Skip to main content

Nothing is more satisfying than to see these idiots come to the realization that "there is no such thing as a free lunch" and someone has to pay the bills for all these wonderful utopian gifts we intend to bestow upon society. It is great to see this type of thing occur in a bastion of liberalism.  Enjoy....and know it will be coming to you in the very near future....haha

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015...s/?intcmp=latestnews

 

Hillary in 2016?  Why not?  We've already had one "girly man" serving in office for the past 7 years, we might as well give her chance as well!

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Only conservatives call it "free". Most thinking and rational people understand that we will have to pay for our healthcare TOGETHER. I'll be glad when we finally get Universal healthcare. 

 

This story is a perfect example of how the ACA didn't go far enough. 

 

Here is a good example of where we should be heading.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/...aby_in_paris_is.html

 

My daughter is now experiencing this first hand. She is enjoying the wonderful French healthcare and loving it. She has had two occasions to use it and it has cost her a grand total of $28 dollars. That is with x-rays, and ambulance ride and all her meds. 

Last edited by Jankinonya
Originally Posted by Stanky:

The school of hard knocks and reality still offers the best education. I do wonder if the lesson will be lost on those students in the voting booth after all the free-stuff campaign promises.

"Hard knocks and reality"   has been lost to the "Free-take one" campaign. Why work hard and get tired and dirty when someone else will do it and still reap the benefits?

Thank the Democratic party and the so-called President of this country for getting people hooked on their "hand-outs for votes". 

The students are most likely covered under their parents polices. 

 

As to France, the French with abilities or wealth are fleeing the place.  The UK attracted hundreds of thousands of those with ability, but little wealth.  The wealthy are going to Belgium, Switzerland and Monaco.  The 75 percent wealth surplus tax was quietly ended in an attempt to stop the flow. 

Wealthy and those of ability flee, while the government scrambles to seize every sou they can, Yes, I know they now use the euro, just like the old saying.

 

"Down and out: the French flee a nation in despair

The failing economy and harsh taxes of François Hollande's beleaguered nation are sending thousands packing - to Britain's friendlier sho-res

 

A poll on the front page of last Tuesday’s Le Monde, that bible of the French Left-leaning Establishment (think a simultaneously boring and hectoring Guardian), translated into stark figures the winter of François Hollande’s discontent.

 

More than 70 per cent of the French feel taxes are “excessive”, and 80 per cent believe the president’s economic policy is “misguided” and “inefficient”. This goes far beyond the tax exiles such as Gérard Depardieu, members of the Peugeot family or Chanel’s owners. Worse, after decades of living in one of the most redistributive systems in western Europe, 54 per cent of the French believe that taxes – of which there have been 84 new ones in the past two years, rising from 42 per cent of GDP in 2009 to 46.3 per cent this year – now widen social inequalities instead of

reducing them.

 

This is a noteworthy departure, in a country where the much-vaunted value of “equality” has historically been tinged with envy and resentment of the more fortunate. Less than two years ago, the most toxic accusation levied at Nicolas Sarkozy was of being “le président des riches”, favouring his yacht-sailing CEO buddies with tax breaks and sweet deals. By contrast, Hollande, the bling-free candidate, was elected on a platform of increasing state spending by promising to create 60,000 teachers’ jobs, as well as 150,000 subsidised entry-level public-service jobs for the long-time unemployed and the young – without providing for significant savings elsewhere.

By 2014, France’s public expenditure will overtake Denmark’s to become the world’s highest: 57 per cent of GDP. In effect, just to keep in the same place, like a hamster on a wheel, and ensure that the European Central Bank in Frankfurt isn’t too unhappy with us, Hollande now needs cash. Technocrats, MPs and ministers have been instructed to find every euro they can rake in – in deferred benefits, cancelled tax credits, extra levies. As they ignore the notion of making some serious cuts (mooted at regular intervals by the IMF, the OECD and even France’s own Cour des Comptes), the result can be messy.

 

On the one hand, the lacklustre economy and finance minister Pierre Moscovici recently admitted that he “understood” the French’s “exasperation” with their heavy tax burden. This earned him a sharp rap on the fingers from the president and his beleaguered PM, Jean-Marc Ayrault. On the other, new taxes keep being announced, in chaotic fashion, nearly every week. “Announced” doesn’t mean “implemented”: the Hollande crowd have developed a unique Wile E Coyote-style of leaks, technical glitches, last-minute tweaks and horse-market bargaining whereby almost nobody knows, at any given time, who will be targeted by the taxman, and how. Unsurprisingly, this is liked by no one except us reptiles of the press, eager to report on the longest series of own goals in the history of government communications."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...cialist-farrage.html

Last edited by direstraits

The reality of healthcare a la Froggie.  The article is two years old and it hasn't improved.

