And my point is that many families put goods and services above health care expenses. If they prioritized it as a necessity, then perhaps they could afford it. Other "necessities" would then go by the wayside. It may mean renting instead of buying, doing without a second car, not having cable TV, etc.
Medical insurance should be used for catastrophic items only, IMO. Regular upkeep and tests should be paid for out of pocket. However, that's not what the state insurance boards require. Insurance companies HAVE to provide all these extras to sell insurance in these states.
You can cut back your food budget easily. Don't eat out. Buy in bulk. Make your own bread. Grow vegetables. Again, why is someone else's inability to pay their way my problem? I'm more than happy to help the truly helpless. I'm not interested in helping those that won't help themselves.
why not give up clothes? become a nudist! give up buying food! you can easily scavenge in dumpsters! do your own stitches! and staples! make your own penicillin! give up your car! the money you save waking up at midnight to start walking to work will almost pay for 1/3 of your premium! get a smaller house! your kids can sleep on the kitchen floor! for the love of god, listen to yourself....
People used to be responsible for their own lives. There's nothing wrong with kids sharing a room, parents making their kids clothes or having a vegetable garden. Especially if the alternative is asking your neighbor to pay for your standard of living. I see you having a lot of complaints but no solutions.
nah dog, you are the one with the complaints, healthcare is on its way and vegetable garden? hahaha!! yeah right next to the burned out dumpster...let them eat cake indeed
You simply don't like my solutions. Rationing is on its way; healthcare has nothing to do with the legislation that was passed. Ask your neighbors in the Bay State how long they have to wait to see a primary care physician. Just to be clear, your alternative is that others fund your lifestyle because you don't feel like paying for your own healthcare or that of your family.
so just to be clear, you want sick babies to die in agonizing pain? just to be clear, you think poor people all deserve to die? just to be clear? two can play at that game, although id rather not, you know, play games. i swear to god, you guys are so full of shit, first ed o now you... fucking megalomaniacs JUST TO BE CLEAR i have health care, i am not looking for anyone to pay anything for me, so clean the fucking shit out of your ears if you dont understand that, you are a fucking moron and many of my friends live in mass, and they have never had a problem, maybe the wait is too long for you? you deserve better than everyone else? unreal, get a grip
As I've explained to you, those cases receive health care. Your demagoguery doesn't play. Sure you would. I offer solutions and alternatives and you only offer more complaints. How am I megalomaniacal? I wish dominion over no one. I want all people to be free from coersion by others, especially faceless bureaucrats. Nope, I got it. You've explained your current situation. It may not always be your circumstance, however. If you lost your job tomorrow, you've made it clear that you would expect us to pay for your health care and the health care of your son. I'm just trying to confirm that's the case. Your friends are the lucky ones: http://www.boston.com/news/health/blog/2011/05/wait_for_doctor.html And it's only going to get worse: http://www.heartland.org/healthpoli...ic_Disappointment_Bode_Ill_for_Obamacare.html http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v30n1/cpr30n1-1.html
ok, you say that if i lose my job tomorrow, that i would expect the government to pay for myself...havent you been extolling the very virtues of medicaid for 100 posts or so? isnt that what your "suggestion" has been all along? and if you lose YOUR job tomorrow, wouldnt you and your daughters go on the same welfare? so wouldnt you be expecting the government to then pay FOR YOU?? fucking priceless
Universal health care isn't about someone else paying for it... it is about everyone paying for it. I realize you may want the right choice to not have health insurance... but that is an easy choice to make when you know you can walk into any emergency room and receive care... and that if you are incapacitated you will receive critical treatment regardless. Right now my insurance (which I pay about $300 per month for through work) pays for all the people who *don't* have insurance.
