More wealth, obviously. That is such a lame arguement, having no basis in simple logic. Even if you pay 50% taxes on your 2nd million, that's still $500,000 you get to keep. If that's not enough to motivate a little effort out of you, it's unlikely you earned your first million through honest effort anyway. You are probably coasting as it is and your abscence from the workplace would only open up a spot for someone hungrier who would contribute more to society in the long run. I was born and raised in Lake Oswego and know dozens of millionaires. They would be the first to admit that not one of them works as hard as the median American worker. I seriously doubt they have the mental tenacity to hold down 2 normal jobs like so many parents have to do just to afford living costs.
While it's not nice, there are some huge problems with our health care system. How else do you address the following: 1. Hospitals cannot refuse to treat patients. Patients come in with no coverage, they are in a bad way and when it's time to sign the responsibility sheet, they sign it because their life is in danger, and if they don't get medical help, they are going to be fucked up. Some are poor illegal aliens. They know they don't have the money to cover the bills. They get the treatment, and when the bills come they declare bankruptcy(or split the country..). The hospitals get stiffed for the bill and then have to make it up somehow. That somehow is all of us having higher medical costs, and in turn higher insurance rates to pay because the insurance companies pass the buck on to "the man". 2. Should anybody ever have to worry about being treated at a medical facility? There is nothing worse than seeing a poor person who is saddled with a situation where they cannot afford medical treatment. That is inhuman in itself. On the other side of the coin, there are people who do have coverage, but the costs are so high that it bankrupts them and destroys their lives in order to get treated. If you have no sympathy for poor folks, at least responsible folks shouldn't have this happen to them. It is horrible. 3. Malpractice insurance is causing our Doctors to leave the business. With patients stiffing doctors for bills, it is hard for them to keep up the massive payments required for this insurance. They are choosing to leave the field rather then keep on healing. Some areas are having shortages of Doctors, and the government is actually having to provide money incentives to get Doctors to go to certain areas. This has caused some drastic levels in reduction in health care quality in certain parts of the country. The only way I can see that you could make it work perfectly in a capitalist society, is if everybody made enough money and had health care through their work. That just isn't the case, too many of our jobs are low pay and always will be. At the same time, you can be a cold bastard and say that those people could make a better life for themselves and get that coverage. I say to you people, that you have never witnesseed somebodies life being destroyed in moments by an unexpected medical issue, and that if you ever had that happen to somebody you knew and cared about, you wouldn't see it the same way. I have some problems with the way this is being forced on folks, but at the same time, I almost don't see an alternative. IMO people should have the right to health care. But I just don't see how we can get it virtually free for everybody until we have a little device in every home that can make your drugs for you for free. Part of the problem being, it costs so much to find cures for illness, that it costs a lot when it comes time to treat it. What do you do when the costs for healing are just so high, that people cannot pay the price?
I can simply not drive a car if I don't want to opt in. Driving is a privilege granted by the state and no one is guaranteed the ability to use public roads. As far as I can tell, I can't opt out of this medical insurance scheme. I mean, I CAN, but it involves suicide. Is living a privilege granted by the state now? Ed O.
You clearly don't value people being well educated, with desirable skills that are not easily replaceable by John Doe off the street. That is because you being a former mailman, didn't require any skills or smarts, and any Joe Shmoe could have done your job. I'm sorry you had to work hard. Maybe you could have put out more effort earlier in life to gain some skills and smarts. It isn't necessarily about incentive to work hard. It is about incentive for innovation, progress, development, creation of jobs, etc, etc. Otherwise known as: Working smart.
Yes. If someone is not insured, they'll get treatment anyway, and we'll have to pay for it(life threatening stuff anyway). This bill should also include some sort of over-sight into how much hospitals and insurance companies are charging. If they have less uninsured people coming in for emergency treatment, will they lower prices or just pocket the difference? Also if I have money in the bank but am temporarily un-employed/uninsured, I will STILL have to pay my hospital bills, it will just be one enormous bill. But should I have the right to take the risk of going without it for awhile? And I agree, that in order to REALLY cut into this problem, people need to start living healthier lifestyles. We need to make vast changes in our dietary habits, as well as excercise and reducing our exposure to a variety of toxic substances. That would go a long way in reducing our total health care costs. I bet this bill has insurance lobbiets all over it. You're just getting more money to flow into their pockets. Don't tell me it was Congress' brilliant fucking scheme....hmm, how do we provide universal health care coverage? I know! Force everyone to buy it! Isn't this like solving the unemployment problem by forcing those without work to do community service for free? Individual health care insurance costs huge, and could cripple many families monthly budgets. Anyway.....this country is totally fucked. Corporations and private bankers are running the show....it's out of control, and it doesn't matter which dick-weeds we elect from our two piece of shit parties.
