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.
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,140,525 times
Reputation: 2677
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
interesting thread....and kind of a false narrative
there is not one person in america that does not have access to health care
every person can open up the yellow pages, and find a doctor who will provide the service need (while some doctors might not be recieving new patients, there are plenty out there that are) access is about being able to GO TO the provider
the real issue here is health INSURANCE...in otherwords WHO WILL PAY FOR THE SERVICE I WANT
And now we find a lot of us paying insurance premiums for services we neither need nor want.. and paying for others with services that they neither need nor want. Nobody wants people to "suffer", but total and complete insurance coverage for every sniffle and stubbed toe across the board seems to be taking it to the extreme. Why couldn't we have had a "major medical" coverage for those who need it perhaps paid through the pools, which would have covered those without insurance for the catastrophic medical needs, but not force others then to write a blank check. I could support this for folks who find themselves in need of hospitalization, but find it appalling that I now have to pay for Jane Doe's trips to the doctor for her bunions and birth control.
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,140,525 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
You will, along with everyone else that buys that insurance.... That is the way all insurance works. It spreads the cost to all of the subscribers, so these arguments I'm seeing that are stating people should all pay their own way are not valid. Not for any insurance, home, car, flood or even the socialized insurance (unemployment insurance) working Americans are covered with...
Regarding being forced to purchase ACA insurance, let me ask you, how do feel about being forced to buy auto insurance in order to drive, or being forced to buy home owners insurance in order to obtain a mortgage?
The insurance that I have to buy to drive is Liability Only. So it protects OTHERS from me doing something stupid in a vehicle. There is no law that says I have to have comprehensive. Do you not believe that there are people driving around uninsured? Sure there are! So is this where we are going next? Pooled car insurance for everyone? Also I'm not being FORCED to obtain insurance.. I simply choose to because it is the right thing to do. Nothing is actually stopping me from driving uninsured. Heck if I chose to I could even get behind the wheel without a drivers license. Some folks can't afford that.. so do we all need to start being taxed to provide drivers licenses all around. (I know.. I know.. I'm exaggerating..but this is why the car insurance/home insurance analogy doesn't work)
The reason you have to have homeowners to obtain a mortgage is simple. You are protecting the BANKS money. The bank doesn't care if you have contents coverage, liability, etc. All they care about is that you have enough coverage to cover their mortgage amount so that they will get their money if your home is destroyed by a catastrophic situation. The protection isn't for you... It's for the bank. If you own your home outright you don't have to have homeowners... period. I don't know if you've ever gotten a letter from your bank stating that your insurance has lapsed or if they haven't gotten your declarations page.. but then the bank will tell you they are going to "force" insurance? We actually had people who would come in and say... "I'll take your insurance then add it on to my payment." The only thing the bank forced insurance covers is the mortgage amount period. We'd try to explain that to them, but they were too stupid to get it that if their home burned down they weren't getting a penny.
First, that's a different thread altogether. The search function is your friend if you're interested in discussing semantics in that thread.
Secondly, the left wants equality of outcome and believes this can be achieved through legislation which obligates those who have supporting those who don't, at gunpoint if necessary. Life's not fair. The sooner this is recognized the easier it is to accept and deal with whatever else follows.
There will be suffering always, of one type or another. I don't want to see people suffer, but if I feel strongly then I can provide direct assistance or channel my chosen amounts through a charity. Taking my tax dollars to heavily subsidize individualized benefits for others is robbery, plain and simple.
As has been said, everyone has access to healthcare and no one should be denied by policy. Not being able to pay for it is another thing altogether. Example: No one is denied access to a Mercedes. There are no armed guards at the showroom entrance keeping people out. Everyone is free to enter, browse and compare the available selections. That doesn't mean that everyone who wants one will get to buy one on someone else's dime, nor should they. You want one? Fine, then buy one, but I'm not going to help you pay for it. And you getting one (or not getting one) doesn't affect my ability to get (or not get) one. Like healthcare, it's a consumer product available for retail purchase by those who can afford it.
Now stop being a retard.
Sorry, bub, but I find the use of the word "retard" offensive, and I will point it out if I feel like it.
Secondly, no one is advocating for equal outcomes, and I think you know better. Talk about a topic more appropriate for a different thread!
Thirdly, "I don't want to see people suffer, but" just doesn't quite come across as very compassionate. To replace welfare with charity, it is estimated that charitable giving would have to increase by a factor of 10. Welfare can be replaced by charity
I don't need a failed analogy about Mercedes this early in the morning. If you can't see the difference between health care and a Mercedes, I can't help you.
Regarding being forced to purchase ACA insurance, let me ask you, how do feel about being forced to buy auto insurance in order to drive, or being forced to buy home owners insurance in order to obtain a mortgage?
But no one is forced to buy auto insurance. Only those who want to drive. There are no laws mandating that I buy auto insurance if I do not drive. If I don't need to drive, or choose not to, then I don't need to buy it. Same with homeowners' insuance. If I rent, or live with relatives in their home, why would I need to buy it? And if I have no mortgage, I'm then free to not carry insurance.
