Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree. To me ACA would never have been needed if all states did the right thing for its citizens. To think of all the money wasted on setting up all the exchanges when each state only had to offer a sliding scale Medicaid for those without insurance drives me nuts.
It seems as though the states had to be forced. Here in Massachusetts we already had statewide health care. It was started when we had Gov. Romney. We lost that when the ACA took over. To me, it doesn't matter much whether it's run by the states or the feds but it looks like it's got to be run by someone. Apparently, on their own, most states will spend money on whatever they want and it usually will NOT be for the benefit of their constituents. It's a 100% given that people need medical care.
Actually, when we had state health care, it meant that I had to stay in this state to get medical care. That meant that if I had found a good job in another state, or if I had wanted to move out of state for any reason (to care for a sick relative, to be near family) I wouldn't have had that freedom. I would have had to find a full time job first.
Compare that with my dil in England--she is looking for a job. Her husband just lost his. They have three kids. But do they have the added worry of not being able to go to a doctor? No. The kids go to the doctor, if either of the parents got in an accident, they could go to the hospital. Wondering what they'll do about health insurance doesn't even enter their minds. Health care is a necessity of life.
They have them in IRA. They withdraw just enough to live like $40k for 4 people. All in stock. Yes that is gaming the system.
You should not argue with me regarding let universal health care, my husband came from the UK and we know there were/are no jobs there compare to USA. If there are jobs, very low paid. His niece is a doctor from top school and still barely make ends meet. Live like rats, in tight quarters.
I guess my definition of bum is different your definition of bum. People who don't maximize their God given talent. I never mentioned welfare, those are moochers of society.
Your husband comes from the UK.. and they "live like rats". Same can be said of people struggling in the U.S.
Life is a struggle everywhere.. but at least in the UK you don't loose your life or every thing you have when you get sick.
Not understanding your jobs statement. If i'm reading it correctly you are saying there are tons of jobs in the U.S? But there arent'. Most of the jobs added to the U.S economy have been service jobs - or low paying min wage jobs. And the min wage is not a living wage. it's a poverty wage.
I CAN and WILL argue from here to kingdom come about Universal Health care. I know people in many different nations, that despite some downsides (because nothing is perfect) not one of them would EVER trade the system they have for what we have here in the U.S. As a matter of fact I had a great conversation with a couple from the UK traveling to visit family that live here in the U.S and they said exactly that.. that despite the UK's faults in the system..they still appreciate it when they see what we deal with here. Particularity what their family members living here deal with. They purchase expensive travel insurance just to come visit knowing one accident here could wipe out everything they own and worked for.
Here in the U.S the REAL moochers are the wealthy - who game the system.. exploit the system for their own personal gain on the backs of the poor and the middle class . But just because they have money - and hide behind the guise of money - seem to get a way with it. Even praised for it as being smart. Hell Trump bragged about how "smart" he is that he avoids paying income taxes. LOL. Meanwhile, he's lobbied and influenced politicians to create the very laws he takes advantage of to get away with not paying income taxes.. So Trump is smart - but a couple living modestly that worked to build a modest asset and that use the laws to their advantage are not living up to their potential or are drains on society?
Meanwhile, the U.S biggest employer is Walmart. The owners of Walmart are ridiculously wealthy and they didn't really work a day in their life (they inherited their wealthy and don't have to work). You could say that they are not living up to their potential because they do nothing most of the time - because they don't have to , but I doubt you would say that because you see them as wealthy - so if they are wealthy they have attained their potential? What defines potential. If someone has talent but doesn't use that talent and is poor, they are squandering it and not living up to their potential.. but so is the rich person sitting poolside that doesn't use their talents either. Potential is not measured by income. And what someones potential is can not be determined by you or anyone but the individual. ONly he/she knows what they are capable of and what they are not. WE can only observe and think we know.. but we may not.
IN addition.. companies like WALMART are the realcmoochers.. why, because the U.S government subsidized the employees they refuse to pay a living wage to. They could, easily - and rather than coach their employees on how to collect government benefits , they could pay a wage that their employees wouldn't require any government assistance and still remain a highly profitable company that derives a lot of wealth for the Waltons (I believe that is the family name) that originally started the company and the shareholders.
Why is a potential measured in career or levels of financial gain? what if they desire to live a modest life comfortably enjoying themselves. And , they did have to EARN the money in their IRA - again by working and then sacrificing to put that money there. It wsn't handed to them.. they earned it. So why is that not living up to a potential. To me, they were smart and have achieved a level of success in being able to live their life comfortably .. not flashy , but comfortable.
