Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5597|London, England

Poseidon wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Poseidon wrote:


Yes, but who buys a car to drive it on private roads only?
Farmers.  People with a lot of land.

Even if you could draw a parallel between mandated health insurance and the auto insurance rules, there is a big difference:  auto insurance is largely meant to protect the other guy, not you.
But which is the more often?

I'm not saying they are exactly they same. They obviously aren't. And as I said, I do get that the auto insurance mandate is meant to protect possible victims of an accident. However, in basic terms - it is the government forcing you to get insurance. It's obviously for different reasons than with the health reform bill, but in the end the government is still forcing you to do something. And nobody's ever really had a problem with it.

And hell, I don't even really agree with the mandate with the health care reform bill. All I'm saying is this hubbub about how it's unconstitutional and everything else should be applied to the auto insurance mandate, but it isn't. For a reason.
The auto insurance mandate is done at the state level, not the federal. There is a vast difference between the two.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6369|North Tonawanda, NY

Poseidon wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Yes, but who buys a car to drive it on private roads only?
Farmers.  People with a lot of land.

Even if you could draw a parallel between mandated health insurance and the auto insurance rules, there is a big difference:  auto insurance is largely meant to protect the other guy, not you.
But which is the more often?

I'm not saying they are exactly they same. They obviously aren't. And as I said, I do get that the auto insurance mandate is meant to protect possible victims of an accident. However, in basic terms - it is the government forcing you to get insurance. It's obviously for different reasons than with the health reform bill, but in the end the government is still forcing you to do something. And nobody's ever really had a problem with it.

And hell, I don't even really agree with the mandate with the health care reform bill. All I'm saying is this hubbub about how it's unconstitutional and everything else should be applied to the auto insurance mandate, but it isn't. For a reason.
I edited my previous post to reflect the changes you made to yours, haha!

Say I get sick and die.  Does that fuck with your life?  No.  Say I'm driving and I drive right through your house on accident.  Does that fuck with your life?  Yea, it does.  That very difference is THE difference between the public's acceptance of the insurance rules.  I do NOT need to own that car or drive.  Sure, it's easier, but I don't need to, and if I don't then I don't need to buy insurance.  Health insurance is not the same kind of deal.  The government is mandating everyone get it, and it does not have any effect on anyone else.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6369|North Tonawanda, NY

JohnG@lt wrote:

The auto insurance mandate is done at the state level, not the federal. There is a vast difference between the two.
That too.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6871|949

SenorToenails wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:


really?  i find that odd tbh.  what is the reasoning behind that?
You need insurance AFTER you finance the vehicle, to protect the financed asset.  But for the initial finance, they do not require insurance.
As in, you don't need insurance to apply for financing?  That's the case here too...but at that point, it still belongs to the seller.
right.  I think you need to provide proof within 30 days or the financing company purchases it on your behalf and adds it to the loan amount.
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5937
a congressman was on his phone while everyone was applauding obama.

#rebel
_j5689_
Dreads & Bergers
+364|6955|Riva, MD
Shouldn't there be a new thread for this year's State of the Union and not one for a revived 2011 thread?
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

Nah
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5937
Yeah it's the same song and dance with these guys. No need for a new thread when it's the same thing.

gun control, rah rah rah, economy is better, rah rah rah, liberty and freedom for the rest of the world.

I went through the Cybersecurity executive order he issued today. Nothing special or groundbreaking.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

Did he suggest a free trade and development treaty with the EU?
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5937

Obama wrote:

Beyond 2014, America’s commitment to a unified and sovereign Afghanistan will endure, but the nature of our commitment will change. We are negotiating an agreement with the Afghan government that focuses on two missions: training and equipping Afghan forces so that the country does not again slip into chaos, and counter-terrorism efforts that allow us to pursue the remnants of al Qaeda and their affiliates.
Yes, with corrupt elections and working with drug kingpins.

Obama wrote:

Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 is a shadow of its former self. Different al Qaeda affiliates and extremist groups have emerged – from the Arabian Peninsula to Africa. The threat these groups pose is evolving. But to meet this threat, we don’t need to send tens of thousands of our sons and daughters abroad, or occupy other nations. Instead, we will need to help countries like Yemen, Libya, and Somalia provide for their own security, and help allies who take the fight to terrorists, as we have in Mali. And, where necessary, through a range of capabilities, we will continue to take direct action against those terrorists who pose the gravest threat to Americans.


We're going to keep dropping bombs and killing civilians and US citizens(without due process) and in turn create more terrorist.

What was that about terrorist in Mali? I thought they were freedom fighters when you were praising them for standing up to the Ghadaffi regime, arming and training them, and voted for a no fly zone?

Last edited by 13/f/taiwan (2013-02-12 19:44:31)

Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5597|London, England
al Qaeda is a shadow itself but we need to spend billions more to expand the military further...

Nevermind that every time he orders a drone strike that kills civilians he creates another blood feud for us to deal with... and that al Qaeda is actually expanding because of him...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5937

Macbeth wrote:

Did he suggest a free trade and development treaty with the EU?
Yup.

wrote:

I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/us/po … aucus&

It's on page 8, second paragraph, last sentence.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5597|London, England
As we print $85BN/mo in order to undermine the Euro and kill their exports...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5597|London, England
Man, if they did manage to tie the minimum wage to inflation it would actually cause an inflationary spiral... I hate stupid people.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5937
The White House is taking questions about the SOTU.

http://www.youtube.com/user/whitehouse/featured

Pick a section of the speech and submit your question

Last edited by 13/f/taiwan (2013-02-12 20:06:11)

Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6931
All that clapping... Biden's uncomfortable body language was fununcomfortable to watch.

Last edited by Superior Mind (2013-02-12 20:19:46)

Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

13/f/taiwan wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Did he suggest a free trade and development treaty with the EU?
Yup.

wrote:

I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/us/po … aucus&

It's on page 8, second paragraph, last sentence.
One step closer to the grand Western union. The W.U.
BVC
Member
+325|6934
Wouldn't it encourage use of illegal immigrant labour?

Last edited by BVC (2013-02-13 11:53:23)

Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

So?
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6391|what

What did you guys think of Rubio's response?
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5597|London, England
Rand Paul's response was much better.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

Did he mention his opposition to the civil rights act in the speech?
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5824

He looks like an alcoholic.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard