View Single Post
Dec13-10, 02:41 PM
P: 18
Quote Quote by turbo-1 View Post
Redistribution of financial risk by the uninsured is not a small thing. My uncle was very badly injured by an uninsured driver several years ago and had to undergo extensive and expensive surgeries. He can hobble around now without crutches, but it is always in pain, and it affects his ability to conduct his business (HVAC). Since he is self-employed he had limited resources while he was under treatment. It takes years to get any kind of disability claim processed through SSDI, so by the time he managed to get any financial help from them, they owed him back-payments. When his doctor released him to go back to work with some restrictions, SSDI contacted him and told him that he must pay back the entire sum of the back-payments. Now he'll be tied up in appeals, paying lawyers and expert witnesses to avoid being victimized yet again.
I understand your arguments turbo-1, but just because one can make an argument that everyone should buy health insurance doesn't mean the government has the actual power to force people to.

That's why the Constitution includes the amendment process. There have been multiple times in this nation's history where the Constitution was found to be wrong or in need of some additions or in need of a change or upgrade, which is why we can amend it.

The Constitution exists to limit the powers of the Federal government. It says the Federal government can only do this, this, and that, with some broad interpretations here and there, not that the Federal government can do whatever it wants with a few minor exceptions.

Just because one sees a law or policy as reasonable doesn't mean it is constitutional. The inverse also is true: just because something was constitutional didn't mean it was reasonable (or morally right).