 

"France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke

 

Anita Manfredi got nine massages and 18 mud baths at a luxury spa in November. The French government paid two-thirds of the $1,022 bill. “The treatment has done me a lot of good,” says Manfredi, a French retiree who suffers from arthritis and enjoys a three-week retreat at the southern spa town of Dax every year. “I no longer have flare-ups.”

 

For decades, France has held up its health-care system as a model to the world. Homeopathic remedies, support tights, and taxi rides to the hospital are among the many costs reimbursed by the health-care branch of France’s social security system, known as l’assurance maladie. Average life expectancy is 81.3 years, longer than in the U.S. Adults are less likely to live with diabetes or die from heart disease, and the rate of infant deaths in 2010, the latest year on record, was almost half that of the U.S., according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

 

Yet France’s looming recession and a steady increase in chronic diseases including diabetes threaten to change that, says Willy Hodin, who heads Groupe PHR, an umbrella organization for 2,200 French pharmacies. The health system exceeds its budget by billions of euros each year, and in the face of rising costs, taxpayer-funded benefits such as spa treatments, which the French have long justified as preventive care, now look more like expendable luxuries. “Reform is needed fast,” Hodin says. “The most optimistic believe this system can survive another five to six years. The less optimistic don’t think it will last more than three.”

 

Even as Spain and Greece gut their own costly health-care systems in an effort to control government spending, French President François Hollande is struggling to preserve his country’s enviably generous benefits, which most citizens consider a right. Aware that any attempt to dramatically curtail perks would likely lead to massive protests, Hollande has taken a more modest approach to cost-cutting. France’s health system now requires doctors to reduce the number of drugs they prescribe and to substitute generics for brand-name pharmaceuticals. The government says cuts in the cost of prescription medicines will save €530 million ($702.4 million) in 2013. Patients in other European nations have long used generics, but many French view no-name drugs with suspicion and demand the real thing. In Germany, as much as 96 percent of prescriptions are filled with generics. In June 2011 the substitution rate in France was 71 percent, according to the government. The goal is 85 percent.

 

Under new rules, patients can no longer refuse a generic offered by pharmacists unless they’re willing to pay upfront for the pricier alternative. And pharmacists who sell too many branded drugs face trouble. Jean-Christophe Girardeaux and his mother, Jacqueline, who co-own a pharmacy in Airvault, a town of about 3,000 in western France, lost their right to offer customers immediate reimbursement for one month in September after they failed to sell enough generics. The younger Girardeaux calls the government’s push for generics “crazy,” a view many French share. In a December opinion poll published by Groupe PHR, 46 percent of those surveyed said the increased pressure to use generic drugs was a violation of their freedom.

 

The government is also putting the squeeze on free taxi rides for patients in rural areas, who often live far from hospitals. Jonathan Guersoni, a cabbie in the Burgundy region, says 95 percent of his business comes from shuttling patients to and from the doctor in his Mercedes-Benz (DAI:GR). He carries one customer three times a week for dialysis at a hospital 31 miles away, billing the government at a discounted rate, about 7 percent less than what he charges paying customers. Guersoni, who goes by the nickname Joe Le Taxi, fears health authorities will soon demand a discount of more than twice as much. “I am really worried,” he says. “I may have to get a cheaper car.”

 

The tinkering appears to have succeeded in bringing down costs, though it’s unclear by how much. The government projects the health-care system’s 2013 shortfall will be about €5.1 billion, down from €11.6 billion in 2010. Yet that forecast may be optimistic, since it’s based on the assumption that the economy will grow 0.8 percent—double the European Commission’s estimate. France’s system “is simply unaffordable, unsustainable, and the manner in which it’s financed is a huge burden on the economy,” says Nicholas Spiro, managing director of Spiro Sovereign Strategy in London. “The French are not being realistic.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/ar...ystem-is-going-broke

From the same news site you sourced Dire we get this report. 

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/visua...-care-2014-countries

 

France ranks 8 and the US ranks 44. We spend more in all areas and we get less. So even if its not perfect, its still WAY better than ours. The top 10 are ALL universal healthcare systems. 

 

Are you guys seriously arguing that we have a good system? Take the ACA out of the picture and go back to the time when you could be denied healthcare because of preexisting conditions, or reach a lifetime limit. Was it better then? Of course not. The answer is universal healthcare. Every other developed country in the world knows this and has made it work. We keep paying more and getting less. Why? Because of numbskulls like you. Grow up! 

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

Yes, Dire the French do complain about how much they pay for healthcare through taxes until you mention the US system and then they all agree they prefer what they have to what we have.

 

Mad, I don't have to leave my country just because I disagree with certain aspects of it. I can work to make a change. That is what makes this country one of the best places on earth. I am willing to keep working on those changes. For now. There might come a day when leaving it for a better life is the right thing for me. I'll be sure to let you know.  

