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.
You are right. He should stay uninsured. Then, if he and/or his wife get sick, they can go to the ER. Then, when the bills come in all he has to do is declare bankruptcy and then you, as the taxpayer, can pick up 100% of the cost.
I believe we'll be getting some compensation when he has to sell the condo.
Do you have an answer for how will he actually pay for his UHC? Or is that for other people to do?
How is this any different than individuals who dont go to work, and ask the governmet to pay for their own housing, their own food, and medicaid insurance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roma
A preview of events soon to come brought to you by Obamacare..........
To quote the father of this plan, Mitt Romney (then governor of MA):
"We can't have as a nation 40 million people — or, in my state, half a million — saying, 'I don't have insurance, and if I get sick, I want someone else to pay,'... It's a conservative idea,... individuals have responsibility for their own health care. I think it appeals to people on both sides of the aisle: insurance for everyone without a tax increase" (Link)
Unless conservatives like to speak from both ends, is this not really a conservative idea, as opposed to say UHC that I would rather see?
And you have been paying for him (and the other uninsured like him). Just because the idea didn't get through the sand doesn't mean it hasn't a fact of the system.
To quote the father of this plan, Mitt Romney (then governor of MA):
"We can't have as a nation 40 million people — or, in my state, half a million — saying, 'I don't have insurance, and if I get sick, I want someone else to pay,'... It's a conservative idea,... individuals have responsibility for their own health care. I think it appeals to people on both sides of the aisle: insurance for everyone without a tax increase" (Link)
Unless conservatives like to speak from both ends, is this not really a conservative idea, as opposed to say UHC that I would rather see?
What I don't get is how fiscal conservatives can defend a system that is costing around $7,290 per person per year compared to $4,417 in Switzerland and $2,992 in the UK. And it isn't as though the results are measurably better.
I see myself as a middle of the road voter. But as someone who has been in business for years, the economics shock me.
I mean, it makes basic economic sense to say that we have a problem here. I would have thought that conservatives would be all over that one.
This is Obamacare in miniature. One truly becomes a slave to health insurance companies. If one was to respond to me saying otherwise, I'm sure your insurance is subsidized by an employer. The talking heads talk of small business being the backbone of this nation----not for long, how can they pay these premiums, only large businesses, state and federal for the most part. Another plan not sustainable overtime, just like our current one, just to line the pockets for for-profit insurance companies. Over time people will work primarily for insurance coverage, not homes, education etc. especially if this economy drags on in which it will. Obama pandered to big business with his bill, soon afterwards the Supreme court declared big business as people and can bribe politicians as much as they like setting up a huge revolt coming in 2014.
What I don't get is how fiscal conservatives can defend a system that is costing around $7,290 per person per year compared to $4,417 in Switzerland and $2,992 in the UK. And it isn't as though the results are measurably better.
I see myself as a middle of the road voter. But as someone who has been in business for years, the economics shock me.
I mean, it makes basic economic sense to say that we have a problem here. I would have thought that conservatives would be all over that one.
Because they are true believers in lip service. It gets them the high they crave. Politicians know that, and they keep them on that high.
Over time people will work primarily for insurance coverage, not homes, education etc. especially if this economy drags on in which it will.
You think that hasn't been happening? I know people who are working only to have health insurance. If their employers didn't offer health insurance (many of those that do, have drastically reduced benefits over last decade or so), they would have long retired. These people are just waiting to qualify in Medicare after which they will retire.
THIS is another of those wrongs with America and access to health care. Unless we recognize access to health care as a rights issue, and take power away from corporations, the problem is only going to get worse, even with the Health Reform Bill that does address some issues, but doesn't handle the cost issue. I say... raise my taxes, use it as a premium and expand Medicare for all.
And you have been paying for him (and the other uninsured like him). Just because the idea didn't get through the sand doesn't mean it hasn't a fact of the system.
So perhaps he needs to be told to go buy insurance .... oh wait, Massachusetts has already done that, doesn't look like that has worked out well.
How much are you chipping in for a policy for him and his wife? You might as well, as you're paying for it anyways.
Presumably he will be taxed at his marginal rate just like the rest of us.
Do you think his and his spouses marginal rate equals $800 per month?
That was the cost for a private policy, or at least the best policy.
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.