sturg33
I
You are really stupid sometimes
Affordable Care Act
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
You are really stupid sometimes
Don't get me wrong. I'm fine with spending less on defense but I also don't believe that the more productive people have an obligation to shoulder more of a health care bill for those who aren't as productive. Its all about choices that you make which is ultimately how I feel on most issues now.
But to another point you mentioned...why should we care about what other countries impose on their citizens in the form of taxes?
57Brave
Well-known member
Lord forbid but -- as an example - Say you get ambient lung cancer and have one of those insurance plans that cuts you off after $30,000. I know from experience a bag of ice costs close to $50 - one of the policies being discontinued through ACA would be the one I describe above.
Who pays the other $xxx,000 for your care?
I'm sure you've heard this until you were blue in the face -- A college student without a policy breaks his leg goes to the emergency room for care . Runs up a $10,000 bill. Declares bankruptcy the hospital gets 15 cents on the dollar. Who make up the other 85?
A child is born with serious birth defects -- say it is your sisters child is born with serious birth defects -- who pays the care for lifelng care of that child.
So my point is, it isn't a simple (again, black and white) as they should have made better choices. It is easy to "should upon" so please lets try to talk without the should s or supposed to's.
These are very seriou situations people find themselves in -- and we as a nation can't (or piss and moan) pony up an extra few dollars a month??
Who pays the other $xxx,000 for your care?
I'm sure you've heard this until you were blue in the face -- A college student without a policy breaks his leg goes to the emergency room for care . Runs up a $10,000 bill. Declares bankruptcy the hospital gets 15 cents on the dollar. Who make up the other 85?
A child is born with serious birth defects -- say it is your sisters child is born with serious birth defects -- who pays the care for lifelng care of that child.
So my point is, it isn't a simple (again, black and white) as they should have made better choices. It is easy to "should upon" so please lets try to talk without the should s or supposed to's.
These are very seriou situations people find themselves in -- and we as a nation can't (or piss and moan) pony up an extra few dollars a month??
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
Not saying that we should. Just pointing out that for all the barking about taxes in this country, we don't pay a whole lot of them when compared to other countries and we get a lot less domestically.
In response to your first point, what should we do with the less productive (and what does that even mean)? Deny them any health services and turn them down at the emergency room?
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
What this fixation with the "productive" citizen, and how do you even define "productivity"?
If you can't find a job that has health benefits then I feel sorry for you. There are plenty of options out there.
And if you can't pay for health benefits then you shouldn't get them. I'm sorry if thats cruel but people make their choices in life and not being able to get medical care is a repercussion of those choices. Its not fair to others to shoulder a bill for those who have made poor choices in their lives.
Productive to me means that you contribute more than you take out.
I'm sure you'll be able to pick that apart but that is just how I feel.
Those that take more from the system then put in are a drain on the rest of us that contribute more than we take.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Why not skip the sorries and simply not be so cruel? Because you're correct: it is an essentially cruel mindset.
Furthermore: plenty of people aren't able to afford medical care in this country despite having, on the balance, made more "good" choices than "bad" ones.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
But how do you define "contributions"? You seem to be switching one vagueness for another, and not actually delineating what you mean.
I put more dollars into the system than take out.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
So this is just a fundamental difference in value and value-systems: I strongly believe and affirm that there is a lot more to "productivity" and "contribution" than can be measured in the base currency of "dollars."
I'm sorry. I was compassionate when I was younger until I realized all the hard work I needed to put in to get where I am. Majority of people can do something similar. Sure, I happen to be an excellent test taker and do well in an academic environment that gets me in the door at a company but it also involves putting in work.
But there has to be some sort of measure that can be quantified otherwise its all arbitrary.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
Worth a gander at Mr. Evans article.
sturg33
I
Man, you're really stuck on this, aren't you?
I'll explain and ask again:
1. I DID know my premiums were going to go up - I knew it because of this horrifying new law
2. I knew why they were going to go up - because we now have to subsidize everyone in the company
3. So knowing all of this information - what could I have done to stop it? Quit? I'm still not sure what your point is.
sturg33
I
The question is - why is welfare spending going up every year... Are people getting worse? Or are we getting "less cruel"? At what point is welfare spending too much to sustain?
Also - is it a coincidence that the economy continues to stall?
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Yes and no.
Hopefully.
We'll see, but I don't think we're close to that point yet, especially with all of the other federal excesses (defense spending; pro-corporate-profit policy) that can be mitigated.
Probably. I think the sort of fiscal policy you cite in another thread, as delineated by the letter from the anonymous former Federal Reserve employee, is much more germane to this point.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
A lot; but that's not all on the social safety-net. First and foremost, Ronald Reagan is culpable.
It's all about priorities; I think cuts should be made elsewhere first, and I think taxation is not at all the boogeyman so many make it out to be—taxes just needs to be better structured in this nation.