The private transit companies that didn't exist everywhere and only were affordable because they had free use of publicly subsidized thoroughfares.
It's all entwined.
Quote:
|
2) The requirement for car insurance is more about protecting the other drivers on the road.......protection for yourself is usually optional(at least it is in my state).
|
You could argue that the individual mandate is the same. You are free to decline all the medical treatment you want, but the rest of society is inoculated against a sudden change of heart when you get cancer and decide that maybe you'd really like treatment even if you can't afford it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Morrigoon
"Forcing" people to pay an extra amount every month, one that is not already being paid via deductions from people's paychecks (on a percentage basis, so it rises and falls with income - taxes), is going to cause hardship. And you can throw out all the arguments about responsibility and keeping up with bills that you want, but many Americans have difficulty with this, and will have difficulty with this. If we're creating something universal, let's just let it be through taxes and just plain old COVERED.
|
I'm not sure see any difference between what you say is a hardship in that first sentence and what is ok in the last sentence.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sleepyjeff
Are we wrong? Did we or did we not lose liberties today? Were our rights to our property expanded or contracted today? At what point would you say government has gone too far?
|
It's a difficult question and unless the goal is a Libertarian paradise not one where it is easy to draw the line. Is a truly Libertarian Paradise your preference? If so then we've reduced the discussion to the basic philosophical difference which can't be overcome.