Wage Garnishment for Healthcare? Yikes!

dadpad wrote:

flyboy804 wrote:
dadpad wrote:

Oh sorry I forgot you're an American being rude and insulting is what Americans do.

Is this generalized description supposed to be less rude than those of Hanno?

I forgot to write ignorant, stupid, and insular.

Yes you are right it is a generalization. Generally the Americans I have met are all of the above. When America stops being isolated and insular you too will realise this is not just my view its a view that the world at large holds. A view that has been fed by morons with comments by Americans such as Hanno's.

I wont be returning to this thread so don't bother replying to me.

There we go, I think I've turned over a rock on some preconceived notions/emotional baggage. I would think the problem is that his daughter's working in the service industry, should be eating higher on the trough if she wants politeness.

I would have liked not to argue someones country, common fallacy if immaterial and it draws in emotion either way, especially in my own thread, I mean, I'm in anyone's debt for lending their insight - but with an unqualified 'it works here why shouldn't it work there' he brought it into the debate. I could've beaten around the bush and gotten overrun on the details or just go in spikes first and bring my point full circle.

Every time I advance I become more aware of my own ignorance (hell, maybe Gandhi had none but I'm not without it and it beats just imitating a saint) and I'm contentious, but I don't think I've said anything stupid, or stupidly yet.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

What about those of us with existing private coverage?

Do we get to choose or do we have to pay twice?

You get to choose.

Quote:

IT'S YOUR CHOICE.

If you have a plan you like, you keep it. If you want to change plans or aren't currently covered, you can choose from dozens of the same plans available to members of Congress, or you can opt into a public plan option like Medicare. And working families will get tax credits to help pay their premiums.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/

In every of the Democrats' plans - in the plan Edwards proposed, in the plan Hillary proposes, in the plan Obama proposes - those who want to stick with their current plan, can.

0 Replies

I think most people will switch over to the government plan, which will be a fraction of the cost.

For instance, the administrative cost for operating Medicare is a nickel for every dollar coming in. The cost in a private plan is about $.30.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

I think most people will switch over to the government plan, which will be a fraction of the cost.

For instance, the administrative cost for operating Medicare is a nickel for every dollar coming in. The cost in a private plan is about $.30.

The G can do better than the private sector. Must've been that BS about Star Wars that killed the Soviet Union after all.

0 Replies

Reagan, Mr. Anti-government, pushed that stupid idea (against all advice). BTW, Star Wars was contracted out to private firms.

0 Replies

Re: Wage Garnishment for Healthcare? Yikes!

hanno wrote:

TIME - Hillary wants yer cash-money

Now I realize I'm being a little fallacious here by picking up on one of the most exacerbating things said in the race and ragging on it. What can I say, people want to legislate morality or legislate on the basis of morality, there's no debating against that crap because it requires no logic or functionality. Hear stuff like 'it's time to do what we know we should as a society'. The real counterpoint is that it's got nothing to do with reality and is thus inherently flawed, so I feel justified in taking a quick jab at a blatant example of that.

Hillary says (I think I'm paraphrasing accurately) if folks don't buy into the universal health care, take the cash and give it to 'em anyway, because people who don't participate will screw it up. Makes sense right? I mean, no one gets asked if they want to pay for a share of the military and it wouldn't work if people opted out. Didn't get bombed by Iran today? Another satisfied customer, pay yer taxes.

I'd always assumed if socialized medicine went down it would be taken care of that way - but that's socialized medicine, which is a few steps ahead, nominally, of what the Dems are ready to admit they're selling. Better to give people a choice and penalize them for making the wrong one, if in fact they're contributing enough to the GDP to begin with to be capable of wrong doing, right?

But then, what are we really taking care of? Are we saying health care doesn't work because of the people who choose to do without? Obviously not, if in fact it doesn't work it's because the **** costs assloads of money sporadically. But then, instead of subsidizing it to normalize the cost, since we're not quite pinkos yet, what are we going to do? Target those of dissenting opinion and optimal cash value. Freedom in America rests on the failure of Hillary to act on this madness.

In Massachusetts we now have universal health care coverage for most of the citizens of the Commonwealth. If you don't buy insurance, you pay a fine and if you insist on being a burden to others in this State by not buying your own insurance, you'll continue to pay fines.

If you don't buy insurance then by all means don't get sick...

0 Replies

hanno wrote:

The G can do better than the private sector.

Sounds good except that most American-educated physicians don't want a G-plan and moreover, won't lower themselves professionally by participating in such a plan.

And why should they?

I sure as hell don't blame them one bit.

0 Replies

It is too bad that physicians don't want a g plan. That is a bit self-serving. However, they are not the only ones included in the equation. Moreover, the present system is bad for the country.

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

hanno wrote:

The G can do better than the private sector.

Sounds good except that most American-educated physicians don't want a G-plan and moreover, won't lower themselves professionally by participating in such a plan.

And why should they?

I sure as hell don't blame them one bit.

Miller, I think hanno's comment was a bit 'tongue in cheek'. Read beyond your quoted sentence.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

It is too bad that physicians don't want a g plan. That is a bit self-serving. However, they are not the only ones included in the equation. Moreover, the present system is bad for the country.

Your comment reminds me of an article in this month's New England Journal of Medicine. They point out that critics have been predicting 'imminent collapse' of our present system for decades, and yet it has remained disturbingly stable. It's part of the reason they think there has been no 'reform'.

