Discussion: Healthcare

[BlackLantern]

My doctor jokes with me that I waste his time.....excellent health is always written on my chart.....

 

[thedeadite]

There is always a cost. Your cost is not $0; you've just already paid in the form of taxes.

And the guy that didn't go to the doctor every month for the past 10 years? Yeah, the taxes he was paying during that time contributed to your health care. So make sure you thank the people that are working hard and contributing their income so that you may go to the doctor. Do that often?

As often as I ask to be thanked for the portion of my taxes that went to help someone else in need. Just because I had a short time where I didn't work (it's hard to find a job in a saturated market when you have just moved back to the country after a 3 year hiatus) doesn't mean I don't, and never have "work(ed) hard".

Funny thing is that my income taxes aren't that much more in Canada than they where in Michigan (maybe a 2-5% difference depending on my payrate). Albeit sales tax is slightly higher in Canada, so is minimum wage (compared to michigan atleast).

 

[Tron5000]

My issue with nationalized health care is that there is nothing in the US Constitution that grants the federal government the power to mandate health coverage for its citizens. There is nothing in our Constitution that says that US citizens have the right to health care. And there is nothing in the Constitution giving the federal government the power to seize my property (income) at the threat of jail (that's what you get when you don't pay your taxes) to redistribute that income to pay for another individual's health care. Quite frankly, the idea my income should be taken from me and used to pay for someone else's health care, and conversely, the belief that my health care should be paid for by someone else's hard work, strikes me as ridiculous.

 

[BlackLantern]

My issue with nationalized health care is that there is nothing in the US Constitution that grants the federal government the power to mandate health coverage for its citizens. There is nothing in our Constitution that says that US citizens have the right to health care. And there is nothing in the Constitution giving the federal government the power to seize my property (income) at the threat of jail (that's what you get when you don't pay your taxes) to redistribute that income to pay for another individual's health care. Quite frankly, the idea my income should be taken from me and used to pay for someone else's health care, and conversely, the belief that my health care should be payed for by someone else's hard work, strikes me as ridiculous.

Ex-****ing-actly....well struck sir....

 

[thedeadite]

See, to me I don't see that as a necessarily bad thing. I've lived in both the US and Canada, I've been on both sides of the coin of paying for my own healthcare (in the US) and not being insured and having to put off checking health concerns. Whereas in Canada I know that either way I can get the help I need when I need it, or a possible ailment checked and taken care of before it gets to a point where it's gone too far. To me atleast, I don't mind that part of my income tax goes to a universal healthcare system. Where someone who needs medical attention (even preventative care) can get it without worry of going into massive debt, losing their car/house etc.. The reason that I don't mind is that I never know when I may need that same help.

It's easy to dismiss universal healthcare when you are healthy, have a good job with good benefits, can afford health coverage or live with someone who can cover you (spouse, parents). It's a totally different situation when you're the one who's sick, but can't afford to pay to get better. Anyone can lose their job, anyone can run into financial woes, anyone can get divorced or have trouble finding/affording coverage after they're 21.

 

[Tron5000]

Yes, things do happen and people often find themselves in bad situations. I haven't had health care in 20 months because my job doesn't provide it and I don't want the added expense. However, I am going to get health care soon because I've decided to go without some luxuries in order to offset the expense. I'm also going back to school to further my education in order to make me more desirable on the job market, thus enhancing my chances of obtaining a well-paying job and being able to pay for any medical needs I may have.

I understand why the theory of universal health care is appealing, but as I said, there is nothing in the Constitution granting the federal government the power to seize the property of one citizen in order to contribute to the health care of another citizen. Nothing guarantees me the right to health insurance.

And I really don't know what in the world makes people think that our government is competent enough to manage such a personal issue as health coverage on such a massive scale of 300 million people. It would be an absolute and utter disaster. They can't even get mail delivered on time.

 

[thedeadite]

See I have a very socialist mindset when it comes to things like education, healthcare and other "necessities" to keep a society running. So while I totally respect your opinion on the matter, I don't necessarily understand or agree.

I do however agree with the fact that I don't think the US government would be able to run a universal healthcare system at this time without making it a colossal mess. That and I don't think that the corperations/companies that back so many healthcare based agencies (insurance agencies) would allow it to happen in the first place.

 

[Tron5000]

See I have a very socialist mindset when it comes to things like education, healthcare and other "necessities" to keep a society running. So while I totally respect your opinion on the matter, I don't necessarily understand or agree.

I do however agree with the fact that I don't think the US government would be able to run a universal healthcare system at this time without making it a colossal mess. That and I don't think that the corperations/companies that back so many healthcare based agencies (insurance agencies) would allow it to happen in the first place.

See, I pretty much don't have a socialist mindset when it comes to anything. So while I may disagree with your opinion, you are certainly more than welcome to it.

 

[Damiean Dark]

My issue with nationalized health care is that there is nothing in the US Constitution that grants the federal government the power to mandate health coverage for its citizens. There is nothing in our Constitution that says that US citizens have the right to health care. And there is nothing in the Constitution giving the federal government the power to seize my property (income) at the threat of jail (that's what you get when you don't pay your taxes) to redistribute that income to pay for another individual's health care. Quite frankly, the idea my income should be taken from me and used to pay for someone else's health care, and conversely, the belief that my health care should be paid for by someone else's hard work, strikes me as ridiculous.

This is what it all comes down to to most americans imo not the constituition, not the goverment not being able to handle universal healthcare, those are just excuses its all about what its going to cost you in taxes, "the i dont care about anyone but myself so i dont want to pay" generation.

Sparkles right minium paid, menial job and cant afford basic healthcare?

go **** yourself

god bless america.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

My issue with nationalized health care is that there is nothing in the US Constitution that grants the federal government the power to mandate health coverage for its citizens. There is nothing in our Constitution that says that US citizens have the right to health care. And there is nothing in the Constitution giving the federal government the power to seize my property (income) at the threat of jail (that's what you get when you don't pay your taxes) to redistribute that income to pay for another individual's health care. Quite frankly, the idea my income should be taken from me and used to pay for someone else's health care, and conversely, the belief that my health care should be paid for by someone else's hard work, strikes me as ridiculous.

why? again, no one seems to be able to grasp this, what's the point of living in a society?
does anyone know?

 

[Damiean Dark]

why? again, no one seems to be able to grasp this, what's the point of living in a society?
does anyone know?

Because imo they dont really care about anyone but themselves imo, taking away some of there money in taxes to give something away to others (who will also be taxed) stangely seems to drive them crazy even for a supposedly good cause like the idea of healthcare for all.

 

[zanos]

I have an honest question.

Hillary and Hussein want to have government sponsored healthcare.

Anyone know any possible way they are going to do this without having our income taxes be 50% or more?

Before you start wondering about how much taxes it's going to cost citizens have you ever wondered how much is spent on healthcare in the United States in the first place? The number is 2.26 Trillion and that was just in 2007. We spend way more money on a per capita basis than westernized countries that do have free universal care but they have free care and we get nothing even though each citizen spends more on healthcare. Something to ponder about.

 

[Handsome Rob]

Because imo they dont really care about anyone but themselves imo, taking away some of there money in taxes to give something away to others (who will also be taxed) stangely seems to drive them crazy even for a supposedly good cause like the idea of healthcare for all.

People need clothes to wear, food to eat, and a roof over their heads. Why don't we nationalize those "needs," as well? Would you protest a tax increase to provide each of these to everyone? Let's take away our choices for those, as well. We could have:


And I already said that I oppose nationalized healthcare 1) because it's unconstitutional and 2) because a truly free market healthcare system would be better for the populace as a whole.

Oh, and I know we're disagreeing and everything, but I have to give you credit. In trying to come up with a response, that commercial suddenly popped up in my head. I hadn't thought about it or seen it in years. Thanks for the memories, boss.

 

[Zen]

2) because a truly free market healthcare system would be better for the populace as a whole.

i understand your points, and i respect them... my belief on the issue is so far removed from yoiurs and others that this essentially becomes very hard for debate because we would have to move from healthcare and constitutionality and work from the angle of rights and priviledges, which would ultimately have to turn into a philisophical debate and by that time.... being able to see your way back through the weeds gets unlikely.

what i am curious about is this quoted statement. i see free market healthcare as a problem because healthcare for profit is not neccesarily a good idea IMO... im not sure competition for healthcare is a great idea. i believe quality of care suffers when they are in it for the business of making money. Healthcare is not congruent to the idea of planned obsilesence (which is what free market capatalism has essentially given us). For profit hospitals will do what they can to make money... and thats not neccesarily in line with patients best interests. you can argue that competition would force hospitals to do whats right in the long run because of popular will and shifting public acountability... but i think things like preventative care are not supported by for-profit hospitals... because treating the illness is more profitable than preventing it.

and also...

if somone can not afford healthcare in a free market system... whats your opinion on that situation? is it trully just survival of the fittest... and the definition of fittest is somehow outlined by ones ability to get ahead in society? is that our races crowning evolutionary achievement (or what god put us here to do...) (either way for both beliefs)

just curious.

 

[Handsome Rob]

i understand your points, and i respect them... my belief on the issue is so far removed from yoiurs and others that this essentially becomes very hard for debate because we would have to move from healthcare and constitutionality and work from the angle of rights and priviledges, which would ultimately have to turn into a philisophical debate and by that time.... being able to see your way back through the weeds gets unlikely.

what i am curious about is this quoted statement. i see free market healthcare as a problem because healthcare for profit is not neccesarily a good idea IMO... im not sure competition for healthcare is a great idea. i believe quality of care suffers when they are in it for the business of making money. Healthcare is not congruent to the idea of planned obsilesence (which is what free market capatalism has essentially given us). For profit hospitals will do what they can to make money... and thats not neccesarily in line with patients best interests. you can argue that competition would force hospitals to do whats right in the long run because of popular will and shifting public acountability... but i think things like preventative care are not supported by for-profit hospitals... because treating the illness is more profitable than preventing it.

and also...

if somone can not afford healthcare in a free market system... whats your opinion on that situation? is it trully just survival of the fittest... and the definition of fittest is somehow outlined by ones ability to get ahead in society? is that our races crowning evolutionary achievement (or what god put us here to do...) (either way for both beliefs)

just curious.

I will get back to you on this. I have church this morning and this evening, and I'm going to be studying for the CPA exam all afternoon--my day isn't exactly going to be free. And, since you've brought up several points that I can't address in a quick, 10-minute post, you're just going to have to wait.

 

[BlackLantern]

if somone can not afford healthcare in a free market system... whats your opinion on that situation? is it trully just survival of the fittest... and the definition of fittest is somehow outlined by ones ability to get ahead in society? is that our races crowning evolutionary achievement (or what god put us here to do...) (either way for both beliefs)

just curious.

That's how society has always been.....we have just forgotten that and gotten lazy.....not everyone is entitled to a good or special life....some of us get to live the good life and some of us get to work at Wal-Mart......I work damn hard for the things I have (good healthcare plan, 401k, and all that) some toolbox sitting at home not working doesn't get to have those things....

 

[SentinelMind]

That's how society has always been.....we have just forgotten that and gotten lazy.....not everyone is entitled to a good or special life....some of us get to live the good life and some of us get to work at Wal-Mart......I work damn hard for the things I have (good healthcare plan, 401k, and all that) some toolbox sitting at home not working doesn't get to have those things....

Exactly, no way society or government is structured is going to substitute you from being responsible for yourself. The only thing you should worry about is the government impeding you from moving forward, you can't rely on a government, that has to serve everyone equally, to help you get ahead. it's a dog eat dog world, always has been always will be.

People think they're entitled to everything, that they should recieve all these resources for doing nothing. When I was in college, I had a socialist roommate who thought people had a right to a car, a house...and swore up and down that his utopia vision has never been tried anywhere "oh...Soviet Union doesn't count, because blahblahblah"..

We already have hospitals/services to take of extreme emergencies, life or death situations. Now, if you want to improve your quality of life while alive, you need to plan ahead, work for it...

Suppose you come to the United States with nothing, no family, no home, no education, only enough rent for two month. Let's say you start out working at McDonald's. You might not get much healthcare, you get paid $7 an hour some places ($7 * 40 hours a week - taxes ~=> $250 a week. $1000 per month. That's enough for rent, food, TV, maybe not much for healthcare, but you can save some for it... After three/four months of diligence, there's an opening at Walmart...that pays $9 an hour, ($9 * 40 a week - taxes =>$330 a week, over $1300 a month). Walmart offers some health insurance...not great, but its something. You can still save some of the money up to buy even higher quality insurance. If you're single, you can get good quality insurance for $400 a month as group insurance, over even supplemental insurance for $200 a month. If you manage your time and energy, stay out of trouble, don't have any children.....you can get quality insurance this route.......just saving money and striving to advance your career.

If you can do it that way, what can us high school educated, some of us college educated do.....if we plan it out properly.

I'm not suggesting that its universal or all private. Some nonprofit and private HMOs offer individual insurance to certain geographic regions of the county that are much better rates than national insurance companies for the cheap because they can consolidate resources, cut out middlemen, taxes, etc...

There are so many alternatives people have before going to full blown universal insurance run by a government of bureacrats that don't give a rats ass about any of us.

 

[thedeadite]

Just wondering, is there something in the US constitution that says that citizens are entitled to a free education (up to college)? I'm honestly not too familiar with all that is there.
I don't see how keeping a society healthy is any less important than keeping a society educated to a basic level.

 

[BlackLantern]

education is opportunity based.....if you apply yourself and study your a$$ off you get ahead....and its an easier problem to deal with then healthcare...

 

[thedeadite]

I was more referring to the people who where saying universal healthcare is unconstitutional. Wondering where in the constitution it says that money can be taken from you (taxes) to pay for someone elses education.

 

[Kelly]

I was more referring to the people who where saying universal healthcare is unconstitutional. Wondering where in the constitution it says that money can be taken from you (taxes) to pay for someone elses education.

I guess we can assume you are a "constructionist"....

 

[BlackLantern]

maybe its just the culture...I went to private schools up until 6th grade...then we had some family issues and I went to public school from there on....public education has been around for a bit...its like a utility at this point, everyone knows its there and they know their taxes pay for it......when I start a family, I plan on making sure my kids, if I have any, will get the best education I can afford....I won't send them to public school unless I absolutely have to

 

[thedeadite]

I guess we can assume you are a "constructionist"....

I had to look that up actually so thank you (i like learning new things), I guess I could say that I agree with alot of constructionist theories.
What I'm confused about though is why that has anything to do with the point that I was making. If it's unconstitutional to have taxes taken from you to pay for healthcare, why isn't it unconstitutional for taxes to be taken from you to pay for basic education?

 

[BlackLantern]

using taxes for public education was something that elected representatives agreed upon...thats why...

 

[Addendum]

And if the same thing is done with regards to healthcare...