What parts of your life do you think should be free of government regulation?
Posted at 5:00 AM on November 9, 2011
by Eric Ringham
(32 Comments)
Filed under: Health, Politics/Government
An appeals court on Tuesday upheld the constitutionality of the federal health care law due to take effect in 2014. The court found that the government could require Americans to buy health insurance, holding that "the right to be free from federal regulation is not absolute." Today's Question: What parts of your life do you think should be free of government regulation?
Comments (32)
It sounds a bit paranoid and delusional to equate the Emergency Broadcast System with a dictatorial seizure of media by a tyrant, don't you think, kimMN?
Why are we so blind not to see the latest government intrusion and control by the FCC?
If government didn't limit our health care insurance choices by refusing open competition across states for the past decades then we wouldn't even need Obama Care Insurance Reform act to tell us which companies we can buy from. When those policies are too expensive, we will be forced to do the government's choice. ( we do allow open competition for car insurance and it works well! so why not the same with health insurance???)
Most sane people are also against regulation that controls the air waves and the internet yet today they did a forced automatic control of all media..just like the dictator in Egypt did during their uprising! They called it a test of the Emergency broadcast system but this time it was done automatically on all stations. Total take over of the media was successful all without any private stations controlling the access.
The U.S. Senate on Thursday is set to vote on a Republican backed resolution that would REPEAL the rules passed by the Federal Communications Commission last December that allow our government to set rules for the Internet that really is similar to the way they exercise control over the broadcast airwaves.
On Tuesday, President Barack Obama promised to veto the resolution, which has already passed the House of Representatives, if the Senate passes this nonsense. More control takes your freedom away, one step at a time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4ZdbiSLnv4&feature=player_embedded
At least generally speaking, I want the federal (and state, and local) governments out of the parts of my life that have no baring to the economy or the government, but I am willing to tolerate intervention that is necessary for my and my fellow citizens' needs.
As a recent college grad with a very low income, my need for healthcare outweighs my "right" to choose whether or not I have coverage. I don't like the government telling me I need healthcare, but healthcare is a need I have. The private sector doesn 't offer healthcare coverage I can afford, so I have to get it through the only means I have- the government. If the Minnesota government wasn't able/willing to have a healthcare program, I couldn't afford insurance. I understand, then, that I have given up my "right" to choose whether or not the government is involved in that part of my life.
What I believe should have NO government regulation in my life is:
Free "speech": Music, Art, Literature
Whether or not to have children
Whether or not to marry, and who I marry
What career I am in
My access to communications services (look at what China wants to do to internet access...)
What I wear, and what I put in or do with my body
What religion I am, or whether I have a religion
What I believe should have LIMITED government regulation:
Firearms Ownership (it should only be regulated to the point it is now, maybe with less automatic weapons)
There's a lot of individual rights and freedoms that I didn't mention that are in the constitution, but those rights aren't really up for debate.
I think there is a lot of emphasis on the individual in this country, and in some ways, such as the constitution and the bill of rights, it's very good and important. In other ways though, the emphasis on the individual puts the good of the community and the good of the society in a very deep shadow. Sometimes, in order to make sure that everyone is treated fairly, even if that means I, individually, will have to give up a luxury or an advantage. Forcing people to have healthcare doesn't exactly seem like the most effective policy for me, but if that means that in 40 years when I need surgery or help with a heart condition that I will be protected from the current meat grinder of the health insurance industry, I will take it.
Personal freedom is extremely important. Government should not infringe on the ability of people to live their personal lives as they please, as long as their actions don’t violate the rights of others.
However, we are no longer hunter/gatherers living as a clan or family group. We can’t live without dependence on our neighbors near and far. And we benefit from that dependence.
Only government, funded by the people, can provide and regulate the infrastructure required to live our dependent lives. That infrastructure includes not only things like roads, sewers, watermains, military defense, and local police, which are not profit making enterprises, but also health care.
It’s appropriate to have taxpayer funded, government regulated, and privately provided healthcare as part of our basic infrastructure.
To those who post frequently, take some heat, and then think changing their alias will change how you are perceived or think this "new" voise will offer another supporter for your cause: your writing style, word choice and grammar or lack of grammar are as distinct as your finger print. Very simple traffic analysis exposes you.
Regulations affect everything we do and every job. The EPA takes months to approve a new label for processed foods, meanwhile production is cut, people laid off. Regulations beyond safety issues are not mandated in the Constitution.
As Senator Toumey stated, "President Obama inherited a weak economy, but by nearly every measure, he has made the economy worse. Over two years ago, his administration told us that passing his $787 billion stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8 percent.
Instead, since the stimulus was enacted, our economy has lost more than 1.3 million jobs and the unemployment rate has averaged over 9 percent.
Today, fewer people are working; gas prices are higher; home values are lower; wages are weaker; health care is MORE expensive; taxes are heading higher and our federal deficits are much larger than when President Obama took office.
Clearly, the policies of this administration are not working. "
76% of polled Americans still agree that Obama's policies are failed. His EPA regulations have added over $10 billion to costs to business. North Dakota has to sue us , MN, to provide us electricity because Obama's regulations mandated such nonsense.
If you like this regulation then post back in January when you see your heating and electric bills skyrocket. The rich won't be hurt in their homes but their business will have higher costs and costs are passed along to consumers.
Corporations do not pay taxes as they pass the cost along to consumers. Share holders who risk their own earned money are the ones to lose with smaller dividends. Raising taxes to build stimulus paid for swimming pools and dog parks, billions loaned to foreign countries banks and billions given away to Brazil for deep water oil drilling all as Soros cashes in with his large holdings in Petrobra Oil...so yes_ a regulation calling for honesty and transparency in how government sneaks behind our backs to reward their campaign friends is needed.
Thank god the government doesn't tax corporations justly. Afterall, using Target Corporation as an example, it is much more fun and ego stoking to be in the high ranks of such a corporation where we are recognized for our generosity towards the Arts rather than just being a nobody and shelling out our fair and just percent of taxation.
People adore us for our generosity they just haven't realized that we don't pay squat in taxes.
We need o be free of any responsibilities if Obama can be so free.
2009: speech
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: As part of the reforms we are announcing today, top executives at firms receiving extraordinary help from U.S. taxpayers will have their compensation capped at $500,000 — a fraction of the salaries that have been reported recently."
2011: this week, Fannie Mae execs are awarded in excess of one million dollars each for essentially failing to fix the industry they run. They are asking us to give them another 6 billion at the same time. The government put Fannie into government receivership in 2008, controlling it with their appointees at a salary each of $900,000.00
Maybe we need regulations to demand the White House is held accountable for Fannie mae failing, for ATF leaders and Eric Holder failing with guns across the border, failing with not protecting the border as last week's news of cartels killing others in a Texas border city, failing to "invest tax dollars wisely in bankrupt green energy companies that had ties to big campaign contributors to Obama's election and we need regulations to demand the media does not selectively ignore stories of those they support. The last three years has shown us all that it is business as usual and big business is still in bed with some in Congress and in the White House. And the radicals of the 60's are beside Obama..see the list of Obama advisers and decide for yourself.
OWS is not demanding Obama apologize for demeaning Netanyahu at the G20.
All of it!. The Federal Government has no place in our lives. State and local governments are all we need personal involvement in our lives.
Government spending is the main problem throughout the world.
We don't have a chance.
I'm pulling all of my money out of WF by the end of this week and putting it in my credit union.
It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.
We should be free from federal regulation in every area that is not specifically enumerated in the constitution. The states may choose to do otherwise. This is clearly not an area of federal authority enumerated in the constitution.
“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” ~Thomas Jefferson
And as I said a month ago in this forum - Amendment X to the US Constitution (that would be the one at the end of The Bill of Rights) - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people."
I think it helps to keep honest people honest. It also provides an outlet for those who get scammed.
The gov shouldn't be a part of my life at all. But it should be involved in all aspects of everyone else's life. As long as it doesn't cost me anything.
The biggest threat to individual freedom in America is not the government. In some countries it is, but not here. Here we have a system in which money is freedom. Without money, you have no freedom. With lots of money, you have lots of freedom and lots of power to reduce other's freedom for your own benefit. If you think maximum freedom is to be found in a jungle-rules economy, you are quite mistaken, unless you're one of the predators who manages to hoard a huge pile for yourself. Some intelligent regulation of the economy and some minimal redistribution of hoarded wealth is necessary to ensure that everyone enjoys some freedom.
What a selfish question with so many selfish answers. It is the unflinching truth that our actions have consequences, both for ourselves and neighbors. No person is an island and we need to look beyond what we want, what we have a 'right' to, and see the whole picture.
I think the constitution has it right. Seperation of Church and State. Other than that there are reasons behind government regulations weather we agree with them or not.
The parts of Americans lives that I do not want government to regulate are:
1. what we choose to do with our bodies.
2. our religion as well as atheism.
3. our privacy.