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

From the same news site you sourced Dire we get this report. 

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/visua...-care-2014-countries

 

France ranks 8 and the US ranks 44. We spend more in all areas and we get less. So even if its not perfect, its still WAY better than ours. The top 10 are ALL universal healthcare systems. 

 

Are you guys seriously arguing that we have a good system? Take the ACA out of the picture and go back to the time when you could be denied healthcare because of preexisting conditions, or reach a lifetime limit. Was it better then? Of course not. The answer is universal healthcare. Every other developed country in the world knows this and has made it work. We keep paying more and getting less. Why? Because of numbskulls like you. Grow up! 

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

______________________________________________________

The marker of GDP vs percentage of healthcare cost is a well known fraud.  During the Sarkozy administration it was revealed that reported healthcare costs were actually much more than reported,  The government refused to reveal the real cost (as opaque as the Obama administration) and has refused to do so in the present regime  From that marker, flows much of the rest of the rating.  Although, it really is of little matter, as the entire system is on the brink of failure as reported in my cited article.

 

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

Yes, Dire the French do complain about how much they pay for healthcare through taxes until you mention the US system and then they all agree they prefer what they have to what we have.

 Not only do they complain, they are leaving in droves. 

Mad, I don't have to leave my country just because I disagree with certain aspects of it. I can work to make a change. That is what makes this country one of the best places on earth. I am willing to keep working on those changes. For now. There might come a day when leaving it for a better life is the right thing for me. I'll be sure to let you know.  

 

Originally Posted by teyates:

Nothing is more satisfying than to see these idiots come to the realization that "there is no such thing as a free lunch" and someone has to pay the bills for all these wonderful utopian gifts we intend to bestow upon society. It is great to see this type of thing occur in a bastion of liberalism.  Enjoy....and know it will be coming to you in the very near future....haha

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015...s/?intcmp=latestnews

 

"What do mean we have to pay, we only wanted the rich to pay for this"

Last edited by HIFLYER2
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

From the same news site you sourced Dire we get this report. 

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/visua...-care-2014-countries

 

France ranks 8 and the US ranks 44. We spend more in all areas and we get less. So even if its not perfect, its still WAY better than ours. The top 10 are ALL universal healthcare systems. 

 

Are you guys seriously arguing that we have a good system? Take the ACA out of the picture and go back to the time when you could be denied healthcare because of preexisting conditions, or reach a lifetime limit. Was it better then? Of course not. The answer is universal healthcare. Every other developed country in the world knows this and has made it work. We keep paying more and getting less. Why? Because of numbskulls like you. Grow up! 

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

______________________________________________________

The marker of GDP vs percentage of healthcare cost is a well known fraud.  During the Sarkozy administration it was revealed that reported healthcare costs were actually much more than reported,  The government refused to reveal the real cost (as opaque as the Obama administration) and has refused to do so in the present regime  From that marker, flows much of the rest of the rating.  Although, it really is of little matter, as the entire system is on the brink of failure as reported in my cited article.

 

_________________ 

Let's say that the ACA was repealed tomorrow. What then? We were in an even bigger mess before it and it did not fix many of our major problems with healthcare. What we going to do about it? We can't just ignore the problem. Are we ready to just start letting people die because they are poor? What about children, do we stop funding healthcare for children? 

 

Of course Frances healthcare system is not perfect. Nothing in this world is perfect. It is a hellofva lot better than what we have. You exaggerate when you say the entire system is on the brink of failure. Your article was from 2012, right? The one I linked to was 2014. You are saying that a healthcare system that is ranked in the top 10 in the whole world for efficiency is failing.... What does that say about ours? We are ranked 44 out of 51. 

 

Did you notice (I pointed it out) all of the best healthcare systems in the world, the top 10, are some form of universal healthcare systems? What does it take for you and other nay sayers to wake up and see that we don't have to reinvent the wheel here in this country. We have many great examples of WAY better healthcare systems to use as a template here in the US. 

 

 

Last edited by Jankinonya
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

From the same news site you sourced Dire we get this report. 

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/visua...-care-2014-countries

 

France ranks 8 and the US ranks 44. We spend more in all areas and we get less. So even if its not perfect, its still WAY better than ours. The top 10 are ALL universal healthcare systems. 

 

Are you guys seriously arguing that we have a good system? Take the ACA out of the picture and go back to the time when you could be denied healthcare because of preexisting conditions, or reach a lifetime limit. Was it better then? Of course not. The answer is universal healthcare. Every other developed country in the world knows this and has made it work. We keep paying more and getting less. Why? Because of numbskulls like you. Grow up! 

