pirana 0 #51 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuit using EXTREME examples; let's start talking about the family earning 25k/yr orthe college kid trying to get an education to contribute post grad. These are the people who need medical care who can;t afford it. Actually, that crowd eschews health care premiums, even modest ones, when they are offerred. For the most part the typical 25 year old does not see health insurance as something worth spending money on. Most of them, if given the money to buy it, would spend the cash elsewhere. So a government enforced mandatory universal program of coverage basically becomes telling people how to spend their money. The amount of money is what makes such a program tough for a lot of advocates of personal choice to swallow. If it were $20 or $30 per month to support emergency services or something like that, it might be more palatable. But being forced to turn over several hundred dollars worth of the value of my labor each month to support a mandatory health care program in not acceptable. Then throw in the fact that I also would be in the group helping to pay for those that can't, and my part of the bill becomes well over $1000 per month. Too much. I want to choose whether or not i participate and at what level." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #52 October 18, 2006 QuoteBasic healthcare includes surgeries such as ligament repair, heart surgery, stiches, tonsilectomy, dental care etc. (I think that list there is a good one, though dental care has a ton of different procedures, which ones?) - now "Etc" contains what? preventive medicine? prosthetics? if so, just the basic limb or the fancy one that looks good? asthma medication? behavior control medication? Advil? minor first aid? what about Jenfly's issue of old people that want to live but probably shouldn't? who decides for them? psychological treatment? chiropractic? holistic treatments? what about people on special diets, does your plan supplement the extra food cost? dental - just fillings and x-rays and extractions? or caps and cleanings and other stuff too? what surgeries are paid for? only those with a higher than 25% chance of survival? or all of them. (forget the slippery slope 'extremes', but you can guarantee someone will push that benefit eventually and politicians will add it to the approved list to buy those votes) what about provide a very full set of medical benefit for all children under 18 (no matter what financial situation their parents are in)? then when they are adults, they are on their own. Give em a start as with public education, but then expect them to pull their own weight after that.... lots of options once one acknowledges so level of support is needed. for every option, lots of potential for abuse too. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #53 October 18, 2006 QuoteMy "public education" ended with a PhD from the #2 ranked university in the world, at age 25. Do you have an issue with that? I'm guessing here - but here's one scenario: I'm sure the people of Britain appreciated paying for all your degrees and likely a ton of your living expenses while a professional student and then you running off to the US with your skills before you started your real job. Or if domestic educational aid. I'm sure all the other professionals who are still paying off their college loans think it's just nifty that you didn't have similar loans to pay and that you could move into that nice neighborhood years before they could. I'm sure their parents also appreciated having to supplement your income via grants, etc while simultaneously paying for their own kid's schooling just because they were defined as "rich" - at the time, likely making over $10K/year salary - and not eligible for financial aid. The problem with people that promote "free" education is that they don't want everyone to get a free education. They want special groups, arbitrarily chosen by them, to get free education at the expense of other groups that they hate for equally arbitrary reasons. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #54 October 18, 2006 Quotewhat about Jenfly's issue of old people that want to live but probably shouldn't? who decides for them? Nope, not my issue. You misunderstand. I was not talking about people who want to live, I was talking about the ones who (if able) were pleading to be left in peace. I was talking about the masses of protoplasm, bodies wasted by multi-system failure, drowning in secretions, open bed sores large enough to place your forearms in, regularly debrided (i.e. scraped raw to remove necrotic tissue), hauled off to surgery for bowel resection. Comatose diabetics with legs amputated due to gangrene. Patients who's eyes convey pain and suffering that give no indication whatsoever that they want to live. If you think I exaggerate or that this happens rarely, visit ANY ICU in South Florida. Pick any hospital you want ...you'll find the same thing ...these patients comprise the majority of all unit patients. We keep them alive ...for money.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #55 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteMy "public education" ended with a PhD from the #2 ranked university in the world, at age 25. Do you have an issue with that? I'm guessing here - but here's one scenario: I'm sure the people of Britain appreciated paying for all your degrees and likely a ton of your living expenses while a professional student and then you running off to the US with your skills before you started your real job. When you make statements based on assumption without knowing the facts, you always risk making an ASS of yourself.