Reply With Quote
Funny, under Boos plan you guys would have paid for my wife's health care who hasn't worked for 30 years.
Unemployment rate only counts those actively looking for work. We could quibble all day about the number, but bottom line is all working people from poorest to richest will pay for the health care of those that choose not to work or work for cash in the underground economy..
Funny, under Boos plan you guys would have paid for my wife's health care who hasn't worked for 30 years.
The article didn't talk about or seem to factor in people with disabilities. , schizophrenia alone affects 3.2 million Americans, most of whom will be of working age since the disease tends to show up in adulthood. Many schizophrenics are unable to work. The underground economy problem can be solved by legitimizing those employees with work visas (assuming you're talking about illegals) to get them into the system and paying taxes, as we've talked about in the other thread.
I think the trade off of covering a relatively small number of freeloaders vs. covering the amount of working people who don't have health care would be worth it. How we gonna pay for it? See my other post. We already pay more in taxes toward health care per capita than any other country in the world yet for some reason don't have a single payer system despite the fact. Sounds like a lot of money is getting wasted on bull .
"We" already pay for her protection should a foreign enemy ever invade us. Local tax payers pay for the roads she uses, the fire department she would have to call in an emergency, etc, etc. I don't see how a socialized military and other such services are "acceptable" for conservatives, but socialized healthcare is a no-go.
Decent point. Nice to have a conversation in here with someone intelligent. It's quite unusual.
Well, one of the problems with political debate in this country right now is that both sides are just trying to piss each other off and/or moralize their positions in service of "virtue signaling." I don't see that as productive. I'm also for political opem mindedness and believe you shouldn't lock yourself into a single right/left ideology for life and be willing to change your views as the social/political landscape changes. I used to lean more Libertarian economically, but as I mentioned in another post, I think the shareholder primacy concept has made the Libertarian economic model (for big corporations, at least) untenable in the real world.
The health care issue cannot be truly fixed until we get rid of money in our politics. If we somehow made it where our lawmakers were on a fixed salary - and made it illegal and impossible - to accept any money from any donors - period -
then those lawmakers would make laws that only benefited the people.
It will never happen as "money is the mother's milk of politics."
Until then - the people with the money hire the people who will payoff the lawmakers - who will then make laws that benefit the people paying them.
They will also use their money to make sure the right judges are ruling on their cases to favor corporations and the wealthy at a disproportionate rate.
Any time there might be a real chance of change happening and favoring the middle class or the poor- the people with the money will hire the Rush limbaugh's,hannitys and carlsons of the world to immediately throw around the "socialism" word and the entire machine will parrot this 24/7 and the money will flow and flow until any change is quashed and we return to the status quo.
(Just remember the tax cuts gifted to the rich last year - did this get questioned and debated and examined and vetted? No - suddenly - paying for something that would benefit the rich - went through like magic - easy, unchallenged, praised as a miracle that would "pay for itself!")
The status quo - where the poor and middle class accuse each other of ruining the country and battle each other for crumbs while the rich look down upon them and laugh at their masterpiece they created. It has worked marvelously for hundreds of years.
Don't the other workers who pay into her plan already pay for her health care?
I mean why do Trump supporters pretend they don't use insurance at all?
Is she in the underground economy you were talking about?
Pretty sure that's Medicare.
I don't understand your question. None of my employees pay for health insurance for them or their family. I pay 100%.
As to disability medicare/medicaid it depends if they are SSDI or SSI.
You're right. You don't understand.
How would other workers pay into her health plan if they don't pay anything?You're right. You don't understand.
So only your workers and families are covered by that insurance company?
That's a really small insurance company tbh.
That's a ing stupid and asinine strawman even for you.
Unless you can prove only employers are contributing to the insurance company from which your wife benefits, workers are paying for her health care.
Period.
Sweet. So I can stop paying her premiums and those workers will pay for her health care. It's chump magic!
Sweet. So I can stop paying her premiums and those workers will pay for her health care. It's chump magic!
Sorry I ruined your narrative. Working people are paying for your nonworking wife's health care with their premiums.
That's all. No reason to get pissy about it. I don't blame you for taking advantage of that opportunity.
That is bull . She has insurance because I pay her premium. If I didn't pay her premium she wouldn't have insurance. Simple as that.
Sorry I ruined your narrative. Working people are paying for your nonworking wife's health care with their premiums.
That's all. No reason to get pissy about it. I don't blame you for taking advantage of that opportunity.
are you familiar with the concept of a risk pool?
Seriously, how do Trump supporters think insurance works?
Sure. Another strawman. She wouldn't be in the risk pool if I didn't pay her premium. "other workers" aren't paying for her insurance.
That's your strawman.
Paying for her health care, CC.
You're paying her premium.
You and those other workers and employers are paying for her health care.
bull
Her healthcare is delivered through the payment of her monthly premiums, service copays, and deductibles. Without those, her health care would not be delivered. It has nothing to do with other employers or workers other than being in a common risk pool where they receive healthcare for their payments. I'm not paying for theirs and they aren't paying for hers.
Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 01-30-2019 at 05:53 PM.
so if in a given year, her covered healthcare expenses end up exceeding what you've paid by way of premiums/copays/deductibles, they'll just stop paying for her treatments? that would seem to defeat the purpose of insurance tbh
this is you not understanding what a risk pool is.I'm not paying for theirs and they aren't paying for hers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
