Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care....
Edwards said his mandatory health care plan would cover preventive, chronic and long-term health care. The plan would include mental health care as well as dental and vision coverage for all Americans."The whole idea is a continuum of care, basically from birth to death," he said.
I'm not sure how exactly to describe the sick feeling in my stomach that this gives me. Words like "appalling," "nauseating," and "repulsive" just don't seem to cut it.
More importantly, let's look at who the government looters will steal from in order to fund this monstrosity.
Edwards said his plan would cost up to $120 billion a year, a cost he proposes covering by ending President Bush's tax cuts to people who make more than $200,000 per year.By what right can the government loot this money from our best, most productive citizens? By what right? I have very little doubt that mandatory doctor visits would save lives. There are plenty of people in our country that are too afraid to confront a medical problem which later becomes fatal. Also, there are people in unfortunate circumstances who cannot afford healthcare. But those reasons do not justify the chaining and looting of our most productive citizens by gunpoint.
You can damn well guarantee that I will not be voting for John Edwards in 2008. You should not either. Is anyone as outraged about this as I am?
3 comments:
"By what right can the government loot this money from our best, most productive citizens? By what right?"
By Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which states "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" and the 16th Amendment, which gives Congress the power to collect income tax.
On a historical note, the current maximum income tax rate is 35%. Historically, this rate has been as high as 91%, and for decades was at 70%. The Edwards proposal raises the current level just 4%, to 39%. Yet even this number is misleading, as the long term capital gains tax is currently at 15%, meaning the actual tax rate for many of these individuals is below their nominal tax rate. While you may believe even this is too high, it hardly qualifies as "looting."
That's an incredibly specious argument. So as long as we get some people together and elect a few "representatives" we can pass a law that criminalizes theft by individuals but sanctions theft by state?
1% income tax is looting and theft as far as I am concerned, let alone the perverse sum of 39%.
How about censorship if we got enough elected officials to go for an amendment to the Constitution? Better yet, wouldn't it be prudent to get rid of some undesirables in this country? If it's for the greater good, and we get enough people to go for it, why not?
Do you think that rights are conferred by government onto the people by means of the Constitution? Are such "rights" even rights, or mere privileges?
"So as long as we get some people together and elect a few "representatives" we can pass a law that criminalizes theft by individuals but sanctions theft by state?"
Yes.
"1% income tax is looting and theft as far as I am concerned, let alone the perverse sum of 39%."
Your original statement implied that government has no right to tax income. I clearly demonstrated that it does. Your opinion may be that this is an awful idea, but that does not change the fact the government has this power.
"How about censorship if we got enough elected officials to go for an amendment to the Constitution? Better yet, wouldn't it be prudent to get rid of some undesirables in this country? If it's for the greater good, and we get enough people to go for it, why not?"
These are strawman arguments. I never suggested either of these things.
"Do you think that rights are conferred by government onto the people by means of the Constitution?"
In this country, yes.
"Are such "rights" even rights, or mere privileges?"
Depends on your interpretation of the word "right."
Post a Comment