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #56 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuotewhich is evident with mandatory seat belts and auto insurance. This is a bit of a tangent - can you elaborate? and also, since (perhaps for fun) you equate good and evil as equivalent to the two political parties in power today, do you think that the "good" Democrats would eliminate seat belt and auto insurance laws? Other - Unions are a result of bad management practices and start out likely necessary. But, as in any huge power structure they become no different than corporations or political parties, or organized religion. Thus some need to be busted, and frequently. Big unions are "BIG BUSINESS", but in a more insidious way. I understand the reasoning behind unions, but I still think quitting a job and going elsewhere is much more effective than "threatening" to quit (strike) and some of the other tactics used. I hate to hand my fate to some board of representatives that really only have their own interests at heart. Perhaps leaving it in context it would have made sense. I was saying the US has become fascist, examples are the allowing of corporatiosn to write laws. Seat belt laws do nothing to enact safety of others, just mitigate damages after the collision. Auto insurance is a way of allowing corporations to decide whether they can drive or not. We can engage in all kinds of activities that are very dangerous, let's say skydiving, and not be required to have insurance. I know of the USPA's 3rd party insurance, but that is voluntary on the part of the USPA, not compulsary by the state. Boating, flying, quad riding, 1000's of activities, no required insurance, get it? Quoteand also, since (perhaps for fun) you equate good and evil as equivalent to the two political parties in power today, do you think that the "good" Democrats would eliminate seat belt and auto insurance laws? No but thanks for your attempt to impeach my claim, which is true. In California when fascist pig Reagan enacted mandatory insurance, California wanted to resist it. Once it won out, Cali then was left with the enforcment dillema; can you be required to prove you are not breaking the law? To prove you are not violating the law is contrary to the concept of, 'presumption of innocense." So at first the cops couldn't ask for proof of insurance, now, who knows? So to answer you, no, they won't move to repeal these things, so does that make them culpable? Don't think so. And I don't hold the Dems as saints, just a stretch the right way from the evil side. QuoteUnions are a result of bad management practices and start out likely necessary. But, as in any huge power structure they become no different than corporations or political parties, or organized religion. Yep, but I venture to say that greed precipitates bad managment, and teh US is all abiut greed, so most corps are mismanaged in this respect. QuoteThus some need to be busted, and frequently. Big unions are "BIG BUSINESS", but in a more insidious way. But Reagan just blanket busted them, so there was no selectivity. Kind of like a witch hunt, kill enough people you will eventually kill the witch. QuoteI understand the reasoning behind unions, but I still think quitting a job and going elsewhere is much more effective than "threatening" to quit (strike) and some of the other tactics used. I hate to hand my fate to some board of representatives that really only have their own interests at heart. So outright quitting is better? Do you mean at an individual level? That's what corps want, they want the individual to be singled out. Unions combine them to make them as one, a force that a corp can usualy not fight or not easily fight. As for the union's own interests, if the workers are not working their interests are not being met. Unions generally do help working people which is why the rich hate them. QuoteThis is a bit of a tangent - Other - Unions are a result of Not that I mind, but that is a tangent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #57 October 18, 2006 QuoteMedical care could be provided from birth to death without spending ANY additional public dollars!!! How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. QuotePersonally, I believe our government providing health care for it's citizens is right up there with providing education, clean water and roads. We could do it easily ...and it wouldn't cost an additionl dime! We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #58 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteMedical care could be provided from birth to death without spending ANY additional public dollars!!! How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. QuotePersonally, I believe our government providing health care for it's citizens is right up there with providing education, clean water and roads. We could do it easily ...and it wouldn't cost an additionl dime! We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live? You are only looking at one side of the equation.