets.

Unemployment has become extremely low and food stamp usage is becoming less necessary.

Manufacturing and mining jobs are up.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

How would you respond to critics of subsidiarity, or not so much subsidiarity itself but concerns that it may be code-word for a lack of governmental/public action for a social need that needs to be addressed? For example, I know you and I believe others are skeptical about enacting or implementing single-payer or developing some sort of a Medicare (or even Medicaid) for All) scheme but you do understand for some folks, those arguments can sound frustrating especially if let’s say they’re in difficult situations themselves regarding coverage? You may have an argument but you get why it could be frustrating for an uninsured person to read it right?

 

[MonteRCMS]

Allow free and open competition among insurors.

 

[DENNYINMI]

If it is gone by government, it is then by coercion. As such, it is not compassion. It is not charity. It is solely government power.
As long as we recognize this, then we simply return to the fact that government does not do it well, does not do it economically, will use it Un political ways, will deny coverage when the individual is deemed not worthy for any reason, such as cost, age, severity of condition, health habits, etc.

The above quote is an excellent example of viewing government as an affront/opposition to the people. O’ contraire.

Our constitution is almost a near perfect document.

Within it’s preambles we see the words “We the People”
in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Because of the political division we have moved away from the truth that our “government” is not the bad guy. Our government is “We the People”…which includes the vulnerable, the poor, and those in need as well.

If we’ve forgotten that, I would suggest we need to be reminded. The incessant rampages of the government as the bad guy is faulty.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There is, according to Genesis, an angel with a sword of flame guarding the gates of Eden. So, like it or not, we’re in this “Vale of Tears” for life, and cannot return to an earthly paradise.

People are frustrated by all sorts of things, and will be, no matter what we do to eliminate them.

I have yet to see a convincing argument that more proximate levels of organization cannot deal with at least many social welfare problems. On the contrary, and as I said, the federal government “farms out” a lot of what we think it does to private charities and business organizations. And there are functions the government does not perform at all. One example of that is LifeHouse here. It provides benefits and shelter to women at risk for abortion. It provides safety, education, job referral after the baby is born and, of course, medical care, food, clothing and a place to live. The government does not do that.

But we’re never going to eliminate all frustration for all people.

 

[MonteRCMS]

Hell has open borders.

GDP is about to record the first full year averaging 3% or better since 2005. Unemployment is very low, and job openings are at record levels. Early indications are that the Christmas season was a huge retailing improvement over last year.

But a Trump hating media suppresses any good economic news, and over stresses the bad.

 

[Metis1]

Which has nothing to do with what I posted, which was about the ACA and the fact that the Trump camp promised they’d replace it with something supposedly better, and yet two years later they haven’t done even squat.

So, let me suggest dealing with the question at hand instead of deflecting into something else.

 

[Metis1]

If we’ve forgotten that, I would suggest we need to be reminded. The incessant rampages of the government as the bad guy is faulty.

Exactly. In a constitutional republic based on democratic values, we are the government.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

I have yet to see a convincing argument that more proximate levels of organization cannot deal with at least many social welfare problems.

I think it’s not so much that the proximate levels cannot do it but won’t (concerns that people don’t give enough which have an arguable basis since a fair share of our people do seem to struggle). Another criticism I read online was how civil institutions like charity may provide a bandaid that serves as a remedy of some sort but it doesn’t address the core issues like “the system” or in society, I’m not 100% clear on it (I may be twisting it) but one argument I read compared it to Oscar Wilde’s quote on how the cruelest slave owners were the kindest because they are covering up or papering over an unjust system or set of affairs.

 

[Metis1]

But a Trump hating media suppresses any good economic news, and over stresses the bad.

Ya got any more stereotypes you want to disclose? Is the WSJ “Trump hating”, for example? Fox? How about people like Tillerson, Mattis, and Kelly and what they’ve said about Trump? or maybe Scarborough, Romney, and George Will, each whom have condemned Trump’s behavior?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Kind of a cynical view of charity, I would say. I would instead suggest that people are usually much better than the cynical views assert.

But lest one’s fear that nobody is charitable overwhelm him, I point out that more proximate levels of government also have the power to coerce. Even counties have that power and support a great number of things with it. People even vote support for tax increases when county (or city) government makes a good case for it. One of the problems with excessive centralism is that the more distant and powerful the governing body is, the less it tends to consult the public will about much of anything.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

I will admit, I may have not interpreted it right or clarified the quote so I could be “wrong.”

 

[DENNYINMI]

People even vote support for tax increases when county (or city) government makes a good case for it. One of the problems with excessive centralism is that the more distant and powerful the governing body is, the less it tends to consult the public will about much of anything.

Would this include the military industrial complex?

 

[Ridgerunner]

I acknowledged from the very first that there are some things the less proximate organizations do better. National defense against foreign aggressors is one of them.