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.
Yes, you do need assets in the millions because there is no way to know what kind of care you might need in the future. There is no guarantee .
About the JOB: it does not require 1 trillion plus. The Martians are not coming. End of story.
Of course there is a guarantee.. i dont have to accept your belief that medicine is always right. That every treatment should be taken. I dont want to pay for your health care. My body, my choice. I wouldnt waste millions on healthcare.
Then you're a freeloader. You need to prepare for any health care event in your life. This means you have to have millions in liquid assets. Its not enough to simply ride your luck or claim you wont get sick because you eat well.
Well, calling hundreds of millions of Americans freeloaders (because the vast majority of MOST hardworking Americans don't even have one million dollars in liquid assets) has just earned you a place on my Ignore list.
My definition of a freeloader applies only to those who CAN work but refuse to do so (unless they are retired and/or are independently wealthy after working and earning enough to be so). As long as people are working and paying their bills, they certainly do not earn the title of "freeloader" in my opinion!
If they bought the exact same thing, yes, they would.
One can live without health care. One cannot live without the 3 basic life necessities: food, clothing, shelter (even if it's a tent, cardboard box, etc.).
Really? Know anyone with T1 Diabetes? Know anyone who has had cancer?
What are you saying??
Actually, they would. Due to FDR's and the Dem House's and Dem Senate's 1942 Stabilization Act, employer-provided health insurance benefits are not taxed as income. Remove employer-provided health insurance, and everyone will have to buy/fund M4A with after tax dollars. BIG difference.
Prevention? Really? How are you going to "prevent" idiots from shoving another twinkie, etc., down their gullet and vegging out on the sofa all day and night?
Funny you should ask, as on my lunch hour, there just happened to be a debate on this (for and against M4A). The "for" side alluded to prevention as I did, so my ears perked up. According to the debate "expert" - and no I have yet to research, just got back to my desk - in GB doctors are told not to help someone if they have illnesses related to obesity, smoking, things like that.
My thoughts went to "well, would they help them to STOP what is causing the issues?" That is a question I would want answered.
Funny you should ask, as on my lunch hour, there just happened to be a debate on this (for and against M4A). The "for" side alluded to prevention as I did, so my ears perked up. According to the debate "expert" - and no I have yet to research, just got back to my desk - in GB doctors are told not to help someone if they have illnesses related to obesity, smoking, things like that.
My thoughts went to "well, would they help them to STOP what is causing the issues?" That is a question I would want answered.
and just how are you (or anyone) going to FORCE them to stop or prevent them from doing these things that are causing the issues
the government has already banned (made illegal) most drugs.......has it stopped the drug addictions within the USA...nada
what should we do?? ban everything...ban twinkies, ban smoking (anything), ban eating...dictate serving size...ban extreme sports (lots of injuries there)...or ban all sports..ban drinking (that went well in the 1920's)
is this the land of freedom...or the land of a fascio-socialist government that bans everything??
Poll: Choose among the options available to fund 'Medicare for All,' multiple choices allowed
Where's the choice for
(*) Cancel so-called "Medicare for all" since we can't afford it and would rather have the freedom to choose our own medical plan.
?
Let me guess: That option isn't allowed in this poll, because the poll is designed to pretend all participants approve of so-called "Medicare for all" and differ only in how to pay for it.
and just how are you (or anyone) going to FORCE them to stop or prevent them from doing these things that are causing the issues
the government has already banned (made illegal) most drugs.......has it stopped the drug addictions within the USA...nada
what should we do?? ban everything...ban twinkies, ban smoking (anything), ban eating...dictate serving size...ban extreme sports (lots of injuries there)...or ban all sports..ban drinking (that went well in the 1920's)
is this the land of freedom...or the land of a fascio-socialist government that bans everything??
It's a slippery slope for sure. I don't even really have an opinion on it, as far as governing it that is. I was just reporting what I had heard since we were on the subject.
The part about how it makes me angry that people choose unhealthy lifestyles, I have BIG opinions on that, but different thread
No, I'm not a "free loader", and you don't get to dictate what I need to plan for. I pay for my visits in cash, including dental visits. And I negotiate because I have cash.
If I get a huge bill, I will again negotiate not only the cost, but the payment plan. You still don't have the right to make me pay for what you want. You have the audacity to call me a "free loader" when you support forcing me to pay for your healthcare, and everyone elses, via taxes..."incredulous" just doesn't cover my reaction to that colossal hypocrisy.
Negotiate?
Let's say you get a serious disease. Total bill: $2 million. Result of the disease? Permanently disabled.
If you don't have the money to pay in your free market system, you're burdening the system.
Well, calling hundreds of millions of Americans freeloaders (because the vast majority of MOST hardworking Americans don't even have one million dollars in liquid assets) has just earned you a place on my Ignore list.
My definition of a freeloader applies only to those who CAN work but refuse to do so (unless they are retired and/or are independently wealthy after working and earning enough to be so). As long as people are working and paying their bills, they certainly do not earn the title of "freeloader" in my opinion!
I am talking about people who want to eliminate ALL government involvement in health care like the person I responded to. They have to have millions in liquid assets. If not, they're freeloaders just riding their luck or burdening the system when they do get hit with the bill.
Yeah, let's simply accept what the people who are funded by the private insurance and pharma corporations tell us.
Suckers are born every minute.
That's what Warren said before she took your house for not paying your taxes to pay for your healthcare. Apparently freeloading is not really free....
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.