The ACA mandate is that everyone will purchase coverage whether they need it or not, or whether they choose to see a doctor or not. And will be charged for this product at a rate commensurate with their income. Your analogy fails big time. Neither my auto policy provider nor my HO insurance provider has ever asked me how much I make before quoting the price on coverage.
interesting thread....and kind of a false narrative
there is not one person in america that does not have access to health care
every person can open up the yellow pages, and find a doctor who will provide the service need (while some doctors might not be recieving new patients, there are plenty out there that are) access is about being able to GO TO the provider
the real issue here is health INSURANCE...in otherwords WHO WILL PAY FOR THE SERVICE I WANT
That is complete and utter compost! In addition to those docs not taking new patients, there are docs who won't take self-pay. You think not, try it yourself. And, there are those people who can't afford it no matter how cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus10
And now we find a lot of us paying insurance premiums for services we neither need nor want.. and paying for others with services that they neither need nor want. Nobody wants people to "suffer", but total and complete insurance coverage for every sniffle and stubbed toe across the board seems to be taking it to the extreme. Why couldn't we have had a "major medical" coverage for those who need it perhaps paid through the pools, which would have covered those without insurance for the catastrophic medical needs, but not force others then to write a blank check. I could support this for folks who find themselves in need of hospitalization, but find it appalling that I now have to pay for Jane Doe's trips to the doctor for her bunions and birth control.
This is hilarious. Between the RWs grousing about these awful "high-d" plans that people are now being supposedly FORCED to take, and people complaining that the ACA covers too much, it's hard to figure out what the RW wants. "Will work for chickens"?
The insurance that I have to buy to drive is Liability Only. So it protects OTHERS from me doing something stupid in a vehicle. There is no law that says I have to have comprehensive. Do you not believe that there are people driving around uninsured? Sure there are! So is this where we are going next? Pooled car insurance for everyone? Also I'm not being FORCED to obtain insurance.. I simply choose to because it is the right thing to do. Nothing is actually stopping me from driving uninsured. Heck if I chose to I could even get behind the wheel without a drivers license. Some folks can't afford that.. so do we all need to start being taxed to provide drivers licenses all around. (I know.. I know.. I'm exaggerating..but this is why the car insurance/home insurance analogy doesn't work)
The reason you have to have homeowners to obtain a mortgage is simple. You are protecting the BANKS money. The bank doesn't care if you have contents coverage, liability, etc. All they care about is that you have enough coverage to cover their mortgage amount so that they will get their money if your home is destroyed by a catastrophic situation. The protection isn't for you... It's for the bank. If you own your home outright you don't have to have homeowners... period.
You cherry picked my post, and made a lame attempt at rationalizing what you did respond to to fit your bias....
How about unemployment insurance? I agree that there is no law requiring comprehensive or collision insurance, but they are to protect you, liability is REQUIRED to protect others as well as protecting you from lawsuits...If you want to risk driving illegally that is up to you, but you had better hope you do not get involved in a serious accident and injure or kill someone...
Homeowner's insurance is not just for the bank....Would you take the risk, had no mortgage but decided not to carry insurance?
Another thing. I have no longer have a mortgage on my home, but when I did I had a little thing called mortgage insurance
I saw a scientific survey once that said the further you are from any doctor, the healthier you are. People seem to think they can go to the doctor and then go home and do anything and the doctor can fix it. That's a myth.
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,140,525 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
That is complete and utter compost! In addition to those docs not taking new patients, there are docs who won't take self-pay. You think not, try it yourself. And, there are those people who can't afford it no matter how cheap.
This is hilarious. Between the RWs grousing about these awful "high-d" plans that people are now being supposedly FORCED to take, and people complaining that the ACA covers too much, it's hard to figure out what the RW wants. "Will work for chickens"?
I don't care whether you think it's hilarious or not. What I want is very plain and simple. I want to pay for myself. I want to purchase the coverage I need. I want to have money left out of my paycheck in order to save for my retirement. I want to contribute to other's welfare when I choose to do so. I want to file my taxes each year without being penalized for not patronizing specific businesses. I want some representation for my tax dollars instead of being preached at by politicians telling me what I need. I want some fiscal responsibility from my government. And most of all... I want people like you to stay the heck out of my life and quit thinking that you are the only one with an opinion that matters.....
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,140,525 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Another thing. I have no longer have a mortgage on my home, but when I did I had a little thing called mortgage insurance
LOL.. Mortgage Insurance is a complete DIFFERENT subject. Mortgage Insurance (otherwise known as PMI) covers the difference in the LTV. Most banks only loan at 80/20. If you don't put twenty percent down your going to pay PMI. Or didn't you know this?
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.
And now we find a lot of us paying insurance premiums for services we neither need nor want.. and paying for others with services that they neither need nor want. Nobody wants people to "suffer", but total and complete insurance coverage for every sniffle and stubbed toe across the board seems to be taking it to the extreme. Why couldn't we have had a "major medical" coverage for those who need it perhaps paid through the pools, which would have covered those without insurance for the catastrophic medical needs, but not force others then to write a blank check. I could support this for folks who find themselves in need of hospitalization, but find it appalling that I now have to pay for Jane Doe's trips to the doctor for her bunions and birth control.
