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.
As soon as you can volunteer where your tax money goes let me know. I have to pay for the local schools for the benefit of the community even though I have no children enrolled there and part of my tax money is going to educate children of illegal aliens. On top of that, we have no choice in hiring the teachers that get paid from our tax money. I guess that's an unfair socialist contract too.
You, as an American citizen already pay taxes all day long and have no say where that money goes.
Just because the government violates the rights of self ownership for other purposes doesn't make it all ok and it doesn't justify a never ending cycle of taxation "for the public good".
That's a false equivalency.
Now, that doesn't mean that I think all taxation is wrong (or theft, or socialism)
There are some purposes that are among the enumerated powers of government that constitues legitimate taxation.
What if I have my own insurance and don't want or need the public option?
It's like making someone pay for car insurance who doesn't drive.
If you cannot pay the doctor, how do you fulfill your "right" to healthcare?
Now if I agree to this "social contract" scenario that you are describing....
All is good.....no problem.
But if I don't agree to it......then we have a problem.
The key here is my voluntary participation.
If you come to an agreement with the doctor...for him to treat you for free, or to barter services, or to make payments..... your golden.
Or if you borrow money from someone ....
Or you form a co-op with others and a doctor who agrees to the arrangement...
All of this is A-ok.
But since we're not yet living in a Star Trek like Utopia where everyone works for the good of humanity.....
You have to figure out how to come to this agreement with the doctor on your own
Otherwise you are violating his rights or the person you want to tax rights.
People who don't drive still have to share the cost of public roadways. People who don't have children still have to share the cost of public education, either directly, through property taxes, or indirectly, through their rent, which I assure you covers the cost of the landlord's taxes.
People who don't like war have to share the cost of our military.
Please don't start lecturing about voluntary participation. That dog won't hunt.
People who don't drive still have to share the cost of public roadways. People who don't have children still have to share the cost of public education, either directly, through property taxes, or indirectly, through their rent, which I assure you covers the cost of the landlord's taxes.
People who don't like war have to share the cost of our military.
Please don't start lecturing about voluntary participation. That dog won't hunt.
I don't lecture anyone.
I simply point out when those who call something a "right" are oblivious to what a "right" is.
Go form your own insurance group, all you and your buddies who want this can join. Then, you all share the costs.
Good?
Insurance companies are the problem so, no I don't want to form my own. That's just adding to the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96
What if I have my own insurance and don't want or need the public option?
It's like making someone pay for car insurance who doesn't drive.
If you cannot pay the doctor, how do you fulfill your "right" to healthcare?
Now if I agree to this "social contract" scenario that you are describing....
All is good.....no problem.
But if I don't agree to it......then we have a problem.
The key here is my voluntary participation.
If you come to an agreement with the doctor...for him to treat you for free, or to barter services, or to make payments..... your golden.
Or if you borrow money from someone ....
Or you form a co-op with others and a doctor who agrees to the arrangement...
All of this is A-ok.
But since we're not yet living in a Star Trek like Utopia where everyone works for the good of humanity.....
You have to figure out how to come to this agreement with the doctor on your own
Otherwise you are violating his rights or the person you want to tax rights.
No one is violating anyone's rights. The doctors still get paid. They are free to refuse service to anyone who's on a public healthcare system. Others, who actually care about healing the sick, will step in and fill the void. It happens now with Medicare and no one suffers for it. A lot of people don't even know that.
You may not drive a car but you WILL need healthcare at some point. That alone invalidates your car insurance argument (not sure why people think the two are related).
As far as taxes, you already don't have a choice where that money goes. You may be in favor of your taxes going to fund useless wars but I'm not. I still pay them because I understand they're for the good of the nation.
People like you love to parrot GOP propaganda and say taxes are theft. Well, they're not. Taxes are an essential part of any civilized society. Funding a national healthcare system is one of those things that will be good for the country as a whole. Everyone benefits. You guys will never have your dream utopia of tax free lives. Sorry but that's just not going to happen.
