[selfish and short minded. Here I am, paying 25% of my money to taxes, and struggling to make it. This particular position offers health care to my whole family (I pay a premium for the family to be added, but it is not nearly as much as it would be if we were to obtain the policies on our
If some kind of "national health plan" is implemented, your taxes WILL GO UP MORE and your pay WILL NOT GO UP! Instead, your employer will just stop paying into a commercial plan and pocket the difference. You will end up worse off than you already are.
I'm in Australia, where we have a free health system AND a private system.
One of the rocks upon which "Hillarycare" foundered was that it would have effectively outlawed private practice. Mind you, I'm of the opinion that it was engineered to fail from the beginning.
It's not entirely true to state that medical care is terribly expensive in the U.S. In fact, insurance companies get deep discounts. Anyone unfortunate enough to have to pay for his own care gets soaked, however, in the name of, "recovering the costs of treating the uninsured." Five- to ten times what the insurance companies pay isn't unusual, and I've seen instances where it was close to twenty times.
Unfortunately, what we have now benefits many politically powerful entities. Insurers benefit from the need for insurance. Health care providers benefit from the guaranty provided by the insurers. Employers benefit from having employees who are discouraged from quitting (most insurance is provided via discounted group plans purchased by employers).
In short, the "system," such as it is, is corrupt as hell and likely violates U.S. antitrust laws, but nobody is particularly interested in doing anything about it, apart from the occasional call for a complete government takeover.
That brings me to the point that the feds have shown themselves time and again to be so administratively inept that many (including myself) genuinely believe that there's a better than even chance that government-run health care would actually be worse than what we have now. And, of course, once government takes over, it's almost impossible to go back, regardless of the outcome.
Perhaps there's a "solution" to this, but I'm damned if I know what it is.
This unwillingness of the wealthy to pay taxes just promotes the divides between the rich and the poorer.
The wealthy will never pay taxes. The middle pays the taxes. The wealthy have the ear of government--even of leftist politicians. The poor have no money. So it's the working middle that pays for everything.
1) for many people- I do not know if Korrigan falls into this category, but many people do- the difference in expense of higher taxes or paying for full healthcare coverage is immense. It is vastly less to pay the higher taxes than to pay for the full healthcare coverage.
Too bad YOU DO NOT BOTHER TO READ ANYTHING BEFORE REPLYING.
He stated that he pays 25% of his income to taxes AND HAS WORK-SUPPLIED INSURANCE. If some damnable socialist system is implemented, then he'll LOSE the work-supplied insurance AND HAVE TO PAY HIGHER TAXES. Everything is worse for him afterwards.
It's just that when you pay taxes for health care, the government is usually quite inefficient at distributing them... you pay more in taxes than you would for insurance and a lot of the money goes to people organizing the system rather than to pay for health care. I don't know what it is about America, but socialized *anything* doesn't seem to work very well here.
This unwillingness of the wealthy to pay taxes just promotes the divides between the rich and the poorer.
The wealthy will never pay taxes. The middle pays the taxes. The wealthy have the ear of government--even of leftist politicians. The poor have no money. So it's the working middle that pays for everything.
The wealthy pay taxes just like everyone else, and in fact often end up paying more since the % on income tax increases as income increases. Personally I view this as quite perverse - punishing someone for being successful via higher tax rates.
But isn't that what socialism--I mean "public aid" is all about--hurt the rich for daring to be rich?
If I could have any guarantee that health care would work without denying people access to things like second opinions, etc., without raising taxes unbearably, without taking control of health care out of the hands of the people.....
The ONLY was to guarantee NO discrimination is national healthcare.
Actually, the ONLY way is to nationalize all industries and abolish all private property and private housing. FORCE ALL PEOPLE TO LIVE IN LABOR CAMPS! IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO GUARANTEE NO DISCRIMINATION!
Likewise, CONFISCATE ALL PERSONAL BELONGINGS. Make the wearing of government-issued uniforms MANDATORY! IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO GUARANTEE NO DISCRIMINATION!
Deviation from the norm SHALL BE PUNISHED! It is DISCRIMINATORY!
Oops. The only way to Guarantee NO discrimintion (in healthcare services) is national healthcare (in the US).
And once this is implemented, the next step on the road to total government control of our lives will be that much easier. The more government "aid" that exists, the greater government control there is of both public and private life.
However, some sad, pathetic weaklings DESIRE becoming slaves to government.
The success of communism in the world today is due to the failure of democracy to live up to the noble ideals and principles inherent in its system.
SUCCESS??
You're a delusional IDIOT if you think communism has succeeded. Yeah, such GREAT SUCCESS in the USSR! Such GREAT SUCCESS in Yugoslavia. Such GREAT SUCCESS in NORTH KOREA! Such GREAT SUCCESS in China--which practices state-run capitalism. Yeah, communism is SOOOOOOOOOOO VERY SUCCESSFUL.
the last line of the post still applies
And that line CLAIMS SUCCESS FOR COMMUNISM!
Tell how that "still applies".
Reach back decades to speeches that claim "success" for communism in order to say what?
I agree with DogBrain.
As long as the sodding foetuses are expunged before the established limits within law, why should any of us be so arrogant to be aggrieved by what is essentially a woman's choice in a democracy?
Make it compulsory by law, force women to abort potentially autistic children and that is a different matter...
Test, screen and then sterilize/euthanase people with autistic genes or fully autistic people and that is a different matter, because you impinge upon the rights of the individual.
I really do not see the problem with screening and aborting potentially autistic foetuses, as long as it is within our already established limits.
Change the limits if you must, but why should autistic foetuses be a considered to be a special case if 'normal' foetuses are to be aborted with impunity by women who are simply too busy to have children?
Arrogance!
I am going to hang on in here, but this forum is bizarre and almost entirely leftist in orientation.
As a 'spectrum individual' who claims a fat wadge of benefits and lives the life of Riley at the taxpayers expense, I am going to break the mold and state that I do not care if people abort autistic foetuses.
Maybe there would then be MORE state benefits for ME, so that I can continue to have a 24/7/365 jolly at YOUR EXPENSE for the rest of my healthy, but entirely non-productive life.
Oooh, I hope this is irony! If not, then I seriously worry about your state of mind.
I am concerned about public being misspent on asylum seekers, and special programmes for immigrants coming into the country of my birth.
Given that you're a self-proclaimed intentional non-obligate parasite on the same fund source, your concerns don't matter in this area.
Of course, you would never dare say any of this to my face, would you?
It is all
ad hominem. You have probably never had to question your values as hard as I have, which is why so many of you, yes, YOU, are so incapable of forming a logical rational counter-argument.
I would happily say it to your face. I've said more dangerous things to people who have already demonstrated their wish and capacity for violence. I have had to question my values to the point of nearly throwing myself in front of a truck in order to avoid the quandry. You impress nobody but yourself. You are a self-selected parasite, an intentional drain and dead weight upon society. Your alleged "contribution" in the form of "taxes" is nullified by the plain truth that the money used to pay those "taxes" IS ITSELF FROM TAXATION.
