![]() |
Quote:
This is a problem we have in Canada that bugs me. Technically, I don't think anyway, they aren't covered. Neither are travellers. But everyone just lets it slide for some reason. Which costs us money. Longer lines means that everyone who needs to see a doctor actually is instead of sitting at home because they can't afford it. So, that's a good thing. Same argument about the lower wages for doctor's. I don't know the bill instead and out, but...logically... given that this is a health insurance reform bill and not a health care reform bill, that's there's no public option, that the government won't be "distributing" health (which don't happen anyway with universal health care but seems to be a popular talking point), there's no reason for doctor's to have lower pay. If there was a public option, if this was universal healthcare... yeah, their salaries would take a hit because the tax payer is paying for it. But this didn't happen, so it's non-issue. |
Quote:
about a trillion dollars of dept will be given to the U.S. to pay off because of this healthcare plan. Now last time I recall hearing about the national dept it was 7 - 8 trillion. If we're in a recession right now, why are we spending so much? |
The Congressional Budget Office says the bill will save $138 billion over the course of a decade and up to $1.2 trillion over the next. But they probably made up that number in between death panel meetings chaired by illegal immigrants.
But that's really not the point. The government has to spend in a recession to get out of a recession whether they rack up debt or not. That's what they did after Great Depression with all those public works programs. A healthy workforce that isn't spending all its money on medical bills is going to be spending their cash on cars and $6 coffees and whatever else the economy runs on. |
Quote:
We need to "stop them" from taking such risks in that we as a society foot the bill in the end. We pay twice overall for healthcare, make buisnesses less competitive in the world market by creating disincentives that bar access to proper medical care. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
This is the fifth time I've tried posting this. Let's see if it works this time.
Quote:
So stop dancing around my post looking for ways to misconstrue what I typed. Because you aren't fooling anyone. To everybody else: This is exacxtly what I mean by misinformation being more harmful than helpful. |
I would have to agree. If the government can tell you to buy something, what else can they order you to do? Why do you think all those states are taking this up against the Federal Government?
Frankly, I'd have to agree with Joe Biden's statement, "This is a big f***ing deal." It is, but for all the wrong reasons. |
Quote:
You can't always keep your house from catching fire no matter how careful you are. That's why there's the fire department you pay to keep running. You can't always avoid fender benders no matter how good a driver you are. That's why you need to buy insurance. You can't always keep yourself well no matter how healthy you are. That's why health care for everyone is necessary. If you don't have insurance you're putting yourself and other people at risk. Imagine if people were able to opt out of having the fire department come to their house in exchange for paying fewer taxes. What happens if your house catches fire? The firefighters can either let your house burn because you didn't pay and put your neighbors at risk your neighbors' houses or they can protect everyone and save your house even though you didn't pay and everyone else had to pick up the slack. If you get sick with something contagious you're more than likely going to get someone else sick and cause them to take time off from work or a trip to the drugstore/hospital. You've caused them financial trouble and you have to pay for it. Since you can never know who infects who the only way to make things fair is for everyone to share in the costs of keeping society as a whole healthy. In conclusion: it's not a product; it's a responsibility of anyone living in a civilized society. |
Here is something my parnets always say goverment run anything is crap.
|
Quote:
Health problems come in multiple shades of severity, and even moderately dangerous diseases can be overcome reliably without intervention or money. Serious, life threatening issues like cancer are big business right now, and you can find surgeons and specialists all over the place in the U.S. Note, Netto, that I did not say this was free. There are grants and other services available today to help people who cannot pay for the treatment. Continuing from that earlier sentiment, I propose that many people go to hospitals too often for things that don't require it. There are plenty of ways to deter disease in the sense it was used in Scarf's example. Regular hand washing, living in a clean home, diet, etc. are surprisingly effective and even if you get it, you can take a day or two off work, rest, drink your liquids, take frequent showers, or take an immune booster or something. If you're really concerned about society, there's always self-quarantine. Health care is not a responsibility of anyone living in a civilized society, for the purpose of Scarf's example it's a supplemental to steps you can take to help keep yourself and others healthy. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Remember that the greatest right American citizens enjoy is the right to be left alone by the government. This is why American criminal law is so restricting on how the government can deal with citizens they believe commited a crime. Most social services (save things like Social Security), are voluntary transactions between citizens and their government. People apply for things like housing assistance, food stamps, cash aid, and forms of government health care we have now such as Medicaid; the government does not force citizens to have these services. I would support the individual mandate if the penalty paid funded some sort of temporary public health system that covers medical emergencies for people who did not follow the mandate, assuming they did so because they couldn't afford private care. I'm all for having a safety net for people down on their luck I just believe that it should be the last resort in order to restrict the size of government. |
Scarf, if you believe health care costs too much, don't blame the insurance companies. It's the pharmaceutical companies that make the medicines. The pharmaceutical companies that jack up prices because they can. The pharmaceutical companies that are UNTOUCHED by this bill.
