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.
No, you INSISTED that I had to have INSURANCE - I said I did not - you tried to suggest I was not telling the truth.
Admit it - you were / are wrong. I do NOT have "INSURANCE" - and I drive very legally
Insurance for a motor vehicle is a finacial contract that covers you in case of a accident. having a bond or a cash certificate showing that you are covered financially in case of a accident is no different to insurance. I am not into word games Gday. You know that you can not opt out of being insured in case of a accident, whether it be a insurance certyificate or a cash certificate or a bond. You can not opt out.
Insurance for a motor vehicle is a finacial contract that covers you in case of a accident. having a bond or a cash certificate showing that you are covered financially in case of a accident is no different to insurance. I am not into word games Gday. You know that you can not opt out of being insured in case of a accident, whether it be a insurance certyificate or a cash certificate or a bond. You can not opt out.
I am not INSURED. I pay no monies to an INSURANCE COMPANY.
I show I have the financial means so as not to have INSURANCE
And, I'm not playing any word games. I'm giving YOU the LEGAL requirements.
I have ONE CD that covers ALL MY VEHICLES. You on the other hand pay a separate premium for all your motor vehicles. I don't - because, I do not have insurance.
I am not INSURED. I pay no monies to an INSURANCE COMPANY.
I show I have the financial means so as not to have INSURANCE
And, I'm not playing any word games. I'm giving YOU the LEGAL requirements.
I have ONE CD that covers ALL MY VEHICLES. You on the other hand pay a separate premium for all your motor vehicles. I don't - because, I do not have insurance.
But you have fionancial cover in case of a accident, that is exactly the same as insurance, you are insured against liability in case of a accident but with a bond or cash certificate. You can not opt out of being covered Gday.
I am not INSURED. I pay no monies to an INSURANCE COMPANY.
I show I have the financial means so as not to have INSURANCE
And, I'm not playing any word games. I'm giving YOU the LEGAL requirements.
I have ONE CD that covers ALL MY VEHICLES. You on the other hand pay a separate premium for all your motor vehicles. I don't - because, I do not have insurance.
Can you cash out that CD without any issues? Did you pay cash for your vehicles?
I am not INSURED. I pay no monies to an INSURANCE COMPANY.
I show I have the financial means so as not to have INSURANCE
And, I'm not playing any word games. I'm giving YOU the LEGAL requirements.
I have ONE CD that covers ALL MY VEHICLES. You on the other hand pay a separate premium for all your motor vehicles. I don't - because, I do not have insurance.
You would think they would be happy, you are not making a greedy insurance company rich. They need to pretend you have insurance because it would blow their UHC cannard.
Kind of. I currently live in Chile because my wife, who is Chilean, is finishing college. Chile sort of has universial health care, although it isn't single-payer. There is public and private health care. Everyone gets 7% of their income deducted from their paycheck, which goes toward a health care plan of their choice, public or private. That 7% isn't enough for the majority of Chileans, who are poor, to buy private insurance, so they get public insurance. The public insurance has 4 levels:a,b,c,and d. level A is for indigents, B is for the poorest workers, C is for workers that earn more than B, and D is for the richest workers (although most of them are not really rich). Although this system is far from ideal, I feel it's better than the current US system. According to the last World Health Organization report in 2000, Chile ranked #33 in overall performance and the US ranked #37. And this was in 2000; it's been all downhill since then in the US. My main complaints about the Chilean system, other than the fact that it's not single-payer,are the following:
In the consultorios, which is where people with public health insurance go to see the doctor for free, the conditions are unsanitary. For example, the bathrooms don't have soap and toilet paper.
In the consultorios, the doctors aren't self employed, and the quality of service sometimes reflects this.
The waits are longer than they should be for some procedures.
I attribute the waits and the unsanitary conditions to the fact that Chile only spends 5% of its GDP (which includes the 7% deducted from workers' salaries) on health care; they should be spending more.
While I belive in government, and the government only, financing all aspects of health care, I think that doctors, granted they don't work in a hospital, should work independently. Therefore, if they give crappy care to their patients, they won't have any patients. In HR 676, which is John Conyers' single-payer health care bill, the doctors still work independently, which I agree with.
Here is how the Chilean system is good. My wifes aunt was diagnosed with stomach cancer last March. She went to a doctor for some pre-operation consultations and was operated on in April. She is now cancer free, thank god. I am convinced that a poor person like my wife's aunt would be dead if she was in the United States because she simply wouldn't have had enough money to pay for the operation.
One last note, Chile is a low class third world country with very crappy living conditions if you aren't part of the 20% richest. I hate living here, due to the oppressive living conditions, and I am dying to return to the US. If you have read anything from the Chicago School of Economics about the Chilean Economic Miracle, don't believe it; it's not true. However, there are 2 social problems that are significantly worse in the United States than in Chile: one is health care, the other is street crime.
Kind of. I currently live in Chile because my wife, who is Chilean, is finishing college. Chile sort of has universial health care, although it isn't single-payer. There is public and private health care. Everyone gets 7% of their income deducted from their paycheck, which goes toward a health care plan of their choice, public or private. That 7% isn't enough for the majority of Chileans, who are poor, to buy private insurance, so they get public insurance. The public insurance has 4 levels:a,b,c,and d. level A is for indigents, B is for the poorest workers, C is for workers that earn more than B, and D is for the richest workers (although most of them are not really rich). Although this system is far from ideal, I feel it's better than the current US system. According to the last World Health Organization report in 2000, Chile ranked #33 in overall performance and the US ranked #37. And this was in 2000; it's been all downhill since then in the US. My main complaints about the Chilean system, other than the fact that it's not single-payer,are the following:
In the consultorios, which is where people with public health insurance go to see the doctor for free, the conditions are unsanitary. For example, the bathrooms don't have soap and toilet paper.
In the consultorios, the doctors aren't self employed, and the quality of service sometimes reflects this.
The waits are longer than they should be for some procedures.
I attribute the waits and the unsanitary conditions to the fact that Chile only spends 5% of its GDP (which includes the 7% deducted from workers' salaries) on health care; they should be spending more.
While I belive in government, and the government only, financing all aspects of health care, I think that doctors, granted they don't work in a hospital, should work independently. Therefore, if they give crappy care to their patients, they won't have any patients. In HR 676, which is John Conyers' single-payer health care bill, the doctors still work independently, which I agree with.
Here is how the Chilean system is good. My wifes aunt was diagnosed with stomach cancer last March. She went to a doctor for some pre-operation consultations and was operated on in April. She is now cancer free, thank god. I am convinced that a poor person like my wife's aunt would be dead if she was in the United States because she simply wouldn't have had enough money to pay for the operation.
One last note, Chile is a low class third world country with very crappy living conditions if you aren't part of the 20% richest. I hate living here, due to the oppressive living conditions, and I am dying to return to the US. If you have read anything from the Chicago School of Economics about the Chilean Economic Miracle, don't believe it; it's not true. However, there are 2 social problems that are significantly worse in the United States than in Chile: one is health care, the other is street crime.
It is such a sad indictment of America that such Countries as Chile and even Cuba has a far better Health System than the United States.
No matter how you cut it, the American Health System Stinks and it stinks bad.
I started this thread to see how many Americans have experience of the "Dreaded UHC" and why that experience has persuaded them against a UHC. The only conclussion that this thread can now come to is that the Anti UHC brigade are anti because of either self interest or ignorance of a UHC or Both. The only bad comments have been from Hearsay. I had expected some real life experiences from the Anti UHC people but they have none, just speculation....How sad to base your argument on Hearsay or self interest...very sad.
State of registration, and their requirements, are accepted.
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.