It seems as though the states had to be forced. Here in Massachusetts we already had statewide health care. It was started when we had Gov. Romney. We lost that when the ACA took over. To me, it doesn't matter much whether it's run by the states or the feds but it looks like it's got to be run by someone. Apparently, on their own, most states will spend money on whatever they want and it usually will NOT be for the benefit of their constituents. It's a 100% given that people need medical care.
Actually, when we had state health care, it meant that I had to stay in this state to get medical care. That meant that if I had found a good job in another state, or if I had wanted to move out of state for any reason (to care for a sick relative, to be near family) I wouldn't have had that freedom. I would have had to find a full time job first. Unemployment rate in Europe is much higher than USA.
Compare that with my dil in England--she is looking for a job. Her husband just lost his. They have three kids. But do they have the added worry of not being able to go to a doctor? No. The kids go to the doctor, if either of the parents got in an accident, they could go to the hospital. Wondering what they'll do about health insurance doesn't even enter their minds. Health care is a necessity of life.
The price they pay for that is super low growth, graduates from UK make 1/3 or graduates from USA. And that's if they are lucky to have a job at graduation.
Last edited by NewbieHere; 12-17-2016 at 08:44 PM..
Your husband comes from the UK.. and they "live like rats". Same can be said of people struggling in the U.S.
Life is a struggle everywhere.. but at least in the UK you don't loose your life or every thing you have when you get sick.
Not understanding your jobs statement. If i'm reading it correctly you are saying there are tons of jobs in the U.S? But there arent'. Most of the jobs added to the U.S economy have been service jobs - or low paying min wage jobs. And the min wage is not a living wage. it's a poverty wage.
I CAN and WILL argue from here to kingdom come about Universal Health care. I know people in many different nations, that despite some downsides (because nothing is perfect) not one of them would EVER trade the system they have for what we have here in the U.S. As a matter of fact I had a great conversation with a couple from the UK traveling to visit family that live here in the U.S and they said exactly that.. that despite the UK's faults in the system..they still appreciate it when they see what we deal with here. Particularity what their family members living here deal with. They purchase expensive travel insurance just to come visit knowing one accident here could wipe out everything they own and worked for.
Here in the U.S the REAL moochers are the wealthy - who game the system.. exploit the system for their own personal gain on the backs of the poor and the middle class . But just because they have money - and hide behind the guise of money - seem to get a way with it. Even praised for it as being smart. Hell Trump bragged about how "smart" he is that he avoids paying income taxes. LOL. Meanwhile, he's lobbied and influenced politicians to create the very laws he takes advantage of to get away with not paying income taxes.. So Trump is smart - but a couple living modestly that worked to build a modest asset and that use the laws to their advantage are not living up to their potential or are drains on society?
Meanwhile, the U.S biggest employer is Walmart. The owners of Walmart are ridiculously wealthy and they didn't really work a day in their life (they inherited their wealthy and don't have to work). You could say that they are not living up to their potential because they do nothing most of the time - because they don't have to , but I doubt you would say that because you see them as wealthy - so if they are wealthy they have attained their potential? What defines potential. If someone has talent but doesn't use that talent and is poor, they are squandering it and not living up to their potential.. but so is the rich person sitting poolside that doesn't use their talents either. Potential is not measured by income. And what someones potential is can not be determined by you or anyone but the individual. ONly he/she knows what they are capable of and what they are not. WE can only observe and think we know.. but we may not.
IN addition.. companies like WALMART are the realcmoochers.. why, because the U.S government subsidized the employees they refuse to pay a living wage to. They could, easily - and rather than coach their employees on how to collect government benefits , they could pay a wage that their employees wouldn't require any government assistance and still remain a highly profitable company that derives a lot of wealth for the Waltons (I believe that is the family name) that originally started the company and the shareholders.
Why is a potential measured in career or levels of financial gain? what if they desire to live a modest life comfortably enjoying themselves. And , they did have to EARN the money in their IRA - again by working and then sacrificing to put that money there. It wsn't handed to them.. they earned it. So why is that not living up to a potential. To me, they were smart and have achieved a level of success in being able to live their life comfortably .. not flashy , but comfortable.
You should check out what minimum wage in UK. My sister in law makes less than GBP 8 per an hour. She is lucky her house is paid otherwise she would be in poverty range. She has not bought new clothes since she divorced her husband for 12 years. I don't imagine anybody in my circle live it that way. The grass is always greener mentality.
Honestly, I don't shop at Walmart and don't work for Walmart. In fact my city does not have Walmart. But I'm getting tired of the ranting against the wealthy. You sound like Pelosi on steroids. Ranting all you like, but people in this country rejects socialism and communism. In fact, lots of people from those countries with good health care and we willing to leave them to come here and starting things from scratch. I know plenty of people from France too.
In California, before Obamacare, there was a high risk pool for people with pre-existing conditions. The cost of those plans are slightly more expensive, IIRC, $1000 vs $650 per month.