|
Quote:
Note that damage prevention is already in place; by law you must be given emergency care to stop any further damage from occurring, much like the fire department is required to stop the fire to keep more damage from occurring. But as for the damage that has already occurred before the emergency services could stop it, who must pay for it? The fire department? I think not. If the taxpayers don't have to pay for THE DAMAGES caused by your house burning, then why should we have to pay for THE DAMAGES you sustained from your health condition? No one else has anything other than a moral obligation to nurse you back to health or rebuild your house. In other words, I'm not your freaking mommy, and even then your mommy isn't shackled by law to help you unless you're a minor. But if you ASK me for help, I would help you because I'm a nice guy. That doesn't mean you have the right to force me to help you by paying to fix your problems. It's in the hands of each one of us to protect ourselves from catastrophe, and nothing more than the goodness in someone's heart should compel them to help you. Forced payment is slavery just as much as forced labor is, because the money one earns is the fruit of his labor. When people are in need, the other people will come forth with noble charity to help one another. STOP relying on government and for once, TRUST THE PEOPLE. |
Quote:
The concept of "force" itself isn't something that I like at all, but on the other hand, it's scary to think of the people who would truly lack a moral compass. Perhaps it's a conceptual hurdle that gets to a lot of people. Quote:
Would it be a safe bet to hope someone would come to my rescue if I required a $30k surgery? If there are also many other people in the same situation, that wouldn't make my case any more special than theirs, and then that'd probably further drop potential for people's will to help "a person in need". |
So we NEED the government to do everything for us?
Tell me, how'd that work over in Russia? It didn't. More people starved, more people died. Government run health care is 100% not free. Frankly, if I had an extreme allergic reaction right now, the only people I'd expect to pay the costs are my parents, because I'm 15. Not some anonymous taxpayer out in Iowa. And besides, there's a difference between morality and stupidity. Many taxpayers have families. They take care of them. If people had actual DECENT families, and kid's parents weren't divorced or murdered, then they should be covering each other. Orphans, paying their coverage I have no problem with, until they get a job. And I don't want hear the whole "you're rich, they may not be" argument because I am certainly NOT rich, I am lower middle class, and if your solution is to spread wealth around equally, no one will have much of anything. |
Spreading wealth around is another failed tennet of Soviet Russia. People work hard and earn their wealth, or they inherit it from relatives that work hard for it. The American system is a system that allows people to be the masters of their own destiny. We should be giving people a hand-up, not a hand-out. Give them educational and job oppurtunities to better themselves but don't try and say people hard-earned money has to take care of their every whim.
|
Quote:
|
It's nice to see that the US government is taking some steps to improve their country. Not to say that these changes are perfect, there will probably be many changes needed in coming years, but it's a step in the right direction.
|
Quote:
http://www.pokecommunity.com/showpost.php?p=5644052&postcount=47 |
Quote:
I'll say once again: MISINFORMATION IS MORE HARMFUL THAN HELPFUL. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm suggesting more of a moderate description of running the economy - neither too far left or right. I'd see that as satisfying more people than going full out Adam Smith style. And this bill really doesn't go very far left - it's just shocking unfamiliarity to the US. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"There has been so much intentional misinformation over the course of this conversation, I'm anxious to get to the point where we can tell people what the bill does and what it doesn't." - Kathleen Sebelius (Sec. of Health and Humanity Services) Actually, let's see things on a broader scope. I think people just need to be patient, and let events roll out the way they are. I'm sure there are surprises that you nor I would have anticipated, both that can go in favor of either of our viewpoints. We're already judging before half of the stuff becomes implemented. Save yourself the forehead wrinkles. So many of these arguments go under this "quick to judge" category. You might think this is an easy way for me to wriggle out of an argument, but I honestly think you can only go so far in predicting this kind of event. Quote:
Quote:
I initially had the same degree of certainty in my arguments that you have. But after reading so many arguments, I think there is legit concern on both sides. Alternatives to the bill may certainly be better...time is by far the best determinator. The rest of the babble-rousing is 90% trying to voice yourself the loudest. I already see a ton of hypocrisies and miscontruing facts that it's not really worth trying to make a statement anymore. Overall, I think it's worth revisiting the subject after the bill is allotted some more time. |
Lovely, now he can get to the other things he promised he'd do in his term as President. :>
|
For the record, bold = me.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:03 AM. |
![]()
© 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.
Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.