Medicaid is when you have no other options. Are you saying that you save none of your paycheck? Actually, no. I'm a saver and an investor. I have been all my life. It's been at the expense of having as nice of things as my friends and colleagues, not taking vacations, bringing my lunch, not eating out, wearing suits until they wear out, etc. I picked a figure that I made my goal of a standard of living when I got out of college and that's my standard of living today. The rest is saved, invested or given to charity. My wife is a CPA, and is as careful with money as am I. My son isn't yet three and his college is already funded (assuming projected inflation and current investment targets). If our fund closed tomorrow, I wouldn't have to ask for a dime from anyone. That self-sufficiency has come at a high cost to my lifestyle. You're not alone in your mocking of my lifestyle; I'm used to it. It's not an attitude that most people have these days. I have much more in common with my Depression-era grandparents than I do with my friends. I darn socks, I reuse tinfoil and I have a vegetable garden (which I know you think is ridiculous).
Universal health care is about giving someone else the power to ration your health care. It's a simple case of supply and demand. I believe that the government has no business telling me what kind of health care and I can and cannot receive. My body is my business; it's not the government's. And as I have posted before, the cost of covering the uninsured isn't completely covered by your insurance. It's mostly covered by private foundations hospitals have, by donated services and supplies and by charitable contributions.
Just to weigh in, I am one of those cold, unfeeling individuals that believes that if someone can't pay for a medical treatment (or the insurance that covers it), then they should do without it. There are myriad things in society that the wealthy have more/better of than the rest of us--including basic needs like food, clothing, and shelter; I don't see why medical coverage should be any different. People talk about health care as a "right", but that's contrary to the fundamental concept of what a "right" is. A right is something that you have naturally, not something that is conferred upon you. A right is not something that the govenrnment grants; it is something that the government should not inhibit. So when the Declaration of Independence talks about "a right to life", this doesn't mean that the government has a responsibility to ensure that your life continues; it only means that the government has a responsibility to not deprive you of your life. There is no right to health care, just like there is not a right to have food, clothing, or shelter. People are responsible to provide for their own needs; it is not the government's responsibility to provide for them. Now, I am fully in favor of individual charity and privately funded charitable organizations that seek to meet these needs for those who cannot; however people should have the choice to decide whether, when, and how to contribute.
no, YOU said that. or do you somehow fantasize about it coming out of my mouth instead? thats kinky. nowhere have i ever said that. reading is clutch i mean i could just respond to everyone of your posts with "are you saying that you love it when your dad fists you in the asshole?" maybe thats the assumption im making from what i read, cant really fault me for it right? please stop you say all this, yet you could just as easily be destitute, people lose great amounts of money very quickly...history is littered by stories of the little investor being ruined overnight...and if that happened, would you receive medicaid? would you take the welfare? for your children? would you expect someone else to pay for it? the whole "i dont have to worry about it because im rich" argument, is precisely the point of me asking, what would you do? im actually down with all that stuff man, i clip coupons and plant my own herbs. the laughable part is telling the entire country that might not have the money/time and is hungry to "grow some food", assuming they have a yard they can dig up in the first place
yes like i said, if a kids parents cant afford health insurance, he deserves to die, thank you for having the courage to actually say it
I was asking a question. I wasn't making a statement. The "?" should have been a big hint. I'd happily get fisted by my dad if it meant that he were still living. However, he's dead. I segment my investing. There's money I'm willing to lose and money I'm not. Those who lose everything overnight are generally those who are seeking large returns with all of their money or who have it concentrated in one investment. All that being said, you're still missing the point: Everyone gets taken care of in our health care system. You either sell what you own to pay for it or if you're down to the felt you get government or charitable assistance. I used the idea of growing vegetables (which you can do in any container inside a house, BTW) as an example of an area where people could save money. How about getting rid of cable or internet at home? How about not eating outside the home? Do you know what the largest segment of the uninsured in this country is? It's people who have the ability to buy insurance, but who choose to purchase other items instead. My sympathy for those people is pretty much nil.
Deserves? No, no child deserves to die from some horrific illness. But everybody dies eventually, whether at 1 or 100. If a child contracts a terminal disease, and the parents can't afford the treatment, then I don't believe the child has a right to have the government pay for it. I don't think that's an unreasonable position.
