Response to Sovereign Citizens. (So called).
I'm a Citizen of the State of Florida and subject to the fictions that the federal congress creates as well as my State.
**When I bought property I accepted the State's protection of my land title and also accepted its subjugation..... "Subjugated”, to use a word of the sovereign movement, not mine.
I'm not inclined to be a sovereign. It's too expensive to raise an army to fight off the lazy interlopers or the tax men with guns and badges who have sworn fealty to the current legal fictions, to collect taxes on my fee simple title and who have sworn fealty to those same ideas and fictions created for us to protect our codified rights as humans..... And our property rights. Otherwise it's constantly dealing with the Interlopers and would be competitor extortionists who operate without a hint of due process nor rights protected by the law but by charisma and guns.
The age of warlords is over until a new age dawns; I choose law and order. I'm all for freedom and survival of the fittest when it comes to ingesting mind and mood altering chemicals. Legalizing everything would take a huge strain off of Law Enforcement, as well as increase the tax coffers to fix the 60 year old crumbling freeway system we all so much enjoy.
I hear the sarcasm about muh roads and how they can get built without the State but without the power of eminent domain the land could not be used without non guaranteed treaties between sovereigns to donate the land for the road to the public to use.
We have a bill of rights in this country. The problem isn't Government it's the fact that our voices are diluted by the fact that congress is capped.**
Another great, refreshing article. It's time to repair democracy!
@johnyliltoe What do you think about how to replace Obamacare? https://steemit.com/healthcare/@adconner/america-in-transition-pt-4
I'm Canadian, and I think I stand with most 1st world countries outside of America in my confusion over why so many Americans decry the evils of Single-Payer Healthcare.
I understand if it's a poor country. Sometimes these things are just simply not affordable. But in a country with such a high GDP per capita it seems hard to justify not adopting single-payer.
In general, with so much wealth getting caught in the Reagan trap and not circulating, just about anything that keeps money moving in your system is probably going to be a positive.
I would argue the best method is to go further than your suggestion. Privatized healthcare seems to necessarily exploit it's customers. They have a profit motivation, and either through higher prices or cutting corners they aim to maximize that profit. With a service so necessary they know their customers often can't say no. So allow medicaid coverage for all, with a zero-profit model, and if companies can manage to innovate to offer better prices or services that are worth paying extra then great! But since you're taxing people to cover the cost of expansion, everyone has that basic medicare if they want or need and at a much cheaper cost, since a single body now controls what is willing to be paid out to the hospitals. Hospitals which, as you mention, should be publicly owned as well.
That was my big problem with Obamacare. Expanding government healthcare subsidies but allowing private hospitals to still price gouge off of those subsidies was short sighted at best, a money grab due to lobbyists at worst.
It's the Insurance Company relief act not the ACA. Hahahahahaa.
@adconner
Nice writeup
Good job
Keep it up.