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #59 October 18, 2006 QuoteWhen you make statements based on assumption without knowing the facts, you always risk making an ASS of yourself. I acknowledged it was a guess up front. Go call someone else names. I don't see you acknowledging either scenario. So which taxpayers paid for your "public" education all the way through a PhD? My first ASSumption would have been you made on merit based scholarships or paid your own way, not generalized 'public funding'. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #60 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuit using EXTREME examples; let's start talking about the family earning 25k/yr orthe college kid trying to get an education to contribute post grad. These are the people who need medical care who can;t afford it. I can't believe you'd deny 'reasonable' medical care to senior citizens... (see how these debates progress?) The "people" will vote themselves cosmetic surgery, or sex changes, or lasik, etc. Because they will see the rich purchase those things and then demand it from the government as 'only fair and equal'. Politicians will try to give it to them in order to buy those votes. pirana's comment was on target. And either set of quotes I referenced were for entainment only, I just couldn't choose. No where did I state they shoudl be. Where did I state that? Look at teh quote you posted, it says nothing about that. Has your argument come to the point of strawmen? QuoteThe "people" will vote themselves cosmetic surgery, or sex changes, or lasik, etc. Because they will see the rich purchase those things and then demand it from the government as 'only fair and equal'. So you;re saying if Socialized medicine is introduced it will hypothetically morph into cosmetic surgery? I doubt it, but so what if it did. I don't generally back that, but what about burn victims that as so disfigured that they have mental issues? That might be a case where it would be justified. But having bigger boobs is not an emergency, at least not to the proportion of this current war (joke). QuotePoliticians will try to give it to them in order to buy those votes. Hypothesizing. Quotepirana's comment was on target. And either set of quotes I referenced were for entainment only, I just couldn't choose. Again, there are so may pestides for conservatives that come in the form of arguments, one is to ask how it is conscionable to deny basic health coverage for a country's people? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #61 October 18, 2006 Quote....teh US is all abiut greed, so most corps are mismanaged in this respect. then the answer is simple - all US corporations need to be managed by some company from another country - since only "teh US" is all about greed. that was simple. no more greedy companies and no need for unions ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #62 October 18, 2006 QuoteI was saying the US has become fascist, examples are the allowing of corporatiosn to write laws. Seat belt laws do nothing to enact safety of others, just mitigate damages after the collision. Proof of your statement on seat belts doing nothing to enact safety of others, and also a link to the Congressional record showing just WHICH corporation authored the bill. Tks. QuoteAuto insurance is a way of allowing corporations to decide whether they can drive or not. We can engage in all kinds of activities that are very dangerous, let's say skydiving, and not be required to have insurance. I know of the USPA's 3rd party insurance, but that is voluntary on the part of the USPA, not compulsary by the state. Boating, flying, quad riding, 1000's of activities, no required insurance, get it? Again, please provide link to the CR showing which Insurance company authored the mandatory insurance bill.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #63 October 18, 2006 >Hah. No private policeman costs $1000 / hour. No phlebotomist charges $1000/hour, either. >Not having food will kill you and your little girl too. Correct. We have the WIC to protect against that. >Transport and electricity, or lack thereof also variously cause death. I have lived without utility electricity for months on end. Didn't kill me! And millions of people in the US live without a car, so that's not going to fly. Not even sure what that has to do with healthcare. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteMedical care could be provided from birth to death without spending ANY additional public dollars!!! How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. QuotePersonally, I believe our government providing health care for it's citizens is right up there with providing education, clean water and roads. We could do it easily ...and it wouldn't cost an additionl dime! We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live? Or school taxes on property...