Ido t know about the voucher system because it's not concrete yet. I'll wait and see.
High risk pools tip already high priced insurance over the top .. nearly double! In PA when I moved here before the ACA they had guaranteed issue plans for "healthy" people and "underwritten" plans for people with pre-exisitng conditions. And the cost was nearly double - pushing it way above affordability. and , to boot, if you had a laps in coverage - not only did you pay the high risk price - but you got absolutely NO coverage for your pre-exisitng condition for a full year. |
High risk pools do not help those with pre-existing conditions. They are designed to help those currently healthy save money - and screw those with conditions..
You should check out what minimum wage in UK. My sister in law makes less than GBP per an hour. She is lucky her house is paid otherwise she would be in poverty range. She has not bought new clothes since she divorced her husband for 12 years. I don't imagine anybody in my circle live it that way. The grass is always greener mentality.
Min wage in the US is no better.
Have you seen the charts on what it costs to afford rent in all 40 states on min wage.. in just about all the states more than 40 hours a week are required just to meet your housing expense (rent).
I would imagine that he UK and the US are having similar issues with regard to income inequality and corporations corrupting government for policies that favor themselves at the behest of everyone else. I don't pretend, however, to fully know the UK system enough to make a definitive assessment of that.
BUT I know what the issues here in the U.S are well. I have followed politics closely.. and not just every 4 years like most fair weather voters in the US who think they know, but have no clue.
High risk pools tip already high priced insurance over the top .. nearly double! In PA when I moved here before the ACA they had guaranteed issue plans for "healthy" people and "underwritten" plans for people with pre-exisitng conditions. And the cost was nearly double - pushing it way above affordability. and , to boot, if you had a laps in coverage - not only did you pay the high risk price - but you got absolutely NO coverage for your pre-exisitng condition for a full year. |
High risk pools do not help those with pre-existing conditions. They are designed to help those currently healthy save money - and screw those with conditions..
This is not true for California, but you seem to like twisting the truth for your argument. My sister got coverage except it was more expensive then she liked to pay. Now with ACA, she is paying $750 a month.
Have you seen the charts on what it costs to afford rent in all 40 states on min wage.. in just about all the states more than 40 hours a week are required just to meet your housing expense (rent).
I would imagine that he UK and the US are having similar issues with regard to income inequality and corporations corrupting government for policies that favor themselves at the behest of everyone else. I don't pretend, however, to fully know the UK system enough to make a definitive assessment of that.
BUT I know what the issues here in the U.S are well. I have followed politics closely.. and not just every 4 years like most fair weather voters in the US who think they know, but have no clue.
You forgot that minimum wage is intended for teenagers, so they live with their parents, no need to pay rent. It's not intended for adults. But the economy is so bad, adults took those jobs. Even then, none of my kids got paid minimum wage even when they were 15-16, I know they were paid slightly above minimum wage.
Maybe you should move to China or Russia, where there are no corruptions in government. Or perhaps Venezuela or Cuba. It might suit your politics better.
This is not true for California, but you seem to like twisting the truth for your argument. My sister got coverage except it was more expensive then she liked to pay. Now with ACA, she is paying $750 a month.
California is an exception.. and is actually an example of how progressive economy works.. as opposed to republican ideas on economy.
California has raised the min wage above the federal min wage - and is leading the way in higher min wage successfully. It has the 6th largest economy in the world. . AND it's only a state!
It's not without it's problems. Crowding has made housing much more expensive and their is a lot of traffic congestion.. BUT California is a great example of what the U.S should be doing - investing in jobs of the future (tech and green energy) raising the min wage, etc.
And here is the chart explaining how much min wage needs to be in dollars in order to afford rent in each state. Note that even though Ca is higher in min wage , it's overcrowding creating a housing shortage.. the high min wgae there is still not sufficient...
I wasn't trying to make things "fit" my story.. the facts informed my opinion...
The problem with ACA subsidies is that it levels poverty levels to one national number without taking into consideration the cost of living in each state.. again THAT is a problem with the ACA that could be tweaked..so that someone in California making hte higher California min wage isn't penalized for that higher wage without taking into consideration the also higher cost of living .
I've already stated the ACA isn't perfect.. and if there were changes that could be made to improve it ,t hey should be made.
Last edited by TaraBann; 12-17-2016 at 09:07 PM..
Reason: Clarify a point.
The price they pay for that is super low growth, graduates from UK make 1/3 or graduates from USA. And that's if they are lucky to have a job at graduation.
Look into the numbers of those with college degrees working min wage jobs that have nothing to do with the very high priced degree they earned from university. Look up the cost of university vs. the pay they receive if they ARE lucky to find a job .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
