fmccap Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 listen here smart ass, when you say socialist your trying to demonize me because most socialists believe in income redistribution! I think a business owner should be entitled to the lion share of the money that they have made, at the same time if you hold a job you should be entitled to health care! People who sit around all day don't have to worry about getting hurt, or losing wages on top of medical bills if they get hurt out side of work! Don't resort to name calling because you cannot face facts. How does holding a job entitle you to health care? We are not entitled to anything but human rights. Since you don't call it income redistribution tell me what it is when they would take my income to use towards everyones health care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 (edited) Don't resort to name calling because you cannot face facts. How does holding a job entitle you to health care? We are not entitled to anything but human rights. Since you don't call it income redistribution tell me what it is when they would take my income to use towards everyones health care. you have yet to this point supplied any "facts" on this topic for me to ashamed to answer! You had full understanding of what I was saying and choose to label me a socialist. In a merit health care system they would only use the money to pay for a contributers health care just as they would pay for you when it is your turn for care! This eases the burden on employers, encouraging people to go into business essentially creating more work and people to buy or pay for whatever it is you do for a living! Edited September 23, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 you have not to this point supplied any "facts" on this topic for me to ashamed to answer! You had full understanding of what I was saying and choose to label me a socialist. In a merit health care system they would only use the money to pay for a contributers health care just as they would pay for you when it is your turn for care! This eases the burden on employers, encouraging people to go into business essentially creating more work and people to buy or pay for whatever it is you do for a living! Wrong. I've given you many facts. Like I said, I'll just pay for it myself, it makes it much easier. Then we don't have to worry about whos turn it is and it will save money because there does'nt have to be people, who would get paid, to run it. What answers do you have???????????? How does holding a job entitle you to health care? We are not entitled to anything but human rights. Since you don't call it income redistribution tell me what it is when they would take my income to use towards everyones health care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 (edited) Wrong. I've given you many facts. Like I said, I'll just pay for it myself, it makes it much easier. Then we don't have to worry about whos turn it is and it will save money because there does'nt have to be people, who would get paid, to run it. What answers do you have???????????? Do you work at Ford cap? I probably should know but I engage in debate with so many users that it makes it difficult to recall everyones situation! Edited September 23, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 (edited) That's what we are dealing with now, extortion! My buddy has a chronic problem with his eyes after surgery if takes about another 5 to 6 years before he has to repeat the surgery! The current price for his operation alone is $75,000. $75,000 for an operation that takes a couple of hours is outrageous! The fact is that your government cut out the middle man by eliminating the insurers and pay much less for procedures than our insurers do. I don't understand why you believe that because your health care is substandard because you guys cover everyone in the country that, if we limited our liability to just those who pay in to support the system that we would have the same problems! Having health care would incent lazy people to work! Health care inflation is through the roof in this country and we have to take the necessary steps to control them! Both systems are no good. At least with health insurance, you know how much you are paying. We don't. It is now eating up 50% of tax revenue, and growing. If we could just take health care off the pedestal and start looking at it as just another commodity that you pay for according to supply and demand, then prices would fall 90%. Get the government to pass laws against gouging. Make it be the law that the procedures are charged according to amount of labor, not according to risk of death. Say, $500.00 an hour labor. Heart transplant: 10 hours labor, $5,000 parts. Total: $10,000 plus tax = $11,322. If you don't have it, you can pay in installments. Three years warranty or 1,000,000 beats, which ever comes first. My father got his tonsils out in a dentist chair. I would charge maybe $50.00 plus tax. If they grow back within 3 years, they are removed again free. They gouge you because without treatment you can die. It is like kidnappers holding someone for ransom. Edited September 25, 2007 by Trimdingman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 How about if the insurance companies gave the family doctors the money up front, and they paid the specialists and personnel out of that money, and what was left over would be their salary? That would at least stop unnecessary surgery. It would be a start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
