fmelvis
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since November 2010
Posts: 235
|
Post by fmelvis on Nov 13, 2012 8:31:03 GMT -5
Obamacare....oh no that's like all communist like....the government will take over your life oh god no.
Who's telling you all this. The same fine folks who had no problem getting all socialist when their banks and wall street firms needed trillions of public money? Politicians who insurance companies back their elections? Fat cats who sold mortgage backed securities to elders because it was triple a? These fine folks? These defenders of the american way?
I've lived with socialized health care all my life. I have never met anyone who has ever spoken to a government official about their health care. I have never been told, no, you can't see this doctor. I have never seen someones life ruined because of medical bills. I can go to any hospital I want, and choose any doctor to do my operation. Anyone who says different is selling something.
Now, you go ahead and quote me all the bullshit you heard from fox news or glenn beck, I don't care. Its all crap.
Is our system perfect? No. But in all my life, I have never heard canadians screaming to change the system. Its never been an election issue. Why, because with all its faults, we like it.
Yeah, there's always some rich asshole who thinks he deserves better. Who cares?
Fact is, a walmart employee who gets cancer in my country will get excellent care, while in your country will face financial ruin and most likely die. No one deserves that. No job in your country, no health care. Student? Sorry. Your insurance don't cover this, too bad.
You're all afraid that someone is gonna get something on your dime, and that's wrong. Yeah, I get it.
I don't think everyone deserves a big house, a boat, vacations etc...These are things you earn by working hard and they are yours.
But health care should be available to all. We should not be separated by insurance plans or money. Its life, not material goods.
Now, I gotta go and pick up today's Pravda.
|
|
blackout5783
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since November 2011
Posts: 248
|
Post by blackout5783 on Nov 13, 2012 9:03:28 GMT -5
You want to hear something absolutely insane? I get health insurance through my job and the employee contribution is around $275/month. No idea what my employer contributes. I was wondering what my plan would cost on the individual market. The closest thing I could find is an HMO, so I'd still have to pay out of pocket for doctors that are "out of network". My current plan still partially covers those doctors. Care to guess the monthly premium?
Over $8000/month.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Nov 13, 2012 9:34:14 GMT -5
It's all insurance company profit. Of all the things that should not be tied to profit, you'd think children's lives would be it. Either way, nothing is going to change on that til we see what happens in 2014. My hope is that the rich will start screaming 'UNFAIR!!' and the gov't allows people to sign up for Medicare who are too young. It would help pay for it, and it would spread the costs to the healthy.
Once 1/2 the US was on medicare, the Insurance industry is out of business, and the rest sign up and we have Universal health care just like that.
|
|
itsandbits
freely admits to licking rocks
Member since March 2012
Posts: 825
|
Post by itsandbits on Nov 13, 2012 10:20:25 GMT -5
I don't understand being too young for medicare; here in Canada, I think children are some of the heaviest users of the medical system. any time I go to the doctors office it is filled with them. We pay a monthly fee here less than $100. for a single and every adult is calculated at that rate and then there is a family rate based on the number of children. The rate is also based on income and goes down from there. By having everyone on the system it makes it less costly, and so does not for profit; why should anyone get rich off someone elses suffering? The medical proffesion make a good living but making profit on every bandage and stich of needed medical care is just not right.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Nov 13, 2012 10:41:23 GMT -5
Medicare is for those 65 and older ONLY. Children in the US are completely dependent on their parents insurance. And many parents can't afford insurance. Even those with insurance cannot get insurance to pay for certain diseases and problems that are killing their children.
My son had a friend with a genetic growth of the ribcage where it DID NOT grow. As he got older, the ribcage stayed the same size... and his organs got crushed, very slowly from their own growth. They fought their insurance company for 5 YEARS as he slowly died. They finally gave approval, through a court battle, that saved him probably a month or 2 before his heart outgrew the space in his chest. His ribcage was literally like 20" around, and his lungs and heart could not fit anymore. What damage did that do to him over those 5 years?
Insurance companies and their 'profits' are killing the US, a few at a time, way more insidiously than any war we ever fought, and no one wants to notice that.
|
|
|
Post by sheltie on Nov 13, 2012 11:39:25 GMT -5
I'm over 65, retired military PLUS have a health annuity that my civilian company established for me - without my knowing until my subsequent retirement from them - plus VA benefits if needed. My monthly output for ANY health related issue/item is ZERO. I too can pick and choose who I want to see and where I go for treatment.
I KNOW I'm extremely fortunate to have this coverage. But to get it, I had to expose my life daily at times to being killed by someone who opposed the US. I served my time during an era when being in the military was not considered honorable and we were treated like crap by our civilian peers home in the states. Thank God that has changed over the years and for that you can thank vets of the VN era who vowed to never let it happen again. To this day I harbor a deep and abiding hatred for the traitors who refused to serve their country in some way or another and especially to people like the biggest traitor of all, Jane Fonda.
