patron saint of sociopaths
So that’s the argument that compels you to buy insurance? I’d say that doesn’t fit the interstate commerce definition that I know. And that argument came before the Supreme Court.Well, that's an original thought, if you take out the "original" and "thought" parts. By crikey, there are some people in America who never, ever needed any sort of health care what-so-frackin'-ever, and how dare we say that they might? Every day in America, there are babies who get born in a bucket, go to school in that bucket, and die 80 years later in that same bucket. Never need a dentist, never need none of them fancy-pants vaccines that keep dangerous contagions from using them as a bucket-bound disease vector. Sure, they may step on a nail and lose their foot or something, but dammit, that's why God gave everyone two. One's a spare. Oh, and you should have stayed in your damn bucket.
What i’ve said is that, in every decade, in every state, there have always been babies that were born, lived, and died, and some of them a long and healthy life, without ever using a dollar worth [sic] of health care expenditures. That would mean that they didn’t engage in interstate commerce with regard to health care.
I would really be interested in finding these people who, in the year 2012, live their entire star-spangled American lives without ever needing even one dollar for medical expenses. Really interested. I'm sure scientists and National Geographic would be, too. Why we should structure the entire national health care system on the supposition that those people exist, however, and that they can be absolutely guaranteed to not need health care at any point in the future, no less(!), is something only Mr. King can explain.