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 do know that Medicare is wealth redistribution don't you? Some people haven't paid anything into Medicare while others have paid very little while the very wealthy have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars. But that is ok because the Tea Party and Republicans love Medicare. Might as well call it Republicare. Republicans now want to own it.
It takes a special kind of liberal, to look at a scheme where people were forced to pay all their lives into a misnamed "Trust Fund", and to note that once it came time for them to get some benefit for all they were forced to pay in, they are very determined to get that benefit back.....
.....and conclude that their determination to get it back, means that they approved of the thefts in the first place!
there are more effective ways to do it. i think that eventually the computer geeks will get it up and running. the main concern is that many working poor will be unable to afford obamacare.
What conservatives have known for years, has now even become apparent to the New York Times, only three years after it was signed into law.
The main function of Obamacare is not health care - we already had that. It is redistribution of wealth - taking money away from people who earn more, and giving it to people who earn less. Health care is merely the excuse.
And lying, hiding their agenda, and making promises they had no intention of keeping, is the natural extension of this fundamental truth about the people who have done this to us.
Doesn't surprise me one bit. It's been the left's scheme all along, and all of it to scam everyone.
Dude..healthcare is by definition a redistribution of wealth scheme.
Dude, healthcare is a consumer product delivered in the form of a service. Insurance is the way it's most commonly paid for by consumers of the service by purchasing policies as a means of risk transferal. Purchasers are placed into pools of those with equivalent risk levels and rates are set according to the commonality of risk and likelihood of payouts. It's all a form of legalized gambling.
Here's where the redistribution comes in. By forcing everyone into a limited number of pools, and distributing the risk more evenly, it works to the disadvantage of the lower risk individuals forcing them to pay higher rates to compensate for high risk individuals. Compound this by not charging or subsidizing those unable/unwilling to pay, and the producing members of society take it up the butt pricewise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Everyone needs it at some point, and we don't check people's bank accounts before deciding whether to let them die outside the ER or let them in and save their lives.
No, and stabilizing care is not the same as preventative or ongoing care.
[quote=ambient;32383885]And everyone's care costs money, and the people with money are always going to end up covering the tab one way or another. And nobody can afford the full cost of their care out of pocket, especially when it gets really serious, which is why we have insurance - which anyway is a redistribution of premium dollars from healthy to sick people at any given time.[quote=ambient;32383885]
And NObamaCare increases the burden on the producers by guaranteeing enhanced consumer healthcare for the non-payers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Because everyone is in the pool when it comes to healthcare, we have to find a way for everyone to contribute what they can.
But too many do not and will not contribute at all while reaping the benefits.
Everybody who can, needs to pull their own weight. And as a result of natural selection, some will not make it. Life's not fair and it cannot be legislated to be so. This, too, will fail and wreak untold damage upon our society in the process.
How do you justify taking up to 35% of someone's income (premiums and deductibles) to subsidize your care? We are talking folks who are middle class. If you can explain that to me I would appreciate it because nobody has been able to yet..
Yep, Obama instituting a tax on the hard working productive middle class to pay for the druggies that can't hold down a job because they are looking for the next fix. Next thing we know Obama will want us to pay for their drugs.
You have never dealt with a health care problem or know anyone in your immediate family has had health care problems from birth have you? You are a perfect Tea Partier and no doubt benefiting from a government health care program like Tricare, Medicare, or VA. Guess what someone is paying for your health care and its not you...
You realize men and women fought and died for Tricare and VA benefits right? Also, everyone has paid the same amount toward Medicare right? Nope, you don't have a clue how thse programs work so stop posting until you grow up and figure out what the hell is going in.
It took the NY Times all this time to realize what informed people knew 3.5 years ago. And yes, we also knew 3.5 years ago that there will be 'death panels'.
"Joe the Plumber" was much more heavily vetted than obama.
A terrible stain on the media of America.[/QUOTE
I agree! I'll never forget that interview when Obama used the word redistribution. It went through me like a shock wave. Then they set about destroying Joe, looking into every closet and cupboard.
Most of the media was too busy being Obama's cheerleaders and screaming foul of anyone vetting Obama.
It is a frightening fact that the media would vet a private citizen for daring to ask a legitimate question to a candidate. The media was even more vindictive in this vetting, because Obama stumbled and gave out a poor response. How dare you show us a glimpse of the real Obama - trash the questioner!
The media needs to keep both sides honest. Didn't happen in 2008 or 2012 really.
How do you justify taking up to 35% of someone's income (premiums and deductibles) to subsidize your care? We are talking folks who are middle class. If you can explain that to me I would appreciate it because nobody has been able to yet..
Exactly right! This is the biggest problem with the ACA, it is too expensive.
You've made a great point in support of single payer. Taxes for single payer would certainly be far less than the combined premium and copay's most American's are enduring now. Plus, their coverage would be portable, not shackling them to an employer in order to get coverage.
A healthy society is a strong society, we can't keep the system we have now where each year, people pay more and more for less and less. We would have been here and worse in just a few years, with no option.
Fortunately, the ACA will probably help transition us to single payer.
Exactly right! This is the biggest problem with the ACA, it is too expensive.
You've made a great point in support of single payer. Taxes for single payer would certainly be far less than the combined premium and copay's most American's are enduring now. Plus, their coverage would be portable, not shackling them to an employer in order to get coverage.
A healthy society is a strong society, we can't keep the system we have now where each year, people pay more and more for less and less. We would have been here and worse in just a few years, with no option.
Fortunately, the ACA will probably help transition us to single payer.
You have absolutely no clue what your talking about. Tricare and VA are employer plans. You know, you work for a benefit you don't live off the back of your middle class neighbor? No, you don't know that do you? What have they been teaching in our schools the last 40 years?
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.