4. our writ of habeas corpus
The cops (a branch of government) needs to stop being dupes and shills for their bosses (elected officials), who in turn need to stop being dupes and shills for their true bosses, the plutocratic regime. The cops need to stop infringing on peaceful protester's 1st amendment rights. The electorate needs to stop selling the low and middle class down the river for the gain the the 1%. When you infringe on one person's liberty you infringe on everyone's.
Recommended reading – Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness, by Thaler and Sunstein. The book has several examples of how to improve an individual’s choices without resorting to excessive regulation. Also, has several examples of the unintended consequences of well-intentioned regulations. Read before judging whether we have too much or too little government.
Reminds me of an Army joke. What's the difference between the US Army and Boy Scouts? The Boy Scouts have adult supervision.
Okay, that said, I am an adult and can manage myself just fine. I don't care if you hate the mean, out of touch far right OR the elitist, clueless far left, just leave me alone!
Welll the big # 1 DONT regulate ME ... But darn sure better be a way that I CAN extract a pound of flesh from someone else that does ME wrong. Oh ... and protect ME for other people who come after me when I screw up ... Yeah....that would work.
You need two i's to spell Libertarian - but not to be one.
All the things "TooLiberalForYa" said plus a couple more.
Most importantly, I should be allowed to turn left at a green light if there is no oncoming traffic. Red arrows should be banned! :-)
Who consenting adults want to marry.
The gov't has no business telling me not to engage in the recreational use of marijuana. That is a choice I make which affects only me, and is in no way detrimental to the health and safety of other people. The gov't exists to protect people from other people, and not from their individual selves. Going so far as to make laws which inhibit the individual choice to put oneself in danger is a clear-cut case of the gov't overstepping it's limitations. If marijuana is going to remain illegal, then we should also make illegal other hazardous and dangerous activities that can self-inflict injuries such as bungee jumping, skydiving, and the eating of junk food.
"It's going to take more than four years to fix the eight years that former President George W. Bush foisted upon us."
That should be, the 28 years of Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush Jr., all of whom did their part to undo the New Deal and leave America with a jungle-rules economy where a few prosper while most struggle.
I personally don't need a babysitter - do any of you?
I am not a child, therefore what I choose to do with my body should be my decision.
Examples: Drinking, smoking, abortion, sex for money, homosexual sex, dying MY way, drugs and etc. etc.
Now I can easily say that most of these things I will choose to never partake in - But, if I became very ill, I would want a choice in how I die, I would want a choice in how I medicate myself, and I truly believe that as adults - all of us should be able to decide how we live our lives without religion or corporations (Government) dictating what we do.
I understand this is far fetched and will never be the case, not in my lifetime anyway - both sides of the isle are too busy playing tug of war to actually get much done, let alone worry about the freedoms of the people.
As to the topic of health insurance - I have a hard time with the requirement to purchase. I'm more of the mind that everyone should have mostly free access to healthcare. Why mostly? Well, if you want that fancy non-generic new knee or golden drug - have at it.
Short answer: the parts that don't affect anyone else.
The supreme irony of this move by conservatives to get the health insurance mandate declared unconstitutional is that if it succeeds it will be easier to get single-payer passed, because no one seriously disputes Congress' authority to create a government program and levy a tax to pay for it. The mandate was originally a Republican idea designed to preserve the private health insurance industry.
kimMN: It's going to take more than four years to fix the eight years that former President George W. Bush foisted upon us
Government has no business regulating collective bargaining rights. If Federal, State and County workers negotiate in good faith with these entities, it is a mutual agreement that is the result of these process's. If an entity would like to amend or renegotiate some aspect of the contracts then do so with the parties and not with a decree.
If the government followed our Republic's Constitution we would not see Ohio having to even address the Obama care act. But they did and voted YES to be excluded from Obama-Pelosi's rammed through Health Insurance reform act. Since 2008, according to the gov's own records, government mandated regulations have increased over 40%. and our debt grew by 4 trillion. Are we really better off with more regulations? Unemployment and under employed rates are over 20% combined...and the gov spent how many billions in stimulus money for what result?
Though I do not believe the GOP candidates or the far right radical republicans understand the impact of their proposals on the economy and our personal freedoms, this question is quite simple. Keep government out of my bedroom and quit legislating drug wars. If you want the federal government taking from the middle class and continuing to give corporate welfare to industry and tax cuts to the wealthy. I would have to assume you are one of the many that benefit from crony capitalism with it's twin, socialized capitalism.
Though I do not believe Obama or the far left radical democrats understand the impact of their laws on the economy and our personal freedoms, this questions is far to broad to answer. As always, it will depend on your personal political views. If you want the federal government managing all aspects of your life than I assume you are a wagon riding freeloader living off the hard work of others in society.
| November 2011 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock