How about Forced Medical Insurance?

Message boards : Politics : How about Forced Medical Insurance?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Robert Waite
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 07
Posts: 2417
Credit: 18,192,122
RAC: 59
Canada
Message 958439 - Posted: 24 Dec 2009, 5:32:07 UTC - in response to Message 958386.  

I believe you are under the mistaken assumption that the health care plan being passed by the US Senate tomorrow is a single payer plan. It isn't. I believe rebest knows this.


Make no mistake,I'm aware of the piece of crap this bill has become and I am pissed at your congress, senate, corporate lobbyists and your president over this sell-out to the insurers.
I just read your response as some sort of put down to those wanting coverage.
If I'm wrong, I apologize.
I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.
ID: 958439 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 29654
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 958444 - Posted: 24 Dec 2009, 5:51:33 UTC - in response to Message 958439.  

I just read your response as some sort of put down to those wanting coverage.
If I'm wrong, I apologize.

It was a put down of this bill so I can understand your confusion.

ID: 958444 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 958504 - Posted: 24 Dec 2009, 14:39:57 UTC

I work with morons here in Texas(taxes). They seem to think that under a universal health care plan
A) Employers won't hire people. they couldnt explain it but they were sure employers wouldnt hire people.
B) We'd be paying for the unemployed and welfare folks. Ummmm yeah you already are. Every paycheck you pay taxes and part of the taxes goes to hospitals that see indigent and uninsured people in the ER. This is a very expensive means of health coverage. since seeing a Dr. in his office would cost a fraction of the ER visit.
C) Drs. offices will become inundated with new patients. Sooo? The US has a shortage of general practicioners. WHy you ask? because specialty medicine is where the money is. I'd have to assume that some form of specialty limits would have to be set. Perhaps only the top 1/3 or 1/2 of a Med school class can spcialize the rest get to be GP's
D) It'll cost to much. It already does. I pay to much for the ever dwindling coverage my company can negotiate out of BLue Cross.
E) Its Socialized Medicine. So is medicaid, meidicare, and chips. so SHUT UP.
F) Thats not part of a capitalistic plan. Ok heres the numbers 1/6 of the US economy, economy being corporate earnings, is health care insurance. When I think of Economics and capitalism I think that workers are making product and the owners making a profit from their work. This doesnt happen with Insurance. Insurance is me handing money to a company and hoping that I don't have to use the Insurance. THe company then takes my money and invests it in stocks, bonds, and other lucrative ventures. This isnt capitalism at all. This is the raping of the average Joe. It's insulting to think that Insurance companies can rake in so much money then turn around and claim they need to raise our rates because they aren't making enough money.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 958504 · Report as offensive
Profile Albireo380

Send message
Joined: 21 Mar 08
Posts: 119
Credit: 1,570,025
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 958587 - Posted: 24 Dec 2009, 21:00:31 UTC

Wow, confusing thread this for a Brit. Over here we pay huge taxes, but do receive reasonable health care from cradle to grave - it varies from area to area, but here in Central Scotland my GP has given me excellent service over the years and when I had an MI 7 years ago I had excellent specialist staff looking after me (luckily no clinical sequelae) and still run 10Km in under an hour fairly regularly : ). So the National Health Service has always been good for me. A lot of folk abuse the NHS, but that is Human nature.

I will keep reading this thread with interest as I hope to learn a bit more of the system in the USA.

Have a good Christmas.

Tom
ID: 958587 · Report as offensive
Niko

Send message
Joined: 14 Dec 09
Posts: 123
Credit: 70,041
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 958597 - Posted: 24 Dec 2009, 21:38:06 UTC - in response to Message 958587.  
Last modified: 24 Dec 2009, 21:40:44 UTC

Wow, confusing thread this for a Brit. Over here we pay huge taxes, but do receive reasonable health care from cradle to grave - it varies from area to area, but here in Central Scotland my GP has given me excellent service over the years and when I had an MI 7 years ago I had excellent specialist staff looking after me (luckily no clinical sequelae) and still run 10Km in under an hour fairly regularly : ). So the National Health Service has always been good for me. A lot of folk abuse the NHS, but that is Human nature.