Do I think that everyone DESERVES health care? Yes. Do I think it should be free? In a utopian world it would be, not now however. Who should pay for healthcare? Should it be the government or the individual? Good question for which I have no answer. Perhaps if I were in another position, such as having to pay what the average American who has health insurance has to pay, I might feel differently.
|
|
Don
Cave Dweller
He wants you too, Malachi.
Member since December 2009
Posts: 2,616
|
Post by Don on Nov 13, 2012 11:45:51 GMT -5
The individual will always pay, whether by writing a check directly to the provider, or writing it to the IRS in the form of tax. There is no free lunch.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Nov 13, 2012 11:49:53 GMT -5
Sheltie, Healthcare will NEVER be free. It's not free to those with Universal Health care now. The reason it costs so much, and it's the young families with small children who cannot afford it is because of insurance company profits. That is at least 50% of the cost, but way way more if you compare the cost of Medicare for the sickest elements of society, the retired, vs the cost of ordinary insurance for young families who hardly ever go to the doctor but must pay $15,000-$50,000 a year. Medicare is $99 a month vs up to $3000 a month to insure a young family with a baby. Because Medicare is the government so costs only, and insurance must make profit on top of costs... so they can pay their CEO 72 million dollars a year, and relative costs for BOD and Officers and sales staff unnecessary with a non-profit. In millions of cases, insurance costs more than workers actually make in salary. How do their kids get treated? They don't til it's too late sometimes. It's probably why the US's infant mortality rate is one of the highest in the world. This is the US's Infant Mortality Rate... #34, behind Cuba (yes, more of our newborns die than do in Cuba) and above Malta and Hungary: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rateThis figure ONLY counts deaths of infants under 1 year old and no abortion. Lack of health care is killing America's children and future. Why should insurance companies PROFIT so much from it, that parents can't afford it at all for their children?
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Nov 13, 2012 11:52:08 GMT -5
“The medical proffesion make a good living but making profit on every bandage and stich of needed medical care is just not right.” If you think that’s bad, wait’ll you go shopping at the funeral home. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sheltie on Nov 13, 2012 14:13:30 GMT -5
Sheltie, Healthcare will NEVER be free. It's not free to those with Universal Health care now. The reason it costs so much, and it's the young families with small children who cannot afford it is because of insurance company profits. That is at least 50% of the cost, but way way more if you compare the cost of Medicare for the sickest elements of society, the retired, vs the cost of ordinary insurance for young families who hardly ever go to the doctor but must pay $15,000-$50,000 a year. Medicare is $99 a month vs up to $3000 a month to insure a young family with a baby. Because Medicare is the government so costs only, and insurance must make profit on top of costs... so they can pay their CEO 72 million dollars a year, and relative costs for BOD and Officers and sales staff unnecessary with a non-profit. In millions of cases, insurance costs more than workers actually make in salary. How do their kids get treated? They don't til it's too late sometimes. It's probably why the US's infant mortality rate is one of the highest in the world. This is the US's Infant Mortality Rate... #34, behind Cuba (yes, more of our newborns die than do in Cuba) and above Malta and Hungary: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rateThis figure ONLY counts deaths of infants under 1 year old and no abortion. Lack of health care is killing America's children and future. Why should insurance companies PROFIT so much from it, that parents can't afford it at all for their children? I'm not sure if you are for or against Obamacare, but it's obvious that you are opposed to insurance companies and CEOs making a lot of profit. Are you equally opposed to them - or any business - making a reasonable profit (whatever that is)? Do you agree with the Japanese model of the CEO making no more than 10x the salary of the lowest paid employee? Can you imagine how that would work over here? ;D I guess you are correct about healthcare not being free as I did pay for it for awhile while working. All I know is that I haven't paid a penny in over 11 years for anything related to healthcare that I haven't been reimbursed for. That's pretty free as far as I'm concerned. Of course it took me a substantial number of years to get here. I have a great deal of trouble trying to decide whether it is right to provide every living person with free or low cost healthcare. I'm not a fan of welfare, especially the part of giving it to able bodied people who either refuse to work or are just too lazy. Those who truly are unable to take care of themselves come under a different category and I can't decide what should be done about/for them.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Nov 13, 2012 14:40:13 GMT -5
Nope. Business is business. OF COURSE people make profits or they wouldn't be in business. Difference is, people can CHOOSE to walk away from your business and NOT use your services. Cell phone rates too high? Don't get a cell phone. A 4 year old with cancer has no choices, nor can they sign up with the military at 4 with cancer to get your benefits. Their parent can be a single mom working at McDonalds, who offers no health plan, and if they did, her pay wouldn't cover it. What does this child do? Die? Some do. More than other industrial nations in the USA, our children are DYING from lack of health care, OPEN YOUR EYES: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rateYou are retired with a nice pension, you apparently never saw the problem. When the crash came here in Florida in 2007, I saw children sleeping in cardboard boxes because their parents lost their jobs. Health care was less a concern for them than food. But if they had cancer or something too, they died. It opened my eyes, and I began to see a problem. I looked up infant mortality rates, and my jaw hit the ground. The US is #35 of ALL nations. I linked it above. Then I looked up CHILD mortality rates... we are above 3rd world countries, but compare the US to Canada, who have Universal health care : www.unicef.org/sowc00/stat2.htmChildren in the USA under 5 are dying at a MUCH faster rate than Canada. Do we need health care to protect our future too, or ONLY our past? You can't decide? You had your life, good or bad, how can you not realize when it's over, the only thing that will even remember you ever lived are your kids, grandkids and if you don't have any, the rest of the human race? The only measure of your existence is the existence of future generations. If we don't care for our children, we have no future. There is NO SUCH THING as welfare today. EVERY SINGLE person on welfare capable must be actively looking for a job or training for a job or they get cut off. Did you know that a HUGE % of the poor are the families of military personnel? Did you know that 1 of 4 homeless people living in streets surrounded by garbage bags are military veterans? We DO NOT OWE lazy worthless people a darn thing. I agree. I was Republican. But when there ARE no jobs to be had, and it's gotten this bad, we have to help. And no one's asking YOU to help anyway, you aren't making millions a year. When the highest tax rate was 92%, the USA was going great, and unemployment was very low. It was OK when Reagan dropped it, then raised it again to 40%. Today, the rich pay 14%, the middle class pay 35%, and around 30% after deductions. NOW we have a problem, what a surprise. And we will sacrifice the lives of American children to feed their profit. If we don't think that's acceptable loss, why, we must be communist. Now who spread THAT lie?
