We will pay for it with our tax dollars. And I don't have a problem with that.
People will be able to live healthier and more productive lives. They will focus on building careers, businesses, and families. They will spend less time worried about having or losing their insurance.
You do...the same as others will pay for you if you suddenly lose your job, or become sick and can't work, and can't afford to pay taxes. Do you know that you lose more taxes to the rich who use loopholes than for those who can't afford to pay taxes?
The multi Billionaires, who earned every cent of it, will be robbed by the unwashed masses (meaning people who earn less than 250,000.00 per year)who are just too lazy to earn their own money to pay for luxuries like medical care.
The Billionaires of course will not stand for this so they will all move to Montana, secede from the union, and live in the new capitalist utopia of Glenbeckistan. There will be no need for a government because people can always be counted on to do what's best for society even if it diminishes their own financial net worth. The magic of the "trickle down effect" will help those less fortunate souls of Glenbeckistan who can't seem to earn that first Billion on their own.
The unwashed masses will of course not buy medical care with their stolen booty, but will instead blow it on cigarettes and booze, causing the collapse of the former United States and the well deserved deaths of its communist/nazi/atheist inhabitants.
The chosen ones can then re-populate the land and wait for Jesus to return and congratulate them for a job well done.
In the US now hospitals give them care and then "absorb" the costs (i.e. increase the costs paid by paying clients and/or insurance companies). So we already are covering the health care of illegal aliens and anyone else who doesn't have decent health care, but in the most inefficient, expensive way possible.
It's irrelevant, because I just said the current system covers healthcare for people who don't have insurance and can't pay for it. You are already paying for it if you are working and contributing to your own healthcare. That will not change until the law that says that sick people will not be turned away from hospitals if they don't have a way to pay, and I'm sure as a devout Christian you should be the last person to try to change that.
There is no other way than to pay via your taxes. So it means getting your tax system working more fairly.
How about if the companies who are currently buying the 'Dead Peasants Insurance Policies" and receiving tax breaks for same, were to actually pay the tax they are not paying. That would help markedly. It may even solve the whole problem outright, not markedly.
I'm sure there are allot of tax schemes that are on the stinky side that could be addressed to help even out the fair from the smelly.
Aside from believing it's the right thing to do, I see it in my best interest that EVERYONE have access to health care. I don't want to be exposed to drug resistant infectious TB or a multitude of other things.
We pay for healthcare either way, because people just end up in the emergency room or declare bankruptcy to get around paying bills. So lets just use tax dollars - from income taxes to sales taxes to pay for it - and do it as efficiently as possible.
The shiftless, lazy and basically ignorant people drive me crazy too. But that's no excuse to punish good people.
I hope that I've been upfront enough about who pays for it. I really believe ultimately that the taxpayer will. I admit that I've got it pretty good in Massachusetts, and I'm worried that the new plan will screw us over, but I'm willing to take that risk.
In Massachusetts if you make under $30,000, your healthcare is free. And we've already discussed your taxes before, some of that is because you live and work in different states. And because you have other fees - that aren't taxes deducted. I couldn't find the topic thread though.
I find the topic of GOVERNMENT RUN or CONTROL Healthcare, to be a page from the stupid people running around rampant online, screaming foul play.
I've learned about the supposed topic, but find that the view is coming from those who think that there is nothing wrong with the "healthcare" system, as it is.
How ever, we have bigger problems and more immediate pressing concerns, than to exclusively tell citizens that we are not willing to help them.
It is disgusting and uncomprehensible that we can not protect our citizens from detrimental workings of business.
The fact: Business HAS Control of Congress.
That alone: should out-right scare you and you should be looking for real answers.
The "healthcare" reform is necessary step to driving down healthcare costs and insurance premiums. The problem presently causing your rates to increase is due to many millions of people who do not have coverage. Those people are walking into hospitals, clinics or wherever, getting treatment and not paying for the services.
Why are they not paying for the services they receive? Because, they are mostly made of "homeless" people who don't have a job, a place to live or any food to eat. Which is contributing to the reasons for their trips to the hospitals.