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

______________________________________________________

The marker of GDP vs percentage of healthcare cost is a well known fraud.  During the Sarkozy administration it was revealed that reported healthcare costs were actually much more than reported,  The government refused to reveal the real cost (as opaque as the Obama administration) and has refused to do so in the present regime  From that marker, flows much of the rest of the rating.  Although, it really is of little matter, as the entire system is on the brink of failure as reported in my cited article.

 

_________________ 

Let's say that the ACA was repealed tomorrow. What then? We were in an even bigger mess before it and it did not fix many of our major problems with healthcare. What we going to do about it? We can't just ignore the problem. Are we ready to just start letting people die because they are poor? What about children, do we stop funding healthcare for children? 

 

Of course Frances healthcare system is not perfect. Nothing in this world is perfect. It is a hellofva lot better than what we have. You exaggerate when you say the entire system is on the brink of failure. Your article was from 2012, right? The one I linked to was 2014. You are saying that a healthcare system that is ranked in the top 10 in the whole world for efficiency is failing.... What does that say about ours? We are ranked 44 out of 51. 

 

Did you notice (I pointed it out) all of the best healthcare systems in the world, the top 10, are some form of universal healthcare systems? What does it take for you and other nay sayers to wake up and see that we don't have to reinvent the wheel here in this country. We have many great examples of WAY better healthcare systems to use as a template here in the US. 

 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sorry, you are in error, several of the top 10 are not universal healthcare.  The UK for instance is mixed -- National Health Service (NHS) and private insurance.  The Brit paper daily print horror stories about the NHS worthy of the VA system -- remember when the left used to use that as a exemplar. 

 

Now, as to a second marker -- life expectancy.  In the first world, life expectancy is more a result of diet and genetics.  For example, Japanese have the longest average life span in the first world -- a combination of genetics and diet (seafood, rice and lots of vegetables).  Place a young Japanese in the US with our diet and their average life span will be less than their native land, but longer than the US average.  Similarly, in France, the diet is more the cause than genetics, -- red wine, good fats such as olive oil, nut oils, and duck/goose fat. 

 

The left never understands that things are more complex.

 

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:

BTW, the Brit papers are reporting NHS is now not affordable -- may limit care to the indigent and low income. 


To be treated for most malladies in the UK, it requires private health insurance.  Only those considered high risk can get appointments in a reasonable amount of time.  A good friend of mine who is British and lives in Crawley enlightened me to this fact about 10 years ago.  Back then, he was paying around 400 pounds/month for private health insurance in addition to the high tax rate for NHS cost.  I can only imagine it's gotten worse.

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

I don't think anyone minds helping those who need it, but let's get something straight when we say "healthcare is a right".  What else is a right? Is food a right? Is it a "right" to be able to go where I want any time I want? When you say something is a "right", what you are saying is that someone somewhere has to take care of you when you want it without any cost to you for their service. Seems to me the ancients tried that with salves for a while, and no civilization has ever made that last for too long. See people get tired of washing other peoples feet and tails, cleaning them up, nursing them, especially when it is not one of their own.  They expect to be paid to do it. Of course there are a few with a Florence Nightinggale philosophy, but they lose that after a few months of changing dirty bed sheets and minding catheters. And then these people expect to be compensated for doing that work. In reality, the only people who are required to take care of you is your own. You can think that you can create a utopian society where people will give great compassionate care to to people with essentially no compensation for doing so, but if you think that you are living in a dream world, cause it is not going to happen.  Perhaps your daughter can bring us home some grand ideas of the utopia she is finding so rewarding there in France, since I find it ironic that the spoon fed elite are always the ones who have the grandest ideals of what our society should be.  Perhaps she could get a better idea by volunteering at local nursing home or geriatric facility and helping to take personal care of the elderly and infirm for a few months at no or minimal compensation and see if that is what she would like to do for the rest of her life.

Most medical students will leave medical school with over 6 figures of debt, which will gain interest over the next four to five years as they complete their residency. By the time they get to the "real World, they have seen and done enough to know that the world is a different place that the one upon which they entered, and then the bills come due. As much as they would like to see patients for free or at minimal costs, they have overhead and bills to pay, and those nurses and techs that help them don't want to do it for free either.

I agree that there were points in the ACA that helped, but those things could have been done without the rest of the monstrosity, nor the increased tax costs to the remainder of the populace. Instead this president and his minions have devised a wealth redistribution scheme that will affect us for decades. As for "universal healthcare", if and when we do see it in this country, you can rest assured that there are going to be many like yourself who will welcome that "free healthcare" you think you deserve, however there isn't going to be anyone around to give it to you.