I will keep reading this thread with interest as I hope to learn a bit more of the system in the USA.

Have a good Christmas.

Tom


Tom, a lot of my USA friends have medical insurance through work, but something like 46 million don't. If you mention the state-run National Health systems that we have in Canada and Great Britain, there is this genuine fear about their country going in a Socialist direction.

My brother lives in Texas and is self-employed. He pays over 900/month to insure his entire family.

Great time on that 10K considering your age :-) I'm a miler < 5.25 minutes ...

Cheers!
ID: 958597 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959192 - Posted: 29 Dec 2009, 7:04:17 UTC - in response to Message 958381.  

In my last post to this thread, I said I would touch on what the problem is with health care here in the USA (and to varying degrees, worldwide). But, before I do, I would like to comment on a few posts since then.

I'm not sure what Gary is trying to say about your very legitimate question rebest.
What do American citizens do when they have lost their job and their healthcare package?
I suppose they will have to pay the $200,000 hospital bill by dipping into their spare change.

Under the Universal Single Payer plan, such as we have in Canada, there would be no loss of coverage when a job is lost. No one will lose their home due to a bankruptcy caused by medical expenses in this country. NO ONE.

That isn't a herd mentality. It's a civil society that takes care of it's citizens when they need help the most.



I just faced a similar situation. Shortly after my 1st son was born in May 2008, my wife got a nice teaching position in a school district in rural central Texas. So, we moved down there from the Dallas - Fort Worth area. Well, she lost the position (and the somewhat expensive health insurance) at the end of the school year (the person she replaced wanted to come back, and well... small town politics and all...). Well, we were expecting another baby (and I have this sneaky suspicion -- totally unprovable, of course -- that this was also a factor in her contract not getting renewed). Thankfully, my house up here in D/FW had not sold, so we moved back in August (at least for the time being until we can get employement again). CORBA (insurance continuing between jobs) was not an option for us; CORBA would have run around US$1000.00 / month -- money we didn't have to spare.

Well, my 2nd son was born in early October. Medicaid picked up the tab. It was a C-section, and there were complications which required about an hour of extra surgery for my wife, but everyone is doing fine now. We received excellent care in the hospital (a for-profit one, by the way) and during the follow-up doctor's visits -- better, in fact, than what we received during my 1st son's birth, and we had insurance then. If, on the odd chance Medicaid had denied us, the hospital had a charity program that would have picked up the tab. FYI, it is against the law (at least here in Texas) for most, if not all, hospitals to turn you away and refuse to provide care based on your ability to pay.

As far as it goes, the system works. I see no reason to go to a national system such as Canada or Britain has. Additional bureaucracy for no additional benefit. Just a jobs program for bureaucrats.
ID: 959192 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959195 - Posted: 29 Dec 2009, 7:20:55 UTC - in response to Message 958416.  
Last modified: 29 Dec 2009, 7:23:39 UTC

I believe you are under the mistaken assumption that the health care plan being passed by the US Senate tomorrow is a single payer plan. It isn't. I believe rebest knows this.


Quite right. If you look lower in the thread, you'll see my impression of the Senate Plan. It's crap, to put it nicely.

So the choices are 1) we do nothing, accept the status quo, and wait another 30 years to try again; or 2) we pass the proposed plan - lame as it is - and spend the next 15 years fixing it.

At least the proposed plan eliminates exclusions for existing conditions and prohibits insurance companies from dropping people when they get sick.

The first US President to call for a health care reform was Roosevelt. Not Franklin, by the way. Teddy. We've been diddling with this for 100 years.


Yeah... right. There is already a law on the books about being excluded for pre-existing conditions. Dubya (Bush the Younger) signed it into law. The insurance companies found ways around it, just like they will with this one, and just like they will with being prohibited from dropping you when you get sick.

Think about it... Your homeowners insurance will likely drop you if you file a claim, your automobile insurance will likely drop you if you get too many accidents and/or tickets, etc. Why do you expect health insurance to be different?

Oh, and we do agree on the Senate bill being crap... So is the House bill, and yes, I have read huge parts of both. Total pile of crap that won't do a dang thing except employ more bureaucrats.

You left out a choice... 3) kill the current bills in the House and Senate, and do something about the *REAL* problem with health care (which the bills in question will make worse, big-time...).
ID: 959195 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959227 - Posted: 29 Dec 2009, 10:13:00 UTC

OK, now for the *REAL* problem with health care in the USA (and to a lesser extent, the rest of the world).

The problem is not that so many people are uninsured. The problem is that health care is not affordable anymore.

When I was a small child, I had to have surgery. Everything (the Doctor, the Surgeon, the Anesthesiologist, the hospital stay... everything) came to about US$300.00. The average family income back then was about US$12000.00 per year. So, my surgery cost about 2.5% of the average family yearly income back then.

Back in July 2008, my older son had to get his 2 month vaccinations. His pediatrician billed around $1,400.00. For just 5 fsckin vaccinations (4 injections and one oral)!! After seeing *that* bill, I quickly discovered the miracle of the county health department. In 2007, per the US Census department, the average family income was US$50,233.00. So, just my son's 2-month shots came out to about 2.8% of the average family yearly income.

You see what is wrong with the situation?

Health care is not affordable any more. Why? Well, here are the reasons.

1. Health Insurance: When I was a small child, very few people had health insurance. The doctor had to look the patient in the eye and tell them "Ok, I think I can cure you, but it will cost $x.xx..." Not so anymore. Now, they just fill out a form, and send it away to someone else. No longer is there a psychological factor in holding down costs. It's just "Who cares what I charge, the patient won't have to come up with the money themselves..."

2. Doctors/hospitals/etc's excessive greed: Back then, one didn't go into medicine to 'get rich'. You went into medicine to help people and make a difference in your community. Hospitals were mostly either city/county run, or were run by private charities or religious organizations. Now, people go into medicine to make lots of money, and most of the hospitals are for-profit.

3. Government over-regulation: While some small amount of government regulation of health care is likely a good thing, health care has now been regulated almost to death. Many hospitals today have more administrators on staff whose job it is to massage the mountains of paperwork the government requires than they have patient beds. With the exception of giving these non-productive bureaucrats a job, just HOW is this a good thing?

4. Lawsuits & Lawyers: L&L... Even scarier than D&D, because L&L is *real*! Bahhh... A number of years ago, I knew an OB/GYN in Dallas. He told me that he was in a bind. It seems that Medicaid would only pay just so much for a delivery, and that his malpractice insurance premiums were so high that the small amount of money left over wouldn't cover his expenses. He was an older doctor therefore he wasn't as profit-motivated as many of his peers (almost all of whom had stopped taking Medicaid patients for this reason), but he was still worried that he might have to stop as well. But, he didn't want to do so because he cared about them.

People are just too lawsuit-happy nowadays. They see it as 'free money', and many will sue at the drop of a hat. Medicine is not perfect, and quite likely never will be. A doctor can do everything right, and still fail to help (or worse, lose) the patient. These days, a doctor has to practice 'defensive medicine' to help stave off the inevitable malpractice lawsuits. That is, they have to order every test in the book that is even slightly related, even though they had it figured out after the first couple of tests. This, alone, wastes tremendous amounts of money.

Its simple. Get rid of medical malpractice lawsuits (and drug/medical product liability suits while we are at it). We would save a boatload of money, though I imagine that lawyers, the insurance industry, and certain people who look at lawsuits like they would the lottery would be most displeased.

5. Federal Govt. healthcare programs: As private health insurance was making inroads into the population in the mid 1960's, the Fed. Govt. created medicare for the elderly. Combined with private health insurance, Medicare is responsible for a lot of the vast, ugly inflation in health care costs since the mid-1960's. Maybe even more so, since at least in the early days of the program the Govt. was more willing to pay the higher claims than private insurance (with its profit motivation) was. And for anyone that actually *wants* the Federal Government to run health care in the USA, might I suggest that you take a look at a health care program that they already do run.. The VA hospitals. The VA hospitals provide some of the most (forgive the slight naughty language) piss-poor health care on the planet. The US Federal Government runs that system to provide our military veterans the health care they were promised in exchange for service to our country, and it is a total 100% National Disgrace. Enough said. You really want the Federal Govt. running YOUR health care (for those of you that are US Citizens)? If you think you do now, please go visit your local VA hospital, and talk to some of the Veterans there. If that doesn't change your mind, you need a nice long stay in a rubber room with a coat that ties in the back, cause you are nuts.

6. So-called 'intellectual property' laws aka. the March of Progress: This one is a real kicker. Another HUGE reason health care costs have become unaffordable without insurance is all the new fancy machines, gizmos, devices, and wonder-drugs. Do we live longer now, compared to back when I was a kid? Well, the average life expectancy is a little longer now compared to back then, but how much of it is due to all the fancy new stuff? And how much is due to better preventative care, better health awareness, and better discouragement of undesirable health habits (smoking, obesity, etc.)?

Granted, the new stuff has helped some. Most people would like to continue to improve things. However we need to take a good long look at the way this progress is funded.

To give a personal example, I was severely ill a few years ago. One of the medications I was taking (an antibiotic) cost US$8.00 a pill... wholesale... in lots of 1000. Well, I had to pay retail for it, so it was considerably higher. And I had to take 2 every 4 hours for 2 weeks. It worked out to over US$2500.00. Well, it was a NEW antibiotic, so because of patents there was no generic available. A drug company in India had 'ripped off' the US drug company and started producing this medicine without a patent license for much less. If I could have gotten the Indian version, it would have only been around US$200.00.

The US drug companies justify charging such huge fees for their products saying that they have to do a LOT of research and spend a LOT of money just to bring one new drug to the market, which is true. The way the system is set up currently, they have to do this. The US drug companies are kinda forced to extortion of the US population to fund research into yet newer ways to extort money from the US citizens (and hopefully improve their health a little bit.. maybe.. kinda-sorta...).

We need a NEW system to fund medical research. If you want the US Govt. to get involved in health care, how about on this? The US Govt. would hire researchers to develop new medicines instead of letting the drug companies do it. When one of the new drugs is demonstrated to be of real benefit, it goes to market. Since the US taxpayer funded the research, the US Govt. controls the patent, which it would then freely license to all drug companies worldwide to make and sell (at a *reasonable* profit, of course... not the current monopoly price gouging that is going on).

A similar scheme would work on medical devices and all the other new, shiny toys that cost so bloody much.

Think about it. Having the drug companies fund they own research into new drugs is like hiring a fox to guard your hen-house. Since the payoff is so great, can you really trust them to get it right? Or, when the next new drug turns out to be a disaster, will you find a very, very rich fox with feathers on his snout?

tl;dr version:

1. health insurance itself.
2. doctor and hospital greed.
3. government overregulation.
4. medical lawsuits & lawyers.
5. Federal Govt. healthcare programs.
6. conflict of interest in drug companies and medical device companies.

These 6 things have contributed to making health care unaffordable for most people in the USA today.

Get rid of these 6 things, and you will have done a lot of good towards making health care affordable again.
ID: 959227 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 29654
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 959317 - Posted: 29 Dec 2009, 17:50:22 UTC - in response to Message 959227.  

You missed the reason those pills cost a fortune.

We grant patents on treatments and cures. We should only grant patents on cures.

Drug companies learned their lesson from tobacco. Make a treatment and you have them hooked for life. Make a cure and you loose a customer.