Usually, when you want to see a doctor, there isn't a problem, because they are FORCED by Medical Ethics to treat you, regardless of whether or not you can pay.
So, universal coverage plan is not the real answer, but affordable insurance plans would help thriving businesses to pass on savings to their workers and allow a 'homeless' person to enter a rehabilitation center and work through their ordeal and get them back into society, where they belong in the first place.
NOT addressing the 'homeless' problem is going to continue to drag down America's overall health and wealth.
Let's make sure we understand, what's what, so we can defeat the cause of the problem, instead of putting a bandage on the problem and waiting for the next shoe to drop.
What was I talking about that was private? Like penis size? Let me reiterate, I work at a university with over 30,000 students. Not everyone is going to be abstinent. So we teach safer sex as well. If they're going to have sex (which some are) they may as well be safe. Abstinence based sex education doesn't work. But this is a whole different suject Sneako. So lets just settle on: you and I are two totally different people.
This liberal friend will tell you to stop lying. A government option to force competition and bring down the health care cost for everybody is not GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH CARE. Stop the false argument. This liberal friend will tell you a an insurance company denied health care to a BABY! Was he sick? Did he have a hole in his heart? Deformed? nooooooo. He was to fat! Something everybody prays for. A big fat healthy baby. The public option would force insurance companies to a act in a reasonable manner. Have a honest discussion.
That baby, that time, was givin coverage because the insurance company was embarrassed by the publicity. What about all the people the insurance companies let die needlessly. The government is not the bad guy here, this time. Why are you worried about the taxes you would pay, when it cost about 6000.00 a year to cover a family? And there's still a chance the insurance company would let you die?
Maybe bring back workhouses? Slavery would solve a lot of those problems.
Of course, you have to see if there is a job for all those people. Some are lazy, but the vast majority are not. Will you provide free day care for the single mothers? Also, many of the jobs that are available do not provide a living wage.
How do you get them to work, hold them at gunpoint? Seems problematic in a free country. One of the things you have to accept in a free country is that not everyone has the same work ethic as you do. And that some will take advantage of either welfare benefits or tax loopholes. And why should children be punished for the behaviour of their parents?
Believe me, if you closed some of the tax loopholes your country(and ours) would not be in any financial difficulty. Even with a percentage of the population having to be on welfare.
As I said, I am sure the vast majority of people on welfare do not take advantage of it and are truly in need. There will always be users...like those millionaires who pay less taxes than a middle class person.
Tiered healthcare options could help. The Insurance companies take care of non elective health care options for a start, and if you want premium premium health care, you pay extra. Meaning you get a higher health care option via your insurance company. They'd love that. So you make sure you're not paying for somebody's face lift or liposuction.
Emergency treatments and non-elective procedures get covered by your taxes. This system needs to be separate from the insurance companies coffers - so the greedy mongrels don't get all the pie.
It is just frustrating. People don't see doctors because they can't afford it. Even if it is an emergency. They check their bank account before they make an appointment. And those are the people with insurance. I know I do. My copay is $40 for a specialist of which I had to see three times the past two weeks. I work on campus and as a waitress... not like I'm bringin' in the big bucks
There will always be people that abuse a system. But the majority don't. Everyone should have healthcare. How do we pay for it? Increase everyone's taxes? I doubt it would be more than $12,000/yr my dad spends insuring us. As far as illegal aliens, people visiting..whatever, they're here so we can't just let them suffer, so do we pick up the slack? Yeah. It is very rare that someone will never need medical treatment (even serious) at one point or another, you pay so no one has to suffer.
Didn't the American taxpayer pay your salary while you were in the military? I don't see anything wrong with that. Why shouldn't students get a break while they are trying to improve themselves and get better jobs so that they can avoid welfare and so they can pay higher taxes?
Are you serious? My salary? If you want to go that route I assure you they owe me quite a bit more money! I don't want her to have to pay higher taxes, do you not get that? But until she pays any income tax she needs not spend my money!
The richest country in the world arguing so long and so vociferously about whether or not they should look after the sick, regardless of their financial status is very, very weird. Why you would not want to look after each other is beyond me, but good luck, and I hope you can afford your illnesses.