Originally Posted by teyates:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

I don't think anyone minds helping those who need it, but let's get something straight when we say "healthcare is a right".  What else is a right? Is food a right? Is it a "right" to be able to go where I want any time I want? When you say something is a "right", what you are saying is that someone somewhere has to take care of you when you want it without any cost to you for their service. Seems to me the ancients tried that with salves for a while, and no civilization has ever made that last for too long. See people get tired of washing other peoples feet and tails, cleaning them up, nursing them, especially when it is not one of their own.  They expect to be paid to do it. Of course there are a few with a Florence Nightinggale philosophy, but they lose that after a few months of changing dirty bed sheets and minding catheters. And then these people expect to be compensated for doing that work. In reality, the only people who are required to take care of you is your own. You can think that you can create a utopian society where people will give great compassionate care to to people with essentially no compensation for doing so, but if you think that you are living in a dream world, cause it is not going to happen.  Perhaps your daughter can bring us home some grand ideas of the utopia she is finding so rewarding there in France, since I find it ironic that the spoon fed elite are always the ones who have the grandest ideals of what our society should be.  Perhaps she could get a better idea by volunteering at local nursing home or geriatric facility and helping to take personal care of the elderly and infirm for a few months at no or minimal compensation and see if that is what she would like to do for the rest of her life.

Most medical students will leave medical school with over 6 figures of debt, which will gain interest over the next four to five years as they complete their residency. By the time they get to the "real World, they have seen and done enough to know that the world is a different place that the one upon which they entered, and then the bills come due. As much as they would like to see patients for free or at minimal costs, they have overhead and bills to pay, and those nurses and techs that help them don't want to do it for free either.

I agree that there were points in the ACA that helped, but those things could have been done without the rest of the monstrosity, nor the increased tax costs to the remainder of the populace. Instead this president and his minions have devised a wealth redistribution scheme that will affect us for decades. As for "universal healthcare", if and when we do see it in this country, you can rest assured that there are going to be many like yourself who will welcome that "free healthcare" you think you deserve, however there isn't going to be anyone around to give it to you.

 

Originally Posted by teyates:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

 

Healthcare is a human right. Not a privilege. 

I don't think anyone minds helping those who need it, but let's get something straight when we say "healthcare is a right".  What else is a right? Is food a right? Is it a "right" to be able to go where I want any time I want? When you say something is a "right", what you are saying is that someone somewhere has to take care of you when you want it without any cost to you for their service. Seems to me the ancients tried that with salves for a while, and no civilization has ever made that last for too long. See people get tired of washing other peoples feet and tails, cleaning them up, nursing them, especially when it is not one of their own.  They expect to be paid to do it. Of course there are a few with a Florence Nightinggale philosophy, but they lose that after a few months of changing dirty bed sheets and minding catheters. And then these people expect to be compensated for doing that work. In reality, the only people who are required to take care of you is your own. You can think that you can create a utopian society where people will give great compassionate care to to people with essentially no compensation for doing so, but if you think that you are living in a dream world, cause it is not going to happen.  Perhaps your daughter can bring us home some grand ideas of the utopia she is finding so rewarding there in France, since I find it ironic that the spoon fed elite are always the ones who have the grandest ideals of what our society should be.  Perhaps she could get a better idea by volunteering at local nursing home or geriatric facility and helping to take personal care of the elderly and infirm for a few months at no or minimal compensation and see if that is what she would like to do for the rest of her life.

Most medical students will leave medical school with over 6 figures of debt, which will gain interest over the next four to five years as they complete their residency. By the time they get to the "real World, they have seen and done enough to know that the world is a different place that the one upon which they entered, and then the bills come due. As much as they would like to see patients for free or at minimal costs, they have overhead and bills to pay, and those nurses and techs that help them don't want to do it for free either.

I agree that there were points in the ACA that helped, but those things could have been done without the rest of the monstrosity, nor the increased tax costs to the remainder of the populace. Instead this president and his minions have devised a wealth redistribution scheme that will affect us for decades. As for "universal healthcare", if and when we do see it in this country, you can rest assured that there are going to be many like yourself who will welcome that "free healthcare" you think you deserve, however there isn't going to be anyone around to give it to you.

____________________

 

You and Dire seem to just make up what you decide someone has said (even when they didn't) and then you argue against that. I said, and I will say again, only conservatives such as yourself think universal healthcare is free. Reasonable and logical people know its not free. It's just a much better system of dealing with all our healthcare needs than we have in this country. Your long response would be awesome if it were actually pointed at someone who said we should have slaves to perform healthcare services. I have never, nor have I ever seen anyone say that. It seems that you can't understand how we can pay healthcare workers AND provide healthcare for ALL Americans. It is not impossible. Take a look at how Germany is doing it. It's probably a system that would fit our society as well. It's not free. No one is working to care for the sick uncompensated. The country (the people) have decided that it is worth the COST to educate themselves and the COST of caring for their sick. I know that is a strange idea to you. 