As to those L&L's you realize that 99% of that is because the boards of medical quality assurance simply butt sit. Have you ever heard of them sending secret shoppers in to find out if a doctor is qualified?!! So do the insurance companies. Send a check we cover you, no matter how big a quack you are. Dump the 5% of quacks and the lawsuits will fall by 95%.

ID: 959317 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 959356 - Posted: 29 Dec 2009, 20:31:58 UTC - in response to Message 959317.  

Texas is such a wonderful state. Republicans screamed TORT REFORM 10 years ago. Texas got tort reform. Tort reform limits payouts for injury awards. Seems stupid to me. But again this state is loaded with idiots. /back on topic/
Tort reform was supposed to save insurance companies money and from that Doctors and others would pay less for insurance. The insurance companies certainly saved a boatload of money. Unfortuantely, they forgot to put into the TORT REFORM a means to lower insurance rates for subscribers. I work with Doctors and none have seem any decrease in their rates. Insurance companies are keeping any difference in awards for themselves.

Back to Doctors. Quacks I mean. Texas because it limits damages to Doctors has inadvertently created a quack vacuum. With lowered financial risks in Texas Quacks are moving to Texas in droves. THat isn't to say Non-quack Drs. aren't also enamoured by the lowered responsibility.
This brings us back to the TORT REFORM. Apparently these quacks weren't paying attention. They aren't getting anything cheaper here. Just getting sued for lesser amounts. Their Insurance is still going to cost what it did before.


So when you hear about insurance companies wanting TORT reform as a part of the healthcare reform you'll understand that once again they are trying to increase profits at the expense of their subscribers


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 959356 · Report as offensive
Profile Reuben Gathright
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 01
Posts: 213
Credit: 14,594,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959534 - Posted: 30 Dec 2009, 14:19:04 UTC - in response to Message 958345.  


Freedom comes at a cost, which is capitalism. We have two extremes in government Socialism and Capitalism.


My sister and her family may face bankruptcy if one of them gets sick because she lost her job and health insurance. Is this what you call freedom?

Ok good point

BUT!

Why should the younger generation (30 somethings) now have to pay for something that never existed before now?

Honestly, the only thing that I despise about universal healthcare is the forced taxation on those who actually made an effort to get an education and work. We never smoked pot, drank beer or partied our $$$ away in college. Now we have to work longer hours to pay for all these people around us who say they are to sick to work.

You can make any argument you want that someone's loved one deserves it but what about those who never had any fun because they wanted to earn the American dream? This just sucks.

My point is that I want to see stricter laws on labor. If you were young and able (passed all health exams and had solid scores on high school evaluations) but just got lazy, then you should not get health coverage. Simple.

Communists in Russia did this. You were forced to work to earn the right to be a member of their society. If you want universal healthcare then these lazy people should be required to work for it. Get rid of all those Playstation 3's and make people work again! Arghh!
Overclock with the MSI G31M3-L and Intel E8600 3.33Ghz
Intel D865GLC Socket 478 Motherboard
~How To Overclock The Eee ASUS 1005HA Netbook To 1.9Ghz~
ID: 959534 · Report as offensive
Profile rebest Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 00
Posts: 1296
Credit: 45,357,093
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959586 - Posted: 30 Dec 2009, 18:42:42 UTC - in response to Message 959192.  

In my last post to this thread, I said I would touch on what the problem is with health care here in the USA (and to varying degrees, worldwide). But, before I do, I would like to comment on a few posts since then.

I'm not sure what Gary is trying to say about your very legitimate question rebest.
What do American citizens do when they have lost their job and their healthcare package?
I suppose they will have to pay the $200,000 hospital bill by dipping into their spare change.

Under the Universal Single Payer plan, such as we have in Canada, there would be no loss of coverage when a job is lost. No one will lose their home due to a bankruptcy caused by medical expenses in this country. NO ONE.

That isn't a herd mentality. It's a civil society that takes care of it's citizens when they need help the most.