"You are very generous with my money, along with the fact that you make very little money you are also exempt from paying taxes and actually getting a refund of something you never payed"
"Government has never done anything better than our free market system, ever!"
Tex, please tell me you didn't mean to say that to the Lady. You pay your taxes that you are obligated to pay as a citizen of this country. You gonna pay your taxes regardless of how our government spends it. And are you OK with the Insurance Companies practices? You dont think a public option would help this lady's father out? I dont always like what you say but I did respect what you had to say. Please be reasonable about this.
Well I'll have a career in a little over two years. So for now I just pay taxes on my paychecks from my two jobs. Still don't know why it is someone wouldn't want to use their tax money to help out a student who will be helping them out when they retire. But all is well.
My son is at uni in Australia. He works two jobs and still gets his student's allowance from the government. I know dozens of these young ones like my son and they need the help. Australians are happy to pay for their education, but when help is needed it is there. We have free health services that are world class as well. I think it is a matter of long term thinking, something Australia seems pretty good at.
Can I come live with you? I have scholarships that pay for my tuition and I work two jobs to pay for my car and apartment. I have no debt. I'll be starting grad school in the summer and be starting my career after the two year program. I am very very lucky to be in this situation. I am also lucky that my dad pays for my health insurance. With that exception I am financially independent from my parents. I should be completely. What I don't understand is the thinking that because I am a student I don't contribute to society and shouldn't have a say in how tax money is spent. I may be 22, but thats just more of a reason for me to have a say.
Nobody said you don't have a say, but your idea that everyone will pay for this is just wrong. There will be those that truly get health care for free, or rather they don't pay for it. My role is to take care of my family not anybody else's, but because of these schemes government comes up with to take my money its getting harder and harder to do what I'm supposed to. The really bad thing is there are still people who think government should provide for their every want or need, they also think that government is capable of doing it well despite all the evidence to the contrary!
Does that mean that people who can't afford to pay taxes do not deserve police protection or can't call the fireman when their house catches on fire? Letting a house burn and possibly spread would threaten to hurt a lot of people most of whom pay taxes. Just like Nellie said, it's in your best interest that your poorer citizens get health care.
A lot of people do not want their tax money paying for a couple of wars, but have no choice. I don't have children but I have always paid school taxes. You are not the only tax payer, many people have different ideas on what should be done with their taxes.
I'm sorry, but what is so wrong with people getting free health care if they need it?
"Does that mean that people who can't afford to pay taxes do not deserve police protection or can't call the fireman when their house catches on fire?"
No, those systems are funded locally not federally. If a person buy's a stick of gum or a loaf of bread they pay taxes. Taxes that are used to fund local infastructure. Lets compare apples to apples please.
"A lot of people do not want their tax money paying for a couple of wars, but have no choice."
I thought the people did have a choice, they made it last November. Didn't the President say he would end these wars post haste? How's that working out? I say this simply to re-inforce the idea that our government is broken. We can't trust them to do anything until they clean their own house.
"I'm sorry, but what is so wrong with people getting free health care if they need it?"
Because we already have a system for that. Its in danger of going broke! Its called Medicare. Why would you want to expand a broken system? Fix it first, prove it works. I don't care what they do in Canada, France, UK or anywhere else. My tax dollars don't go there.
You were just making it seem like I don't pay taxes, and I shouldn't say how tax money is spent. Do I believe that healthcare should be provided? Yes. I think that declining health has a tremendously negative effect on families, businesses, communities, and the country. If someone is able to seek medical care and especially preventive care they are less likely to have a debilitating illness that causes them to go on government assistance programs to begin with. Government doesn't and shouldn't provide every need to everyone, then there would be no reason for hard work and determination. I admire your desire to take care of your family. I think that is everyone's priority. But other's lives effect our own and I think when it comes to healthcare we should take care of everyone.
I was talking about income tax.I pay property tax,school district tax,income tax and now they are going to want me to pay more tax, all for a health care system that they have already proven they cannot run.
I say I say, wouldn't it be a good idea to tax junk food as a way of paying for free health care? And cigarettes and alcohol? That would be a good alternative. Then it gets down to abuser pays. What do you think?