The problem with your argument is that the middle class overall is already stuck with a bill.
Perhaps you misunderstand. I suggest abolishing socialized medicine and getting government out of healthcare entirely.
That does not involve the middle class in paying for the bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marino760
An outrageous monthly insurance premium that many times is more than many individuals pay for rent or even a mortgage.
Healthcare shouldn't cost an individual an obscene amount of money lowering their standard of living by forcing them to have an almost useless health insurance plan that they are in fear of using because of high deductibles.
If the current system was working, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
The "obscene cost" is a recent development.
The problem is quite simple : the more takers shoehorned in between the patient and the care giver, the higher the cost - to the patient or to the one paying the bill.
Takers include government, bureaucrats, administrative overhead, taxes, stockholders, red tape, bankers, etc, etc.
No form of government meddling, subsidy, insurance or other burdens will ever drive down the cost.
GLORIOUS SOCIALISM Average Cost Per Inpatient Day Across 50 States in 2010
Hospital bed cost per day
United States
• State/local government hospitals — $1,625
• Non-profit hospitals — $2,025
• For-profit hospitals — $1,629
COST INCREASE : 40,725% increase ($1,629/$4)
($1,629/$4 = 407.25 X 100 = 40725%)
(Somebody has to pay for all the bureaucracy, paper work, clerks, adjusters, investigators, supervisors, guys in clown suits, etc, etc.)
This is the result of government meddling in medicine for over 120 years.
Perhaps you misunderstand. I suggest abolishing socialized medicine and getting government out of healthcare entirely.
That does not involve the middle class in paying for the bill.
The "obscene cost" is a recent development.
The problem is quite simple : the more takers shoehorned in between the patient and the care giver, the higher the cost - to the patient or to the one paying the bill.
Takers include government, bureaucrats, administrative overhead, taxes, stockholders, red tape, bankers, etc, etc.
No form of government meddling, subsidy, insurance or other burdens will ever drive down the cost.
GLORIOUS SOCIALISM Average Cost Per Inpatient Day Across 50 States in 2010
Hospital bed cost per day
United States
• State/local government hospitals — $1,625
• Non-profit hospitals — $2,025
• For-profit hospitals — $1,629
COST INCREASE : 40,725% increase ($1,629/$4)
($1,629/$4 = 407.25 X 100 = 40725%)
(Somebody has to pay for all the bureaucracy, paper work, clerks, adjusters, investigators, supervisors, guys in clown suits, etc, etc.)
This is the result of government meddling in medicine for over 120 years.
So your idea would be to remove government from healthcare, thus removing regulations? You are advocating healthcare be the one and only unregulated industry in the country? That would drive down the costs to a 1930s level? Why is healthcare the only industry affected in such a way by regulations? Other industries are regulated like food, utilities, etc. but I don't recall ever having to mortgage my home to use any of those things.
I for one don't want people who are treating, or operating on me to be just anyone off the street. I want to know they are properly trained to do what they are doing. We don't want to return to the days when the local barber also doubled as the town surgeon.
"Getting government out of healthcare" is a fallacy. I don't know about you but I want my hospitals and doctors regulated and I think I can safely say a majority of people do as well. I can also tell you from living in a state that's had tort reform, that method hasn't worked either in the 10+ years we've had it. If it hasn't worked in Texas, the bastion of conservative politics, what makes you think it'll work nationwide?
Now that we've established both of your standard GOP talking points are little more than propaganda....what else ya got?
Insurance companies are the problem so, no I don't want to form my own. That's just adding to the problem.
Here is the problem.
You want everyone to pay for health care.
So...
Get all the people together like you who want this and you people agree to pay for it.
Those of us who don't want to be a part of your system can choose our own way, much like what already occurs in socialized health care countries where the people who want better healthcare just use private anyway.
This way, you... and people like you equally pay for what you want as your little collective and everyone else can do what they want. I get to keep my money, and your money goes exactly where you want it to go!
Sound good or are you now going to tell me it won't work unless you can take from everyone?