I just faced a similar situation. Shortly after my 1st son was born in May 2008, my wife got a nice teaching position in a school district in rural central Texas. So, we moved down there from the Dallas - Fort Worth area. Well, she lost the position (and the somewhat expensive health insurance) at the end of the school year (the person she replaced wanted to come back, and well... small town politics and all...). Well, we were expecting another baby (and I have this sneaky suspicion -- totally unprovable, of course -- that this was also a factor in her contract not getting renewed). Thankfully, my house up here in D/FW had not sold, so we moved back in August (at least for the time being until we can get employement again). CORBA (insurance continuing between jobs) was not an option for us; CORBA would have run around US$1000.00 / month -- money we didn't have to spare.

Well, my 2nd son was born in early October. Medicaid picked up the tab. It was a C-section, and there were complications which required about an hour of extra surgery for my wife, but everyone is doing fine now. We received excellent care in the hospital (a for-profit one, by the way) and during the follow-up doctor's visits -- better, in fact, than what we received during my 1st son's birth, and we had insurance then. If, on the odd chance Medicaid had denied us, the hospital had a charity program that would have picked up the tab. FYI, it is against the law (at least here in Texas) for most, if not all, hospitals to turn you away and refuse to provide care based on your ability to pay.

As far as it goes, the system works. I see no reason to go to a national system such as Canada or Britain has. Additional bureaucracy for no additional benefit. Just a jobs program for bureaucrats.


I am very glad that one of those evil government-funded and administered health care programs picked up the tab for you. As a taxpayer for the past 33 years, I have no problem saying "You're welcome." I am also very glad that the system worked for you and your family. However, it doesn't work for many because the systems in every state and some cities are different.

As for the so-called bureaucrats that you seem to despise so much, remember that "bureaucrats" made sure that the taxpayer money from the Feds and Texas were disbursed to the hospital where your wife and son were as well as the doctors that treated them later.

There's only one difference between government "bureaucrats" and insurance company "bureaucrats". The pressure to turn a profit.


Join the PACK!
ID: 959586 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 959616 - Posted: 30 Dec 2009, 22:50:09 UTC - in response to Message 959534.  


Freedom comes at a cost, which is capitalism. We have two extremes in government Socialism and Capitalism.


My sister and her family may face bankruptcy if one of them gets sick because she lost her job and health insurance. Is this what you call freedom?

Ok good point

BUT!

Why should the younger generation (30 somethings) now have to pay for something that never existed before now?

Honestly, the only thing that I despise about universal healthcare is the forced taxation on those who actually made an effort to get an education and work. We never smoked pot, drank beer or partied our $$$ away in college. Now we have to work longer hours to pay for all these people around us who say they are to sick to work.

You can make any argument you want that someone's loved one deserves it but what about those who never had any fun because they wanted to earn the American dream? This just sucks.

My point is that I want to see stricter laws on labor. If you were young and able (passed all health exams and had solid scores on high school evaluations) but just got lazy, then you should not get health coverage. Simple.

Communists in Russia did this. You were forced to work to earn the right to be a member of their society. If you want universal healthcare then these lazy people should be required to work for it. Get rid of all those Playstation 3's and make people work again! Arghh!

forced taxation? Isn't all Taxation taken by force. IF you don't pay they force you into a jail cell. If you are really against forcibly paying for Healthcare then maybe you should consider asking your employer to stop paying your medicare and social security tax. These really are optional. If you choose not to pay you get to save all that money. You also get NO: unemployment insurance, food stamps, welfare in any form, social security and any other "entitlement" program the gov't provides us. Now most of us will never need any of those programs. I bet the few that are receiving unemployment benefits are glad they chose to pay that tax.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 959616 · Report as offensive
Profile rebest Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 00
Posts: 1296
Credit: 45,357,093
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959628 - Posted: 30 Dec 2009, 23:52:31 UTC - in response to Message 959534.  