Actually, he raised taxes nearly 50% for the average American. He raised the standard rate from 11% to 15% for most real workers, and effectively eliminated their biggest deduction (healthcare costs, which went from 100% deductible to not being deductible at all for most). Then he created many loopholes for the wealthy and corporations while letting our nation's infrastructure crumble and corrode, ran up the biggest national debt known to man at that point in history, and started us tumbling downhill to the pit of misery that is our nation today. He destroyed the unions, and quite predictably destroyed what was once the greatest workforce in the world. He was a horrible President and a really bad person.
Ah, to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities. Yep, that's what America is about. Being created equal and living at the same level are two different things. As for my mother, she never made the kind of money she could have by working for a for-profit corporation. In fact, I made more money as a low-level I-banker in my early 20s than she did her last year before she retired. And my sister? She is a resident at Seattle Children's Hospital. Next year, she's moving to Kenya to work in a rural clinic. Before medical school, she was in the Peace Corps. So yeah, they're both money-grubbing "neo cons". You should read some Norman Podhoretz; you might learn exactly what the label you ascribe to me actually means.
My deepest concern here is the fact the threshold is set at $8/hr. If some person was working a job making $8.10/hr they have to come up with money out of their pocket to buy themselves health insurance or face penalties from the federal government. Since they aer unable to do that, it stands to reason the federal plan will have some cost factor built in whereby that person's policy will probably be very close to free. That means someone is going to have to pay for those millions of policies and/or subsequent health care. Will it be an additional tax on the "wealthy"? Will it be an additional tax on the rest of us? And since there are so many millions of people in that same predicament, the cost will easily be in the billions per year, just like the other billions per year for those making less than $8/hr. Thus the dependancy on the feds for healthcare continues to grow and Obama gets the single payer national health cxare system he wants and taxes are raised to choking levels to support it. Or at least that's one plausible way to look at it.
I think you've missed completely the point of my post. Although you have reinforced my idea that capitalism never works in it's purest form because it relies too much on the goodwill and/or charity of people.
I don't know, is that part of the joy? How many progeny are you spawning off to absorb your untold millions Ed? If the playing field isn't leveled through absorption of some manner, either pre or post-death then the only other thing I can think of is to provide all of the absolute top-quality opportunities in housing, health care, education, and nutrition to every American up until they go to college. But since there's no one to pay for it...hrm..well, you can see the dilemma.
success is a choice. sure, some people start out better than others but people who strive hard and are smart about things succeed. what keeps people poor is having people take care of them and they become lazy or dependant.
I read an article sometime ago that discussed this issue. I think it was in the 40's, 90% of aid given to the poor was through charity and church. Today, 90% of aid given to the poor is through the government. Are they better off now? I don't know, but I do know that this change has increased the size of the government and increased inefficiencies.
Having children nor making money is a passion of mine. I don't begrudge those who choose to combine those two things. There will always be rich people and there will always be poor people. My personal philosophy is that we try to make our poor comfortable enough to not overturn the apple cart while giving a chance for many of the best/brightest/hard working to become wealthier. This country is not great and will never be great by trying to make everyone the same... we have a spirit of individualism that should not be stamped out through additional, perpetual, irreversible collectivist government actions. Ed O.
I completely agree. Nowhere do I advocate taxing people at 100% or making people completely the same - I advocate either you accept the taxes that are graduated or if you're convinced people just "haven't worked hard enough" you have to guarantee them the same exact opportunities. Put up or shut up. But the same arguments come up time and time again - that no one will have incentive to work if the government taxes at a high rate. To me, that is completely bullocks.
A better question is why is that true? Is that true because the government stepped in and started handing out money left and right because it had nothing better to do? Or is it because people and society changed and they aren't as connected, aren't as willing to donate to general charity? Or is it a combination of the two? My personal opinion is that it's somewhat of the first because of the various government directives, aka War on Poverty, but much of it is the second as people have become less connected with their neighbor. I know some people who don't even connect with their immediate family because they're "just connected by genetics and have no obligation otherwise". True enough, but still sad.
