States Acting Against Fed. Government!

Hmm, I think I found the problem here.

You don't see any benefit to a society with easier access to healthcare? It would be easier if every man were an island and his poor decisions only affected himself, but that is not the case.

Aside from that, it's just the *** decent thing to do.

idk where you live but in MD if you have a registered vehicle that has tags on it (which correct me if I'm wrong but all cars on the road need to be tagged by some state or you cant be on the road "anywhere" and there is a "fine/penalty" for doing so, I am fully aware that there are exceptions like work trucks on a farm, but it seems to me that the argument that you are making is more of a general one) and it is not insured the "penalty" is 2x what my insurance is.

Can you drive a car without it? Sure. Does it make sense to? I suppose that depends on the "penalty" vs cost of insurance.

Again this is only for MD. Id like to know if there is a state that does not fine you for having a registered and tagged vehicle that is not insured.

Not trying to say that im all about having insurance or agree with it at all but if they are going to fine you and the cost is less than the fine, id call that a "need".

Last I checked my health affected absolutely nobody but me.

Ahhh, So that's what this is about.

People want to not be held responsible and have someone else pay for everything. Heaven forbid a person be held accountable!

Obamacare does not make easier to access healthcare and it sure as hell don't make it more affordable! Why should I live a healthy life and have to pay for someone who decided to OD, abort a child, I could go on forever but ima stop right there.

I saw a documentary once where a man was told he couldn't drive without his license. He tried anyways, turned the key and the car started.

I think everyone was surprised by that.

http://conventionofstates.com/

http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/media-ignoring-nullification/

Kinda odd that the states are unprecedentedly standing up against such a wonderful president that only wants to help with his executive powers and pen.

So your health has no impact to your family or your friends? No impact to any children you have?

If you are sick with the flu, and head into work, you think that doesn't impact anyone else?

You don't think that having vaccinations (or not having them), affects the overall general health of a population?

You don't think that universal access to healthcare improves the overall level of health of that society?

So your health has no impact to your family or your friends? No impact to any children you have?

If you are sick with the flu, and head into work, you think that doesn't impact anyone else?

You don't think that having vaccinations (or not having them), affects the overall general health of a population?

You don't think that universal access to healthcare improves the overall level of health of that society?

Why the hell did I pay for your education?

Why the hell did I pay for your education?

I pay CASH for myself and my family, its amazingly affordable when you cut out the Middle men.

The states don't have power against Federal laws, Federal law will always trump states' rights, we've proven that, and it's sad that we're wasting time with the nonsense again.

There was no "power grab" short of when the area was added to the U.S. it became one of many.

There's a thing called the supremacy clause, you should read up on it.

Surprisingly enough, there is a growing trend with doctors who do not take insurance or Medicare now, and accept Cash/Checks only. Their services are actually cheaper that way, since they do not have to pay 10 administration staff and a monthly fee to support insurance.

So of course this is a bad thing to liberal's mind. Pretty soon, before Obama leaves office, there will be a doctor mandate to support insurance or his whole system goes crashing down. All in the name of supporting those who refuse to take care of themselves.

If the Convention happens and the majority vote is meet they can do pretty much anything they want. More people will stand with the states than our current federal government.

Why should I live a healthy life and have to pay for someone who decided to OD, abort a child, I could go on forever but ima stop right there.

You're delusional, and not they can't.

It would be considered treason, and they'd be executed.

You're sorely misinformed if you don't think you're already paying for people's irresponsibility as far as medical expenses are concerned (and you're an idiot if you think you pay for abortions). The practical thing to do is to not ignore that and look for ways to lessen that cost.

Does getting cancer or getting into an accident count or are you immune to those somehow? Go ahead and pay for those with cash.

The colonies rebelling against the crown was considered treason, look what that got us.

You're delusional, and not they can't.

It would be considered treason, and they'd be executed.

All you gotta do now is call me racist and we can wrap this up.

You've either had a private or public education, or some combination of both.
How is providing healthcare for all fundamentally any different from providing education for all?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to decide to OD and die before joining the workforce?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to drop out of high school/not complete their education?
Why should I pay for educating someone, who consistently earns marginal grades?

It may be because the society at large benefits greatly from such a policy in the long term, even though there may be little to no short-term benefits. The concept is often described as enlightened self-intrest.

You've either had a private or public education, or some combination of both.
How is providing healthcare for all fundamentally any different from providing education for all?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to decide to OD and die before joining the workforce?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to drop out of high school/not complete their education?
Why should I pay for educating someone, who consistently earns marginal grades?

It may be because the society at large benefits greatly from such a policy in the long term, even though there may be little to no short-term benefits. The concept is often described as enlightened self-intrest.

You've either had a private or public education, or some combination of both.
How is providing healthcare for all fundamentally any different from providing education for all?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to decide to OD and die before joining the workforce?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to drop out of high school/not complete their education?
Why should I pay for educating someone, who consistently earns marginal grades?

It may be because the society at large benefits greatly from such a policy in the long term, even though there may be little to no short-term benefits. The concept is often described as enlightened self-intrest.

You've either had a private or public education, or some combination of both.
How is providing healthcare for all fundamentally any different from providing education for all?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to decide to OD and die before joining the workforce?
Why should I pay for educating someone, when they are going to drop out of high school/not complete their education?
Why should I pay for educating someone, who consistently earns marginal grades?

It may be because the society at large benefits greatly from such a policy in the long term, even though there may be little to no short-term benefits. The concept is often described as enlightened self-intrest.

Did you go to public or private school?

If a civil war breaks loose, I call dibs on Jet and Jassik! Maybe Vic too if nobody wants him.