Thread: Are We Incrementally Losing Our Freedom?

Recently, there have been several threads started concerning the Health Care Bill, (now law issue); the constitutionality of the methods, processes our representatives used to get it passed despite polled constituent majority opposition to the actual bill as written, (I will interject that opposition to this partial bill and the shenanigans to get it passed does not mean that those opposed to this particular bill are opposed to changes in health care to make it more efficient and better serving); and what are the real or possible effects of much of what is written, some would say hidden within this 2700 page document. In short, some would say and/or suggested that this particular bill does little to improve health care and that the real purpose was to pick a sympathetic subject, (health care), to garnish support to get legislation passed which by it’s contents, would take away certain t individual choice/freedom, and shift states rights, etc., to the federal government, which, is contrary to the constitution. Some would say, or suggest that this is why this document which was considered ridiculously large when it was 1100 pages, then 2400 pages and finally 2700 pages; to shroud it’s contents and make it a muddied mess that could be enacted before being interpreted, so to speak.

Additionally, the bill will increase the IRS already enormous power because it will monitor what kind of health insurance you have, define if that insurance does meet the requirement within the bill and then, if not, assess and collect fines or whatever the term.

There is talk of passing a ‘public option’ to let the current insurance companies go broke and then have a single payer…the fed. All of this infringes on personal freedom, and that is very troubling.

All of the above is not the reason for my question as there is much more going on in Washington.

There is supposedly a bill that has passed the house that gives the Secretary of the Treasury the power to take over any financial if he believes it is in danger of being insolvent; to where he can fire management, fire the board and sell all assets. Last year, the manner in which the administration dealt with/dictated to the financial institutions that had accepted stimulus funds caused some concern over the attitude of the administration and somewhat points to the measure suggested.

Finally, Cap and Trade would have great effect on manufacturing and utilities.

In short, what is left? I suppose the politically correct faction which seems to self define what can be said and written by institution as well as individuals regarding virtually anything cultural.

Is this an evolution away from individual choice and freedom to a system where political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life and all else is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed.

With no intention of being radical here or stirring things up, I am curious what others think of all this. If you comment, I would ask that you offer thoughts/facts and not criticisms of others of an opposing view. State or support your opinion.

It's way too soon to determine whether or not the health care bill is good or bad for our population as a whole. I was, and still am, in favor of a public option to compete against the private sector. Ideally I think that we shouldn't have to pay as much as we are currently, and that insurance companies shouldn't have so much discretion as to who they cover. Do not deny people with pre-existing conditions or drop them when they get sick.

Could you explain exactly what freedoms you're expecting to lose with this health care law?

I think when it comes to things like health care, it is just another facet of why we prefer to live in civilizated societies.

The government monitors the safety of our water, food, our electricity, our baseline education, etc etc etc...

They do this so that we don't have to spend all of our time worrying about basic survival, and we can instead dedicate our lives to pursuing what we desire to do, which not only serves to advance human discovery at a faster rate, but generally leads to a happier population.

Having public health care would just be one more way to make this easier to achieve.

Also, I have been to other countries with public health care, but they also had private insurance for people who wanted it. It was, generally, drastically cheaper than our insurance in the States (since they didn't have to pay for the uninsured), and it covered a variety of needs.

Also, in New Zealand, they had a very simple private system that seemed mostly focused on hooking you up with the right doctor in a shorter amount of time. The cost for that was probably less than a lot of people pay for their internet connection.

Public health care doesn't need to mean the end of private health care. What sort of private structure would you ideally like to have if the US went public? Perhaps this is stuff we need to make clear to the government we'd like to keep.

------

But what you've said about governmental power to run a private business from its internal structure is troubling to me.

I think their are 2 areas of governmental control. Their is basic survival needs, which I think every civilized government does or should try to take care of. And then there is individual advancement, which I think government should stay out of. Indeed, I think the reason government should cover basic needs is to allow us more time to dedicate to advancing ourselves, and human knowledge by proxy.

Can you possibly link me to this legislation? I'd like to read about it.

Interesting responses, exactly what I was hoping. Commiecat, I don't expect to lose anything and I don't mean that sarcastically, but, as I wrote, some of the methods used and some of what is written into the bill could have an affect on other areas of freedom...I will perhaps comment on that later, but, would like to leave the bulk of comment to others.

MistressNomad...that is pretty interesting with what you said about New Zealand...like I said, I think a lot of the opposition to the current bill by others isn't necessarily oppotion to change...just the right change...thank you both

Funny, when Bush passed policy to really curtail our liberties the party in power thought that was a good thing but now they think the health care bill will do that and are upset.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Funny, when Bush passed policy to really curtail our liberties the party in power thought that was a good thing but now they think the health care bill will do that and are upset.

PATRIOT act was good because of TERRORISTS! Health care law is bad because of POOR PEOPLE!

Although admittedly just about everybody not named Ron Paul voted for the PATRIOT act, and Obama extended it.

The only freedom you have is what the state allows you to have.

Good points, in reference to the Bush era laws that in part, could be viewed as infringing on individual rights...it is an example of how something that is presumably good, or created for a stated good can be adulterated/exploited by others for an entirely foreign cause/purpose. Much the same argument with H.C. a good cause/purpose, but, as written is there pre-conceived ill intent?

On the other point, the only right you have are those given by the state...not correct according to the constitution which states all rights are God given...the state's (federal) only purpose is to not infringe, but, protect those rights. As written, individual and state's rights supercede federal, as without the individual/states, federal wouldn't exist.

Thanks all...interesting and maybe with this type of discussion, we find we're not all that far apart

We are well aware that this is a DIVISIVE ISSUE.

SRP does not want to make it off limits, but that is up to everyone participating in the threads.

We will be watching all of the health care threads extra closely and will shut them down if need be.


Now then:
Please treat each other with respect and engage in this conversation with civility.


Thank you in advance.

-Rob

Today Fidel Castro, probably not the best spokesperson for individual freedoms, gave his stamp of approval to health-care reform in the US:

washingtonpost.com

Make of this what you will. Doesn't exactly give me the warm fuzzies.