So your idea would be to remove government from healthcare, thus removing regulations? You are advocating healthcare be the one and only unregulated industry in the country? That would drive down the costs to a 1930s level? Why is healthcare the only industry affected in such a way by regulations? Other industries are regulated like food, utilities, etc. but I don't recall ever having to mortgage my home to use any of those things.
I for one don't want people who are treating, or operating on me to be just anyone off the street. I want to know they are properly trained to do what they are doing. We don't want to return to the days when the local barber also doubled as the town surgeon.
"Getting government out of healthcare" is a fallacy. I don't know about you but I want my hospitals and doctors regulated and I think I can safely say a majority of people do as well. I can also tell you from living in a state that's had tort reform, that method hasn't worked either in the 10+ years we've had it. If it hasn't worked in Texas, the bastion of conservative politics, what makes you think it'll work nationwide?
Now that we've established both of your standard GOP talking points are little more than propaganda....what else ya got?
Lets don't stop at healthcare, lets make most of our industries unregulated.
You do realize that there are private standardization companies who exist even now as a means to insure quality products and under safe specs and conditions? Companies still use these services because of the name that comes with it. You would be surprised at how many government regulations that exist simply to fill the pockets of government and provide favors (ie government controls) to parties who gain favor with them.
Allow parents age 60 and up who want to retire to join their kids' health insurance plan until they become 65 and eligible for Medicare. Similar to how kids up to age 26 can stay on their parents plan. Talk about a nice pay-back for parents that put a lot of time and money into raising great hardworking kids. They can actually retire and enjoy life!
Also allow insurance companies to compete across state lines
The bolded will not work. Selling insurance in a new region or state takes more than just getting a license and including all the locally required benefits. It also involves setting up favorable contracts with doctors and hospitals so that customers will be able to get access to health care. Establishing those networks of health care providers can be hard for new market entrants. The barriers to entry are not regulatory, but financial and network. We do already have it for consumers who take their health care from their job, but employers have a lot of clout. Insurers would need enough customers to have a large enough risk pool to make it worthwhile.
1) Every American has access to the same health insurance plan Congress has at the same cost
OR
2) We strip Congress of its health coverage, requires they devise a plan to cover themselves and every American at the same cost, and watch how quickly they can actually get something done when their own sorry butts are on the line.
You see, the thing is that Congress gets good health coverage, but it is the same coverage that every other federal employee gets.
Members of Congress are also charged with their fair share of the premiums, so that they are not all that different from a federally employed janitor.
Quote:
YOU ASK:
What kind of health insurance does the president and the congress receive?
WE ANSWER:
The president and the members of the congress are covered using the Federal Employees Health Insurance Program.
The Federal Employees Health Insurance Program features "managed competition", with private insurance providers, labor unions and other employee associations offering the plans. The plans are sold at a fee, and are available not just for the president and members of the congress, but for all federal employees. The program provides over 300 private health care plans that covers the president, senators, congressmen, down to the janitors who clean the White House.
Now, before you react violently that congressmen and the president enjoy "gold-plated" insurance plans using your tax dollars, this is not actually the case. Members of Congress are also charged with their fair share of the premiums, so that they are not all that different from a federally employed janitor.
If a federal employee chooses to get a "good" plan, then they will also pay for this. (But their portion of the premiums could reach as little as 25% of the total premiums.) What is interesting is that some of those in congress opt to be covered under the insurance plans of their spouses - for the reason that these may offer an even more comprehensive cover or that it may be more cost-effective.
This insurance program is similar to other private insurance plans in that, the plans state:
The network of doctors you can see
The prescription medications covered
Which specialists you can go to
Which hospitals you can be specialized
What instances may cause your claim to be rejected
However, they do get an excellent set of benefits by virtue of the fact that government employees form a large pool. This enables federal employees to have wider choices. And, by virtue of the fact that they form a large pool of insureds, there is no waiting periods for most of the plans. That means their insurance protects them immediately.
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.