As for healthcare being a right, we have already decided it is. If someone shows up at the ER with no insurance do they get turned away? If someone with no insurance has a heart attack do we leave them laying in the street to die? No. Civilized societies don't let people die just because they can't afford to pay the Dr. However, I understand that the Dr needs to get  paid too. So what do we do? Since we already recognize healthcare as a right, we need to figure out the best way to ensure that right to everyone. I ask what ideas you or anyone that is against single payer or universal healthcare had, but instead of giving me your idea you went on a rant about slavery, elitist, and my daughter. 

 

Maybe if you spent as much time actually thinking of ways to ensure that people have access to healthcare as you do trying to keep people from obtaining healthcare, then you might come to the logical conclusion. Universal healthcare. It's a win win. You get your almighty dollar and people don't die from preventable infections because they can't afford to go to the Dr. 

 

Oh, and rights do not mean: "When you say something is a right, someone somewhere has to take care of you when you want it without any cost to you. Seems to me that ancients tried that with salves (sic) for a while, and no civilazation has ever made that last for too long" That is the most absurd thing I have ever seen you post here, and that is saying a lot. I have the right to free speech.  Did I enslave you with my right to tell you how ridiculous your statement was? I also have the right to an attorney if I am charged with a crime. How many attorney's do you know that are being forced into slavery to represent the accused? I have the right to own a gun. Can I just go down to the local gun shop and make them give me one? I mean...it's my right, right? 

 

Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:

Jank

The ACA also destoryed the good health care plans provided companies who did the right thing like mine.  To avoid the caddiliac tax those plans were reduced and out of pocket expenses were raised.  They knowingly lied to the public to get it passed and then laughed about it, how good could it be?

__________________

 

Scrape it then. Now what? The system we had before wasn't working and was a lot worse than it is now. If you had cancer you ended up running out of coverage way before your treatment was complete and IF you survived you more than likely would be in so much medical debt you would be forced into bankruptcy. If you had diabetes and you changed jobs then you probably wouldn't be able to get any insurance with your new company. No preexisting illnesses. Remember? Those that could afford to pay for insurance but just opted to not would have car wrecks, heart attacks, storkes and run up huge bills at the hospital then just walk away. Which caused all the rest of us to pay higher and higher healthcare cost to offset the loss. Should those people continue to screw the rest of us? The ACA is not perfect, far from it. It didn't go far enough and we have to get over this idea that universal healthcare is some kind of scary thing. It is WAY better than what we have or ever had in this country. 

 

I'm willing and open to new ideas. Please, tell me yours.

No, the ones griping about the uca are the ones paying their share and that of others as well.  Taxes are high enough.  The only tax increase that I would go along with is a small increase in the fuel tax and earmark it for road construction or repair.  Jank, where is the money for universal health care to come from?  Where will the doctors come from?  Old ones are gonna retire, and no one of any intelligence will try to become a doctor if they have to work for the government.  Do you want a community volunteer to do it?  And the point of the original post is that liberals expected everyone but themselves to pay.
Last edited by mad American
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:

Jank

The ACA also destoryed the good health care plans provided companies who did the right thing like mine.  To avoid the caddiliac tax those plans were reduced and out of pocket expenses were raised.  They knowingly lied to the public to get it passed and then laughed about it, how good could it be?

__________________

 

Scrape it then. Now what? The system we had before wasn't working and was a lot worse than it is now. If you had cancer you ended up running out of coverage way before your treatment was complete and IF you survived you more than likely would be in so much medical debt you would be forced into bankruptcy. If you had diabetes and you changed jobs then you probably wouldn't be able to get any insurance with your new company. No preexisting illnesses. Remember? Those that could afford to pay for insurance but just opted to not would have car wrecks, heart attacks, storkes and run up huge bills at the hospital then just walk away. Which caused all the rest of us to pay higher and higher healthcare cost to offset the loss. Should those people continue to screw the rest of us? The ACA is not perfect, far from it. It didn't go far enough and we have to get over this idea that universal healthcare is some kind of scary thing. It is WAY better than what we have or ever had in this country. 

 

I'm willing and open to new ideas. Please, tell me yours.

_______________________________________________________

Jank, most were satisfied with their insurance.

 

Much of the focus of recent polling has been on specific reform proposals. However, a number of surveys conducted throughout 2009 showed a common thread — people’s satisfaction with their own health insurance or health coverage. We have included a number of these findings below:

 

CNN/Opinion Research: 74% of people are satisfied with their personal health insurance coverage. 83% of people are satisfied with their own health care.

 

Employee Benefits Research Institute: Fifty-eight percent of those with health insurance coverage are extremely or very satisfied with their current plan, and approximately one-third (30 percent) are somewhat satisfied.

 

Fox News/Opinion Dynamics: 84% of people surveyed said the quality of their personal health insurance was either excellent or good. 83% of people surveyed said the quality of care they receive is either excellent or good.