It always is and always will be paid by the American Taxpayer. This is part of having a government for the people. The question should not be how are we going to get out of paying for it but how are we going to pay for it wisely. It's all academic.
Yes, but the government is telling me they must rebuild the system from scratch in order to keep costs from rising. Under the current plan I will pay much more than I'm paying now! 80% of the people are happy with their current healthcare and now the government will give, no excuse me, FORCE us into something that gives us less and costs us more all while still leaving 20 million uninsured! Where is the common sense???
I absolutley get what you are saying and agree that with the track record congress has the hopes of a sane solution seems resolute at best.
Something has to be done or the costs will totally be out of reach within a short period of time. Given the lack of a competent plan in effect for the last 30 plus years it is no wonder we are in expensive solutions to this problem. If you think that this is bad wait until the employers revolt and go out of business or downsize and see where un employment will no longer allow us our medical insurance. Will we all be on cobra then? And for how long?
I think we have got to get the other side in congress to say more than no to ideas even if they are not very savory.
So the answer is wait until 2010 and this problem will all be worked out? My reference to the other side did not mean to imply that the democrats have the answer. It was merely a suggestion to get down to figuring it out with an open mind and some solutions. The demeanor of your reply says it all in that you think the partisinship that is going on is the right way of handling the debate.
Partisanship isn't going away anytime soon wether I like it or not, as evidenced by the way this thing is being pushed through by the democrats without even the pretense of 'bipartisanship.' This is why the democrats are overreaching and why enough of them will be slapped down in 2010 to give them a warning. Wether they heed that warning or not is up to them.
Don't know but some on these pages have said if they didn't get health care they would move to Canada, Barbara Streisand, Alec Baldwin have threatened to move, but like most liberals they don't have the intestinal fortitude to carry out their threats!
Hey texan, you don't seem like the kind of person who would throw their hands up and say, "You Win!".
So, let's not go there. Let's keep it real.
As for the general nature of healthcare reform? It is a necessary first step to ensuring citizens are protected against the greedy nature, known as profiteering, of business.
The unrealized major problem for WHY healthcare reform must be done is because your individual rates continue to climb due to fact: millions, upon millions who do not have insurance coverage, not because they do not want it, but because they cannot afford it nor is there affordable policies that won't break the bank.
The main cause for your yearly increases come from those who are homeless, but get treatment from clinics or hospitals and they are unable to pay for services received.
These people have trouble with clothes, food and shelter, which plagues them daily. If they get sick, but still value their life, they seek medical aid, whenever needed, regardless of whether or not they can pay for it.
Now, if we fix the 'homeless' problem, by helping these people return to normal living, then we can handle all the healthcare costs that ever come up.
Until that problem is addressed, we cannot control healthcare, ever.
But aren't you basically saying that people who are unable to pay taxes will get free health care? I thought that was your whole argument, that if you don't pay taxes you don't deserve any services. This is turning into an argument of semantics.
That was never my argument, I said that colebabie was being very generous with my money, its very easy to say "we will all pay for it" when you are in fact not paying anything. I never told her she should be shut out of the process because she didn't pay taxes, that came about because that is what you or she wanted to believe.
1) Their governments are heavily influenced by multibillionaires.2) Those billionaires hide their assets and underpay taxes.3) Both governments spend more than than receive anyway to appease the lower classes.4) Both...
Trey Gowdy posted this article link on Facebook minutes ago. It is the beginning of the end of Obamacare and a legacy.* http://thirdestatenewsgroup.com/breakin … d-to-know/The repeal legislation will go to...
federal income tax rates history, During the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency, from 1953 to 1961, the top marginal rate was 91 percent. (It was 92 percent the year he came into office.)What does it mean, though?...
I want to get people's views on this. The thread's inspired by comments I've seen from people in and outside of this forum that suggest taxes are theft. The idea goes: if the government forces people to pay taxes (under...
Is nobody going to call Peter Schiff on his "I pay 50% tax" crap?Recently, Peter Schiff marched into OWS and confronted demonstrators, claiming that he pays 50% of his income to taxes. Unfortunately, the...