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #65 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhay you see, Andy, is that neo-cons on this board or elsewhere will use extreme examples to make their point. They will talk 90 year olds, elective surgeries like sex changes and tooth whitening. They avoid teh issue because they know it's unconscionable for the richest country in the world to not provide reasonable healthcare. What is the Neocon stance on universal healthcare? I didn't really think healthcare was a part of their platform? NEO-CON STANCE ON HEALTHCARE: It should be given only to those that can afford it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #66 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhen you make statements based on assumption without knowing the facts, you always risk making an ASS of yourself. I acknowledged it was a guess up front. Go call someone else names. I don't see you acknowledging either scenario. So which taxpayers paid for your "public" education all the way through a PhD? My first ASSumption would have been you made on merit based scholarships or paid your own way, not generalized 'public funding'. It doesn't affect the debate about the quality of public education in any way. Suffice it to say that many many people have benefited greatly from public education. For example, my Nobel laureate (physics) colleague here is also a product of public education.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #67 October 18, 2006 I guess we just disagree then on what is a right and what is a privilege. But I'm not trying to snow you or impress you with ornate language. The definitions are tough to nail down. You may think what is reasonable would be an easy consensus. I can assure you from experience that it is not. (This actually is the business I'm in). You may have clear ideas about it, as do I, but as is evidenced by many of the debates on this foruym, building consensus is a different ball of wax. Health care is very expensive; with it being the number 2 expense for most service industries right after payroll. And it is growing at about 3 to 4 times the rate of inflation, and shows no sign of slowing down. The dilemma is going to get much worse; even without adding new classes of expense to the system. Advocating universal care (even at a reasonable level, if you can get agreement on what that means) not only does not represent a solution; it amounts to fanning the flames. What is most urgently needed is to dramatically change the way health care is consumed, thereby reducing that expense as a % of income. Anything else is just performing patchwork on old leaky plumbing. I'll agree that whether care is viewed as a right or privilege is largely cultural (of which political motivations are a subset); and add that how it is consumed, the real driver of costs, is also cultural. If the price does not slow down, then come down, relative to income, bickering about who pays or who gets what is going to soon become very trivial." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #68 October 18, 2006 QuoteNo where did I state they shoudl be. Where did I state that? Look at teh quote you posted, it says nothing about that. Has your argument come to the point of strawmen? follow the thread back to Jenfly's original note. You were being mocked playfully. the entire thread is hypothesizing and bringing up boobs in the thread will just attract Bonfire people doing searches - we don't want that ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #69 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteTrue sign of a classist nation is one that promotes selective, exclusive care for the well-off while depriving those who don't,"deserve" it. You can tell volumes about a nation by looking at its poor, and our poor don;t have healthcare. Hell, the Nazi administartion has failed to keep up with costs at the VA hospitals, cutting benefits for veterans. So if they do that for their soldiers, guess what if you're not a retired vet? I'm a non-wartime vet, non-lifer vet so I get zip. Show me a nation with no classes; no social, cultural or financial divisions that result in some sort of ability to choose the manner in which people live. All people are not created equal, and there is nothing to be gained by trying to make everyone the same (as if that could be accomplished anyway). What exactly is your point? That it is unfair that people are free to make choices, and that the myriad volume of choices and options ensure that we will end up living life differently - with some materially more well off than others? QuoteShow me a nation with no classes; no social, cultural or financial divisions that result in some sort of ability to choose the manner in which people live. Of course tehy all have classes, not nearly as defined as here though. Choose teh manner in which we live / not to be confused with choosing which hospital to go to as in Socialized countries. QuoteAll people are not created equal, and there is nothing to be gained by trying to make everyone the same (as if that could be accomplished anyway). Gained? How about basic humanity? No one said anything about making anyone equal, just another EXTREME statement by a person avoiding the humanity issue (conservative pesticide). QuoteWhat exactly is your point? That it is unfair that people are free to make choices, and that the myriad volume of choices and options ensure that we will end up living life differently - with some materially more well off than others? Are you for real? Look at the topic, look at my constant reiterations of, "It is unconscionable for the richest country in the world to not provide basic healthcare for its citizens." You can can all that rhetoric about cosmetic surgeries and forcing people to live equally, this is about having a cavity filled or an ulcer checked out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #70 October 18, 2006 THat's a reasonable post, but the same as been stated over and over and it's not flying with him. The whole subjectivity of what's right vs a privilege will have as many definitions as there are people in the room. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #71 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhay you see, Andy, is that neo-cons on this board or elsewhere will use extreme examples to make their point. They will talk 90 year olds, elective surgeries like sex changes and tooth whitening. They avoid teh issue because they know it's unconscionable for the richest country in the world to not provide reasonable healthcare. What is the Neocon stance on universal healthcare? I didn't really think healthcare was a part of their platform? NEO-CON STANCE ON HEALTHCARE: It should be given only to those that can afford it. Which, of course, is why all those sick people are being turned away from the emergency rooms for not having insurance. NEO-COM(munist) STANCE ON HEALTHCARE: Everyone should have it and those evil fascist corporations should pay for it. Here's the scenario on that: The Sea Hag gets elected and forces through her national healthcare plan by fiat (you know, like her hubby did in his last few weeks with the arsenic issue). Income taxes are raised 20% across the board (of course), and the evil fascist corporation's business taxes are raised 25%. The corporations, of course, promptly raise their prices by 30% to offset the corporate tax and additional overhead. Joe Schmoe, of course, loses on both ends - paying more income tax and more for all the goods/services he consumes.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #72 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhat is the Neocon stance on universal healthcare? I didn't really think healthcare was a part of their platform? NEO-CON STANCE ON HEALTHCARE: It should be given only to those that can afford it. You really should learn the definition of Neocon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #73 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuit using EXTREME examples; let's start talking about the family earning 25k/yr orthe college kid trying to get an education to contribute post grad. These are the people who need medical care who can;t afford it. I had insurance with a wife and 2 kids making 25k/year. My older sister put herself through college on scholarships and part-time jobs, and had insurance. I would hazard a guess and say that the majority of full time jobs provide some sort of medical coverage. QuoteI had insurance with a wife and 2 kids making 25k/year. My older sister put herself through college on scholarships and part-time jobs, and had insurance. And I walked 120 miles to school in 43 feet of snow, how does this matter? QuoteI would hazard a guess and say that the majority of full time jobs provide some sort of medical coverage. Did you read about the guy at work who paid 500/mo as a premium co-pay? It was at a reputable company too. It was as if he had no coverage at all, but technically they provided it. How about unemployed people? There's Cobra I guess. Either way, especially if you have kids, you're fucked. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #74 October 18, 2006 Quote Are you saying the tax writeoff is the tax break? Don't challenge me, challenge the economics. From the Economist, Jan 26, "Desperate Measures" Quote At the same time, the burden on government is about to soar. Add together Medicaid, Medicare and other publicly financed health care, such as that for ex-servicemen, and the public sector already pays for 45% of American health care. (The total is nearer 60% if you include the tax subsidies.) But as America's firms limit their health-care spending and, particularly, as the baby-boomers retire, that share will rise sharply. On current trends, federal spending on health will double as a share of the economy by 2020. That would mean much higher taxes, something Americans do not want to pay. With employers limiting their exposure and government unable to fund its commitments, America's health system will unravel—perhaps not this year or next, but soon. Few health experts deny this. Nor do they disagree much on the sources of the problem. Health markets are plagued with poor information, inadequate competition and skewed incentives. or try The RWJF I'm not sure which party you think I belong to. But I assure you that both parties are numbnuts when it comes to healthcare.My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #75 October 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteMedical care could be provided from birth to death without spending ANY additional public dollars!!! How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. QuotePersonally, I believe our government providing health care for it's citizens is right up there with providing education, clean water and roads. We could do it easily ...and it wouldn't cost an additionl dime! We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live? You are only looking at one side of the equation. No. I'm asking about one side of the equation that so many people don't want to discuss. It's the elephant in the room. The philosophical aspects of this are irrelevant if we can't figure out how to implement a program, at a reasonable cost. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
