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.
People who can't afford to go to the doctor will often go to the emergency room, the second most expensive area of the hospital in terms of direct costs. Instead of clinics or doctors offices, which are fairly cheap. If those people can't pay the money still needs to come from somewhere, by increasing prices to other patients. Those patients pay higher co-pays and premiums because of it.
A 10 year old should be able to reason through this without difficulty.
I thought you were against choices that made other people bear the cost?
If it free then people will abuse it as always. They will buy a new tech device ;and scam the system if they are that way.
As my cherokee mama used to say when apropos, "charity begins at home." So do a lot of other considerations, also.
I like to remind folks of what I call "The Airplane Principle" to keep it simple, and that is that we are wise to live our lives and not apologize as if we are being too selfish, in this way.
Just as we are told ad nauseum at the start of every dang flight, that in the unlikely event that oxygen is needed, that if we are traveling with someone that is dependent upon us, we must administer oxygen to ourselves, first so that we are able to be of assistance to others.
But you have to hit roock bottom before you bounce back. And when we do, I hope every responsible American will remember both the people and the poisonous thinking that got us into this mess.
But you have to hit roock bottom before you bounce back. And when we do, I hope every responsible American will remember both the people and the poisonous thinking that got us into this mess.
Try to handle the argument presented with that little integrity you might have some claim to. Or, do you realize you're better served avoiding the conversation?
Do you have any idea what the heck we are talking about?
The argument presented was a false representation of my original position.
When the poster corrects their misrepresentations of my position I will be more than happy to have a modicum of respect for their position.
I think you should regulate your own integrity first before preaching to others.
Yes, I read an article recently (not going to cite it cuz I don't feel like looking for it) that said Obama kind of blew it when he called it "individual mandate". This article suggested he should have called it "individual responsibility" or the like, instead. It would have gone over a lot better.
Looks they finally got the memo. As of this morning, or sometime yesterday, the administration is referring to it as the 'individual responsibility provision.'
To quote Chuck Todd "Now you call it that???"
Anyway, Judge Ginsberg is correct. We all collectively benefit from all sorts of economies of scale each and every day - when we go to the supermarket, when we buy clothes and even when we pay our current insurance premiums be they car, health, life, what-have-you.
It is but one of the advantages of being part of society.
Not sure why this is so hard to understand.
the issue in the decision is tht americans are not willing to accept consequences for their own actions. if somebody does not pay they should not get the service, but we dont operate that way.
we have to "do the right thing". land of the eternal 2nd chance.
No, we don't, although I believe that is part of what this provision was attempting to address.
Unlike say, car insurance, there is a close to 100% likelihood that a person is going to need health care at some point in his or her life. Everyone should contribute something to that eventual care.
OK; Free-market economics and the "Chicago" and or "Austrian" schools are displacing Keynesianism -- approaching the status of a proven, empirical, established fact. Yet our schools refuse to teach it.
From what I've seen, the McConnell / Brue economics texts, which are suprisingly libertarian (they contain, for example, a rereshing argument that demolishes the Liberals' "fair trade coffee" foible) have been displacing Samuelson as a staple in many basic Econ classes.
But I recognize that the NEA's basic interest in the growth of statism makes this a hard sell; a system that ignores so basic a reality will eventually collapse under the weight of its own folly.
New York collapsed thirty years ago, and was bailed ou by Uncle Sugar. But there's no way to bail out the entire nation. The question is merely one of what remains when it's over -- how to rebuild it, and how to protect it from the dummies, dreamers, and the smaller contingent of outright predators the next time around.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 03-29-2012 at 03:15 PM..
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.