Freedom comes at a cost, which is capitalism. We have two extremes in government Socialism and Capitalism.


My sister and her family may face bankruptcy if one of them gets sick because she lost her job and health insurance. Is this what you call freedom?

Ok good point

BUT!

Why should the younger generation (30 somethings) now have to pay for something that never existed before now?

Honestly, the only thing that I despise about universal healthcare is the forced taxation on those who actually made an effort to get an education and work. We never smoked pot, drank beer or partied our $$$ away in college. Now we have to work longer hours to pay for all these people around us who say they are to sick to work.

You can make any argument you want that someone's loved one deserves it but what about those who never had any fun because they wanted to earn the American dream? This just sucks.


Would it surprise you to learn that these were exactly the same arguments made in 1935 against Social Security? Now, how many of your relatives have received retirement benefits, survivor benefits, and disability benefits since 1935? I've been contributing to Social Security for over 30 years. I admit that when I was 30, I didn't like it, either. It sucked. I still have 17 years before I'm eligible for full retirement benefits. So, it still sucks. :) However, if I die tomorrow, my family will receive survivor benefits.

You might not get the full benefit of a equitable health care system, but your kids will. I expect to pay $10,000 for health insurance and uncovered, out of pocket costs next year for a family of four. I don't know how my kids are going to able to afford to pay anything like this when they get out of college. We can't keep going the way we are now.

My point is that I want to see stricter laws on labor. If you were young and able (passed all health exams and had solid scores on high school evaluations) but just got lazy, then you should not get health coverage. Simple.


I agree that there will always be some people who will actively try to cheat any system. There are those who cheat Medicare, Medicaid, and every insurance company. I also agree that there should be stiff penalties for those who do.

Join the PACK!
ID: 959628 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 29654
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 959636 - Posted: 31 Dec 2009, 0:33:54 UTC - in response to Message 959628.  

Would it surprise you to learn that these were exactly the same arguments made in 1935 against Social Security? Now, how many of your relatives have received retirement benefits, survivor benefits, and disability benefits since 1935? I've been contributing to Social Security for over 30 years. I admit that when I was 30, I didn't like it, either. It sucked. I still have 17 years before I'm eligible for full retirement benefits. So, it still sucks. :) However, if I die tomorrow, my family will receive survivor benefits.

You might not get the full benefit of a equitable health care system, but your kids will. I expect to pay $10,000 for health insurance and uncovered, out of pocket costs next year for a family of four. I don't know how my kids are going to able to afford to pay anything like this when they get out of college. We can't keep going the way we are now.

And every penny you paid into Social Security so far in your lifetime has been paid out to someone else. Not a dime was set aside for you. Anything you get will be paid by some younger worker. It is called a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme. Just read they letter they send every year if you don't believe it. That part about them running out of money!

ID: 959636 · Report as offensive
Profile rebest Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 00
Posts: 1296
Credit: 45,357,093
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959693 - Posted: 31 Dec 2009, 4:20:22 UTC - in response to Message 959636.  

Would it surprise you to learn that these were exactly the same arguments made in 1935 against Social Security? Now, how many of your relatives have received retirement benefits, survivor benefits, and disability benefits since 1935? I've been contributing to Social Security for over 30 years. I admit that when I was 30, I didn't like it, either. It sucked. I still have 17 years before I'm eligible for full retirement benefits. So, it still sucks. :) However, if I die tomorrow, my family will receive survivor benefits.

You might not get the full benefit of a equitable health care system, but your kids will. I expect to pay $10,000 for health insurance and uncovered, out of pocket costs next year for a family of four. I don't know how my kids are going to able to afford to pay anything like this when they get out of college. We can't keep going the way we are now.

And every penny you paid into Social Security so far in your lifetime has been paid out to someone else. Not a dime was set aside for you. Anything you get will be paid by some younger worker. It is called a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme. Just read they letter they send every year if you don't believe it. That part about them running out of money!