 

Quinnipiac University: 85% of Americans are very or somewhat satisfied with their own health insurance plan.

 

The University of Texas/Zogby International: 84% of people are satisfied with their health care. The Washington Post: 81% of people are satisfied with their health insurance coverage. 88% of people are satisfied with the quality of care they receive.

 

The New York Times: 77% of people are satisfied with the quality of their own care. 77% of people said that basic medical care covered by their health insurance plan is affordable.

 

Democracy Corps: 72% of people are satisfied with their own health insurance coverage vs. 75% in 1993 – not a significant change. 76% of self-identified independents are satisfied with their coverage as are 72% of Democrats and 78% of Republicans.

 

Gallup: “Among all Americans, 83% say the quality of healthcare they receive is either ‘excellent’ or ‘good.’ Only 16% say it’s either ‘only fair’ or ‘poor.’” “Americans are only a bit less positive about their own healthcare coverage, with 67% describing the coverage they now have as excellent or good.” Gallup’s conclusion: “At the same time, [Americans surveyed] are pleased with the quality of medical treatment in the country, and are mostly satisfied with their own healthcare quality, coverage, and costs.”

 

CNN/Opinion Research Poll: In March 2009, 73% of Americans were satisfied with their own health insurance coverage. NOTE: In November 2007, the satisfaction rating was 69%.

 

Employee Benefits Research Institute: 93% of people enrolled in a traditional health care plan were satisfied with the quality of coverage they received through their health plan (including 31% extremely satisfied). 93% of people enrolled in a traditional health care plan were satisfied with their plan. 86% of people enrolled in a traditional health care plan were likely to stay with their current plan. -

 

See more at: http://www.ahipcoverage.com/20...sthash.pKBqkgwS.dpuf

 

Instead of simple reforms to improve the system, Obamacare saddled people with an extremely complicated system, the cost of which is still unknown,  We were repeatedly lied to, to sell the product -- lied to again, and again.

 

As to the uninsured, the most quoted number was 25 million. When this was broken down, about 12.5 million were found to be young people who could afford it, but didn't wish to pay.  A simple bill to cover the 12.5 million who couldn't afford coverage and a tax credit to encourage the other half take up catastrophic coverage would have sufficed, 

 

As to those who used the ER and let others pay -- that is still going on. 

Originally Posted by mad American:
No, the ones griping about the uca are the ones paying their share and that of others as well.  Taxes are high enough.  The only tax increase that I would go along with is a small increase in the fuel tax and earmark it for road construction or repair.  Jank, where is the money for universal health care to come from?  Where will the doctors come from?  Old ones are gonna retire, and no one of any intelligence will try to become a doctor if they have to work for the government.  Do you want a community volunteer to do it?  And the point of the original post is that liberals expected everyone but themselves to pay.

but they want someone else to pay their "too high" premium for them. if it was free the gripers wouldn't be griping.

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:

Jank

The ACA also destoryed the good health care plans provided companies who did the right thing like mine.  To avoid the caddiliac tax those plans were reduced and out of pocket expenses were raised.  They knowingly lied to the public to get it passed and then laughed about it, how good could it be?

__________________

 

Scrape it then. Now what? The system we had before wasn't working and was a lot worse than it is now. If you had cancer you ended up running out of coverage way before your treatment was complete and IF you survived you more than likely would be in so much medical debt you would be forced into bankruptcy. If you had diabetes and you changed jobs then you probably wouldn't be able to get any insurance with your new company. No preexisting illnesses. Remember? Those that could afford to pay for insurance but just opted to not would have car wrecks, heart attacks, storkes and run up huge bills at the hospital then just walk away. Which caused all the rest of us to pay higher and higher healthcare cost to offset the loss. Should those people continue to screw the rest of us? The ACA is not perfect, far from it. It didn't go far enough and we have to get over this idea that universal healthcare is some kind of scary thing. It is WAY better than what we have or ever had in this country. 

 

I'm willing and open to new ideas. Please, tell me yours.

Flat Tax and a tax for every body to pay that comes out of any return for healthcare and no subsidy that makes it a free ride for anybody. 

Originally Posted by mad American:
No, the ones griping about the uca are the ones paying their share and that of others as well.  Taxes are high enough.  The only tax increase that I would go along with is a small increase in the fuel tax and earmark it for road construction or repair.  Jank, where is the money for universal health care to come from?  Where will the doctors come from?  Old ones are gonna retire, and no one of any intelligence will try to become a doctor if they have to work for the government.  Do you want a community volunteer to do it?  And the point of the original post is that liberals expected everyone but themselves to pay.

____________________________

 

Before the ACA we were paying for those that COULD afford insurance but chose NOT to. We were paying the high cost of the poor and uninsured using the ER like a GP. We were paying for the cost of those uninsured hospital patients that were unable to pay the enormous bills. Some of those things have gotten better. Not enough, but better. So I don't really understand what makes you more angry now. Improvement is better than nothing, right? I would understand if you said you were upset that the ACA didn't do enough to fix our horrible healthcare system. I would also agree with you.