los pobres Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 If there was no such thing as social health care, then when your kid broke his leg, you would take him to a private clinic, pay a few hundred bucks, and bring your kid home. Under public health care, the government would be billed a minimum of $20,000. If some poor slob can't afford $300, panhandle on the street for a couple of hours. Come on. It is against the hypocratic oath for doctors to refuse to treat you. You would be given time to pay. Quadruple by-pass surgery: Free market price- maybe $7000 Social health care price: $ 300,000+ Trim, don't kn ow where you are getting the 20 grand number from, but I've known people that lived on the border and drive to Canada to get things done because it is so CHEAP! Why? Is it because the insurance man is missing? No crazy malpractice claims? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) Trim, don't kn ow where you are getting the 20 grand number from, but I've known people that lived on the border and drive to Canada to get things done because it is so CHEAP! Why? Is it because the insurance man is missing? No crazy malpractice claims? They come to Canada to buy cheap drugs. Those drugs are cheap because the government, meaning the taxpayers, subsidises them. As I said before, your system and our system are both bad. We need to get rid of them both and just pay for health care individually like in the old days when there was no problem. If people get treated cheaper in Canada, then they are stealing from Canadian taxpayers. They are recieving the benefits from a system that they are not paying taxes to support. People go from Canada to the States for treatment even though they have already paid for it here. What does that tell you? They would rather pay twice than go to a Canadian doctor. We have lawsuits, but we are just suing ourselves. Thousands of people in Canada were given bad blood, and got hepatitus and aids. Edited September 26, 2007 by Trimdingman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Myths debunked about this important change that is desperately needed: http://www.pnhp.org/reader/Section%208%20-...%20(Geyman).pdf Those who believe that our current system can be fixed by market forces as told to us by libertarian John Stossel are very naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 A more current debunking of the many myths surrounding Single-Payer health care: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/27/...in3105523.shtml Those of you on this forum who are oppossed, what are your solutions? Stay the course? Market forces? Health Savings Accounts? How exactly do you propose to resolve the 47 Million Americans who are without health insurance? How much does that costs us? Are you happy with our WHO ranking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) A more current debunking of the many myths surrounding Single-Payer health care: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/27/...in3105523.shtml Those of you on this forum who are oppossed, what are your solutions? Stay the course? Market forces? Health Savings Accounts? How exactly do you propose to resolve the 47 Million Americans who are without health insurance? How much does that costs us? Are you happy with our WHO ranking? A Merit Health Care system, Only cover those who hold steady employment and pay in to support it! This also reduces the the income and sales tax liability to workers and employees. It also is incentive for lazy people to work and be productive to avoid medical liability, and the credit damage failure to pay would incur. Hospitals would also be able to still write any uncollected debt off as a loss, while pursuing the debt's through collections. This would in turn increase our fiscal GDP. If you can't provide a pay stub from working within the past 2 weeks, or paper work proving your disabled then you should be billed by the hospital. This is a summation of my plan and although it needs refining, would allow more people to, gain coverage, give them incentive to work, decrease employers liability encouraging more businesses to operate here, reduce the tax liability to workers over a current blanketed universal health care, and reduce the long lines and 2 month wait periods to see specialists over current blanketed universal health care! Some additional provisions may be necessary to cover extenuating circumstances, such as grace periods for people who are laid off (maybe 6 months of coverage until they can secure new employment) but that's the gist of my proposal! Edited September 26, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 A Merit Health Care system, Only cover those who hold steady employment and pay in to support it! That's idiotic. How about the children who do not work? How about the senior citizens who do not work? How about the crippled and the poor? How about the underemployed? How can people afford to keep up with the escalating costs of health care while their incomes are going down? Right now the costs are spiraling up faster than people's income, due to globalization and our trade policies. Who other than yourself supports such an idea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 ...and reduce the long lines and 2 month wait periods to see specialists over current blanketed universal health care! Another myth that keeps making the rounds with the anti-Single-Payer system. You don't think we have rationing in our current system with waits? Our rationing is based on income and ability to pay. When you take over 45 million people out of the line, then Yes, you might have shorter waits for some procedures, but not the ones