Quite right. However, this is nothing new. The withholding and benefit formulas for Social Security have not kept pace with the baby boom "bubble", the increase in life span, or adjustments for inflation. It's always more politically expedient for Presidents and Congress to "kick the can" to the next administration and the next Congress. I don't expect the gutless wonders currently on Capitol Hill to be any different.

Join the PACK!
ID: 959693 · Report as offensive
Profile Reuben Gathright
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 01
Posts: 213
Credit: 14,594,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959783 - Posted: 31 Dec 2009, 16:07:17 UTC - in response to Message 959636.  
Last modified: 31 Dec 2009, 16:08:04 UTC

Ah yes, the whole "they shoveled taxes on my back in 1935 so let's do it to the young and talented of Generation X". The problem is that the non-Playstation playing members of the younger generation know about your tricks are upset that Social Security will not be there for us. Many of my friends are even fearful of investing in "market based securities" not for their risk, but because the Democrats may seize those assets when their Social Security program runs out.

It's The Economy Stupid
The difference now is that we do not have a World War to generate a new economy with. All the future we have now is stupid Americans that outsource the intelligentsia to India and China.

All of this combines to be quite a risky situation for America's youth today. We do not see a bright economic future, few of us are able to invest with confidence for retirement (or horde it in hidden gold reserves) and worse no one has even mentioned the fact that we are likely to be forced to receive Social Security benefits way after 77!

How would you feel as a 30 something career man?

Now tell me that I must give you and your family free medical insurance while I work until 75 to pay for you? HA!


Would it surprise you to learn that these were exactly the same arguments made in 1935 against Social Security? Now, how many of your relatives have received retirement benefits, survivor benefits, and disability benefits since 1935? I've been contributing to Social Security for over 30 years. I admit that when I was 30, I didn't like it, either. It sucked. I still have 17 years before I'm eligible for full retirement benefits. So, it still sucks. :) However, if I die tomorrow, my family will receive survivor benefits.

You might not get the full benefit of a equitable health care system, but your kids will. I expect to pay $10,000 for health insurance and uncovered, out of pocket costs next year for a family of four. I don't know how my kids are going to able to afford to pay anything like this when they get out of college. We can't keep going the way we are now.

And every penny you paid into Social Security so far in your lifetime has been paid out to someone else. Not a dime was set aside for you. Anything you get will be paid by some younger worker. It is called a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme. Just read they letter they send every year if you don't believe it. That part about them running out of money!


Overclock with the MSI G31M3-L and Intel E8600 3.33Ghz
Intel D865GLC Socket 478 Motherboard
~How To Overclock The Eee ASUS 1005HA Netbook To 1.9Ghz~
ID: 959783 · Report as offensive
Profile rebest Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 00
Posts: 1296
Credit: 45,357,093
RAC: 0
United States
Message 959815 - Posted: 31 Dec 2009, 17:55:58 UTC

Well, Albireo380, you wanted to know why the heath care situation in America is the way it is. I hope you're getting a good idea. In every other major industrialized nation, heath care and a social safety net is considered a shared responsibility and a basic right of every citizen.

As you can see, that belief is not shared by many in the US.




Join the PACK!
ID: 959815 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 960208 - Posted: 2 Jan 2010, 16:19:06 UTC - in response to Message 959815.  

thats because some folks have the attitude of "I got mine, get your own" well that doesnt always work well. Unfortunately, The US has a long history of that idea. Each time it shows up some group, usually the poor or underserved), get screwed over


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 960208 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 29654
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 960254 - Posted: 2 Jan 2010, 18:48:47 UTC - in response to Message 960208.  

thats because some folks have the attitude of "I got mine, get your own" well that doesnt always work well. Unfortunately, The US has a long history of that idea. Each time it shows up some group, usually the poor or underserved), get screwed over

No they don't get screwed over, unless you think that they are entitled to commit theft. Screwed out of stealing, yes!

ID: 960254 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Politics : How about Forced Medical Insurance?


 
©2023 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.