As for where the money would come from? Look at the way France, or Germany does it. We could do the same thing. Right now citizens in those countries pay way less than we do for their healthcare. For example in Germany the per capita expenditures for healthcare is $4,342  and France spends $3,997 vs the US's $8,233. In other words we pay more and get less. 

 

Basically the money you spend now for healthcare would be less and what you did pay would be used with others to cover more people. Also, the cost would be regulated. For it to work here as it does in other countries we would also have to help those that want to go into medicine by paying for their education. However, as we see with the cost of healthcare in Germany and France in the end we will still be paying less than we do now and we will be able to ensure that illness doesn't bankrupt people. 

 

In America we have been brainwashed into believing that universal or single payer healthcare is bad or scary. It's not. It's more efficient and will cost us less. 

 

You are wrong that liberals thought everyone but them would pay for healthcare. We are actually the ones that think we should all pay. At least pay based on your ability. Some would pay more than others but even the people who pay the most would have the benefit of cost control and would not be paying what we pay today. I pay over $1000 a month for my insurance. I would really like to see that go down. The only way that is going to happen is if we scrap our current system (that has never worked) and do something that is proven to work. 

Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:

Jank

The ACA also destoryed the good health care plans provided companies who did the right thing like mine.  To avoid the caddiliac tax those plans were reduced and out of pocket expenses were raised.  They knowingly lied to the public to get it passed and then laughed about it, how good could it be?

__________________

 

Scrape it then. Now what? The system we had before wasn't working and was a lot worse than it is now. If you had cancer you ended up running out of coverage way before your treatment was complete and IF you survived you more than likely would be in so much medical debt you would be forced into bankruptcy. If you had diabetes and you changed jobs then you probably wouldn't be able to get any insurance with your new company. No preexisting illnesses. Remember? Those that could afford to pay for insurance but just opted to not would have car wrecks, heart attacks, storkes and run up huge bills at the hospital then just walk away. Which caused all the rest of us to pay higher and higher healthcare cost to offset the loss. Should those people continue to screw the rest of us? The ACA is not perfect, far from it. It didn't go far enough and we have to get over this idea that universal healthcare is some kind of scary thing. It is WAY better than what we have or ever had in this country. 

 

I'm willing and open to new ideas. Please, tell me yours.

Flat Tax and a tax for every body to pay that comes out of any return for healthcare and no subsidy that makes it a free ride for anybody. 

__________________

 

So single payer healthcare? 

Sorry Jank, I wouldn't want to get your blood pressure up, you would expect someone to take care of you if you stroked out....haha.

Yes, your liberal ideal of a "right" is exactly like what I referred to.  You insinuate that it is your right to receive medical care, and that if it is such a "right", regardless of whether it is fairly compensated for or not, you expect to receive it.  There were acts in place to take care of the uninsured in emergency situation prior to the ACA. What we are seeing now the ACA is exactly what some of us predicted to begin with. Those who chose not to insure themselves, but could afford it, continue to balk at the idea of buying insurance.  Now however when they do get sick, or develop a cancer, they can go out an buy the best coverage they can afford and the insurance company has to take care of it. Ironically, now that extra costs is passed on to us with the ACA tax and increased rates.  Each month my BCBS bill shows that on top of my already high rate, I pay about $78 for the Healthcare Tax.  That equals out to about $860 per year, then I am tagged again on my return with higher rates and other assorted goodies. Bitter? Yep, I guess you could say that. I am sick and tired of trying to provide for my family's coverage and then being penalized by higher rates to provide for someone else. Now the Dems in Congress are proposing a new brick to stack on the camel's back.  They want to do away with the penalty for THOSE WHO DO NOT BUY COVERAGE....What?  I thought that was what this whole ACA was about?  Now this idiots want to do away with the penalty on the very ones who they are giving money to to supplement their coverage.  These same ones now show up at the ER with no insurance and no plans to pay for their care. The ACA did not nothing but create more of a headache for providers and then turned around and gave the offenders a "get out of jail" free card.

Exactly what kind of work do you do Jank? Do you expect to be compensated for enough to cover your expenses for the job you do? Do you wait 60-80 days from the time you do your work until you are paid for it? Do you get all that you bill? Do you hand those you serve a bill, or are you forced to submit a ream of paperwork electronically, and pay someone 10% of whatever you bill to take care of that for you?

I don't really care if you dislike my moronic statements or not.  Feel free to ignore them.  Most of them typically inflame the Liberal peabrain anyways, and we all know that you are not satisfied with the healthcare you get in this country. I would hate for you to show up to get your head out of your tail.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×