0 Replies

hanno wrote:

The G can do better than the private sector. Must've been that BS about Star Wars that killed the Soviet Union after all.

Yes, because any program that involves any kind of role for the government whatsoever equates to Soviet practices, of course.

(I mean, what? How does the fall of communism discredit the idea of a government role in health insurance? That role exists in much of the West, from Canada and Australia to Britain, Germany, whereever - all market economies. It's hardly a communist idea..)

0 Replies

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Advocate wrote:
It is too bad that physicians don't want a g plan. That is a bit self-serving. However, they are not the only ones included in the equation. Moreover, the present system is bad for the country.

Your comment reminds me of an article in this month's New England Journal of Medicine. They point out that critics have been predicting 'imminent collapse' of our present system for decades, and yet it has remained disturbingly stable. It's part of the reason they think there has been no 'reform'.

Some stable! One out of three people have no insurance or inadequate insurance (high deductibles and exclusions), and the situation is getting worse.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

It is too bad that physicians don't want a g plan. That is a bit self-serving. However, they are not the only ones included in the equation. Moreover, the present system is bad for the country.

If you had spent 8 years in college preparing for your profession, only to have the government step in and say 'now you work for us, and no one else. there is no other option. we'll tell you how much you can make and what you can and can't do as a physician'................

..............I wonder if you'd come aboard without a complaint?

If the government agents walked into your place of business this morning and said, 'you work for us now', what would your response be?

0 Replies

We need to dismantle the government, all of it. Not make it bigger.

Bush and his TSA are an example of uncontrolled government growth. The TSA should be privatized. The IRS disbanded. The EPA and OSHA and all the other agencies with a chokehold on American business need to be dumped.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

If you had spent 8 years in college preparing for your profession, only to have the government step in and say 'now you work for us, and no one else. there is no other option. we'll tell you how much you can make and what you can and can't do as a physician'................

..............I wonder if you'd come aboard without a complaint?

If the government agents walked into your place of business this morning and said, 'you work for us now', what would your response be?

Um - what does any of this have to do with the actual plans proposed by Clinton and Obama?

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

We need to dismantle the government, all of it. Not make it bigger.

Bush and his TSA are an example of uncontrolled government growth. The TSA should be privatized. The IRS disbanded. The EPA and OSHA and all the other agencies with a chokehold on American business need to be dumped.

And that god damn CDC! Blood-sucking parasites, the works of them.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Advocate wrote:
It is too bad that physicians don't want a g plan. That is a bit self-serving. However, they are not the only ones included in the equation. Moreover, the present system is bad for the country.

If you had spent 8 years in college preparing for your profession, only to have the government step in and say 'now you work for us, and no one else. there is no other option. we'll tell you how much you can make and what you can and can't do as a physician'................

..............I wonder if you'd come aboard without a complaint?

If the government agents walked into your place of business this morning and said, 'you work for us now', what would your response be?

I guess life is a bitch. What we have now is bad for the country's health. Under it, the nonwell-to-do are effectively told to drop dead. Our life expectancy is significantly lower than virtually every country with a U plan, and our current system is inhibiting business. Moreover, we are spending more than double per capita what virtually every other developed country is spending on healthcare, and getting less for it overall.

I imagine that any U plan we adopt, if any, will allow physicians to operate outside the plan. This is certainly the case in the UK, in which private practices are unchallenged.

The fact of the matter, in one example after another, is that the government has to step in when the private sector is not performing.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

The fact of the matter, in one example after another, is that the government has to step in when the private sector is not performing.

And you'll go right on repeating this nonsense until you've convinced yourself of it regardless of what the facts actually show...

0 Replies

I guess I did say this before. But can you show us how my statement is incorrect. Consider social security and Medicare in your answer.

0 Replies

Re: Wage Garnishment for Healthcare? Yikes!

Miller wrote:

If you don't buy insurance, you pay a fine and if you insist on being a burden to others in this State by not buying your own insurance, you'll continue to pay fines.

If you don't buy insurance then by all means don't get sick...

I've got a pair of singed 8" metatarsals and a hardhat in back of the car that says I'm no burden to anyone and it'll take a hell of a thing to make me sick. So why the fine?

Now I haven't said it up 'till now, because quite frankly I see it as simply one symptom of the overall fallacy and it is a rare thing I begrudge my fellow Americans, but if someone's going to be a burden to someone else, pooling our resources is a nice way to start. I mean, I know something magical will happen after we turn it over to the G that will make more people able to get more service for less money from an industry of the same or lesser size, so unless I would like to pay more to keep others sick it shouldn't matter, but, if you're going to have a full stomach and a doctor on the payroll either way...

You might say we can't use healthcare to motivate people, and I see your point, I never said turn 'em away - but if all the tough stuff is not just available, but laid out on the table, are we so superficial as to excel simply for the sake of luxury items? Are we so sublime as to seek transcendence instead of watching Oprah and eating canned tuna? You can't motivate me that way, I ain't that bad or that good.

Reality exists whether we like it or not. I want to read a book and drink whiskey? I got to work, pay the bills and do what I want when I can. If the book and the whiskey are there, and the rent's paid, hell I'm no angel, screw work. And who else had to sweat for my stuff to get there? Let people get what they want, but don't allocate it to them or you can kiss the act of getting goodbye, it's like asking for perpetual motion.

0 Replies

Wage Garnishment for Healthcare? Yikes!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know