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Nov 13, 2012 15:38:24 GMT -5
"Today, the rich pay 14%, the middle class pay 35%, and around 30% after deductions." Helen – Let’s skip the bullshit, eh, and don’t call it hyperbole. You *know* that effective tax rates are not even close to those numbers. On paper, 2011 *marginal* tax rates - married, filing jointly Up to $69,000 – 15% Up to $139,350 – 25% Up to $212,300 – 28% Up to $379,150 – 33% In real life, the average effective tax rate is less than 5% for the typical slug with an AGI less than $50k. $100k - $200k the average is about 12% Some of the loudest RTH whiners . . . under 4% ;D
|
|
|
Post by helens on Nov 13, 2012 15:57:04 GMT -5
That's irrelevant Rich, WHY is someone making 21 million a year paying 14%? No wonder our roads are falling apart, our children dying, our economy a mess. We went from 92% to 0% in some cases for millionaire tax, with the AVERAGE millionaire paying 14%, and wonder what happened.
What can you afford when your income drops to 1/5 of what it was? Everyone says the millionaires pay 70% of the tax, so when they went from 92% to 14%, the federal income went where? The problem is so painfully obvious, I still don't get why it's hard for people to comprehend. No one's trying to abuse the rich, it's preventing the rich from pulling yet another fast one that people can't seem to get.
|
|
fmelvis
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since November 2010
Posts: 235
|
Post by fmelvis on Nov 13, 2012 16:12:22 GMT -5
Sheltie, no one was talking about free. A big chunk of tax revenue goes to our health care system.
And yes, there is waste and it always can be improved.
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Nov 13, 2012 16:47:57 GMT -5
No, it’s not irrelevant.
Why pollute your argument with nonsense fit for a fauxnews swilling nitwit? [Even if it's directed at fauxnews swilling nitwits.]
You might as well start your post with, “Hey, y’all. I got this email . . . “ ;D
|
|
|
Post by sheltie on Nov 13, 2012 16:57:10 GMT -5
Sheltie, no one was talking about free. A big chunk of tax revenue goes to our health care system. And yes, there is waste and it always can be improved. Ah, but many folks who don't live in a country that has socialized healthcare seem to think it is free elsewhere. Must be because the internet says it is so. ;D Others know better. Waste and improvement go hand in hand. Unfortunately it is mostly all hat, no cattle. Did you get your copy of Pravda? I've missed reading it over the years.
|
|
fmelvis
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since November 2010
Posts: 235
|
Post by fmelvis on Nov 13, 2012 17:09:52 GMT -5
ah, pravda is not what it used to be comrade.
|
|
|
Post by texaswoodie on Nov 13, 2012 17:14:40 GMT -5
If Obamacare is soooooooooooooo damned wonderful, why did the President, House members, and Senate members exempt themselves? When they come up with a plan that's good enough for themselves, I'm all in.
If Canadian healthcare is soooooooooo damned wonderful, why did the Prime Minister come here for heart surgery?
Obamacare sucks and all the politicans know it does. It's you sheeple that think it's soooooooo damned wonderful
Curt
|
|
fmelvis
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since November 2010
Posts: 235
|
Post by fmelvis on Nov 13, 2012 17:18:52 GMT -5
The US has the best health facilities in the world. too bad only the rich have access to it. You get to brag about it.
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Nov 13, 2012 17:19:47 GMT -5
Sheeple??!! Did you know the average sheep is twice as fast as Usain Bolt? I’m guessin’ Jake found that out the hard way. ;D
|
|