that are emergencies and necessities. The US ranks near the bottom in the WHO rankings and Americans are not outraged? I guess the Insurance lobby has done a good PR job. Must be another scare tactic that is used so effectively by many who want the status quo to remain as it makes some very wealthy. Just ask Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Watch, listen, and learn from those are on the front lines of this struggle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 That's idiotic. How about the children who do not work? How about the senior citizens who do not work? How about the crippled and the poor? How about the underemployed? How can people afford to keep up with the escalating costs of health care while their incomes are going down? Right now the costs are spiraling up faster than people's income, due to globalization and our trade policies. Who other than yourself supports such an idea? If you are a minor, over the age of 67, disabled you would still get coverage, If you are not a over 18, not working, and can't prove a physical disability you get a bill. Welfare also food stamps, ADC cash, needs to also be subject to random mandatory drug testing to determine eligibility! I as a tax paying citizen natural born to this country am tired of carrying the lazy and unwilling to work, their dependency on poverty entitlements is what allows them to do nothing while we carry their weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Another myth that keeps making the rounds with the anti-Single-Payer system. You don't think we have rationing in our current system with waits? Our rationing is based on income and ability to pay. When you take over 45 million people out of the line, then Yes, you might have shorter waits for some procedures, but not the ones that are emergencies and necessities. The US ranks near the bottom in the WHO rankings and Americans are not outraged? I guess the Insurance lobby has done a good PR job. Must be another scare tactic that is used so effectively by many who want the status quo to remain as it makes some very wealthy. Just ask Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN). I'm really more concerned with the liability to the people who pay in! "Cover people who don't contribute, and pay more in tax"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I as a tax paying citizen natural born to this country am tired of carrying the lazy and unwilling to work, their dependency on poverty entitlements is what allows them to do nothing while we carry their weight. Spoken like a true blue conservative. Mischaracterizations and hyperboles and exaggerations and misconceptions, hallmarks of the truly uninformed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Spoken like a true blue conservative. Mischaracterizations and hyperboles and exaggerations and misconceptions, hallmarks of the truly uninformed. Listen here p-ckerhead, see I can also insult people too jacka-s. Rather then insulting me why don't you state you position or at least elaborate what is wrong with my proposal, so if their is adjustment necessary my plan can be modified Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Spoken like a true blue conservative. Mischaracterizations and hyperboles and exaggerations and misconceptions, hallmarks of the truly uninformed. Coming from a true Socialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Coming from a true Socialist. ineffective labeling, coming from someone person with the best privatized medical in the country. If you had no insurance I guarentee you would have a different perspective! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm really more concerned with the liability to the people who pay in! "Cover people who don't contribute, and pay more in tax"! Who do you think pays today when those 45+ million show up in the emergency room? How much is that costing us? Cover everyone with the savings from getting rid of the for-profit insurance companies and you will have a better system with better results that costs less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Coming from a true Socialist. No, coming from someone who is tired of the conservative rants, lies and misconceptions. Your labeling people in an attempt to discredit is another despicable conservative tactic. Who taught you that, Karl Rove? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 ineffective labeling, coming from someone person with the best privatized medical in the country. If you had no insurance I guarentee you would have a different perspective! Look at the whole picture my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaineerwv Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Listen here p-ckerhead, see I can also insult people too jacka-s. Rather then insulting me why don't you state you position or at least elaborate what is wrong with my proposal, so if their is adjustment necessary my plan can be modified If your proposal is so enlightened, who else is proposing this solution, dumba-s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Who do you think pays today when those 45+ million show up in the emergency room? How much is that costing us? Cover everyone with the savings from getting rid of the for-profit insurance companies and you will have a better system with better results that costs less. You want to give control to the government, right? Tell me oh wise one where these for profit insurance companies originated from? I'll give you a hint: It was in the late 30's with the help of government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.