Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Health Care battle and what it means to me now

1235»

Comments

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by daeandor

    Your math is misleading. 


    No, MY math isn't misleading because it isn't "my" math, lol. You think I came up with that number? Those are standard industry accepted numbers you're having a problem with and they are accurate and hardly any sane people dispute them. You really want to make this healthcare discussion about "you and me", don't you? I'm trying to give you industry figures and you pretend I cooked them up. You are truly amazing.


    Here, here's something from U.S. News and World Report and this was TWO YEARS ago. You can write their editor.'


    "The price of health: insurance premiums still no deal"

    Nobody should be celebrating, because healthcare costs are still going up much faster than wages and much faster than the rate of inflation," says Drew Altman, president and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation, which conducts the annual Employer Health Benefits Survey of more than 2,000 employers in conjunction with the Health Research and Educational Trust. In the face of premium increases of 87 percent since 2000, he says, "this reduction in premium growth is pretty darn meaningless."

    The survey found that the average annual premium for a health plan covering a single worker was $4,242, while the cost for family coverage was $11,480. Most workers pay a part of their premium: on average, $627 for single coverage and $2,973 for family coverage. Workers at smaller firms typically pay significantly more than those at larger firms.



    So TWO YEARS AGO, people were paying an average (if they DIDN"T have employer coverage, which you don't seem to understand) of $11,480. The part they paid in to their employers if they DID have it??? For families it was almost $3,000 a year. Again, two. Years. Ago.


    Under the Obama plan, the most anyone making under $280,000 a year pays is 2.5%. Which again, is far LESS than the $3,000 you'd pay back then.

    Again, you want to keep paying, be my guest. This is just for those people who don't have the good job where their company can afford a good plan. The government plan is for everyone, not just the fortunate workers at great companies. And it is coming, so brace yourself. :)

  • DekronDekron Member UncommonPosts: 7,359
    Originally posted by popinjay
    Hmm.. you aren't able to tell people aren't minorities for the most part from listening to them on the phone???
     


    At some point, you will have to go into an office and actually talk with someone about this haggling.
     
     
     
    Race and gender figures into just about everything given the United States' history on how it treats all of its minorties as a whole (Japanese internment camps, slavery, anti-semitic groups, the Irish, people from India, etc, etc, etc). The courts of the land know this all too well and so do lawyers. Apparently, you seem to be the only one not aware how often gender and race come into play.

     
     
    Sorry, I simply have no idea what you are talking about here. :(

    Yes, some people you can tell, but many others you cannot. But, let's go with your Jamaican example. There was a guy in several of my classes a couple of years ago in college. He has a Jamaican accent. I thought the guy was just being an idiot speaking like that. Why? Because he was white. He was adopted and raised in Jamaica since he was a year old and naturally developed the accent.

    So, would you assume he was black?

    My best friend is black. He always gets shit for "talking white". He speaks properly and not "thuggish" (their term, not mine). So, speaking to him, would you think he is white.?

    It seems to me you have the mindset that every person or company is out to screw the minorities - that there is some inherent genetic function in us pink-skinned folks to "keep 'em down".

    I've not declared gender and race do not factor. I just don't believe it's as much as you or any money hungry organization claims. You want to hear discrimination? Have a white person apply for an NAACP scholarship.

    As for my reference to one of your previous posts - I would love to post it, but the search function, as always, does not work.

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by popinjay


     

    Originally posted by daeandor
     
    And lastly, stop talking about scare tactics when you too are using them.  You constantly lambast me for coming into topics you start and berate people who don't agree with you.  Then you tell me to start my own topic.  Well I did, and you can just keep your arguments in your own threads thank you very much.  Go make one about health care and troll it yourself.

     



    I have absolutely no idea what's wrong with you or what you are talking about. But you put up a thread about United States healthcare and when people respond on topic, you tell them to "go away" when you can't defend it and call them a troll? You need to find a spa because you seem stressed.

     

     

    This is exactly what I am talking about pop.  You don't comprehend anything AT ALL.  You completely ignore anything someone writes on topic and immediately deflect their argument with complete disregard of your own history on these forums.  Do I need to make a topic in which I quote you directly?  I would if it wouldn't get me banned for 3 days like every time I directly address your disregard of anything but your own agenda.

     

    And I have defended the position.  It's just that you refuse to read what I have written.  I have several posts in this thread that address everything on this topic.  Most notable to me is that the thread remained on topic for some time until you decided to start spamming the thread with personal attacks on other posters followed by diatribes which were only marginally on topic.

     

    I suggest you read again what I wrote from the beginning.  I have addressed your issues several times over ON TOPIC.

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by popinjay


     

    Originally posted by daeandor
     
    Your math is misleading. 

     

    No, MY math isn't misleading because it isn't "my" math, lol. You think I came up with that number? Those are standard industry accepted numbers you're having a problem with and they are accurate and hardly any sane people dispute them. You really want to make this healthcare discussion about "you and me", don't you? I'm trying to give you industry figures and you pretend I cooked them up. You are truly amazing.



    Here, here's something from U.S. News and World Report and this was TWO YEARS ago. You can write their editor.'

     


     

    "The price of health: insurance premiums still no deal"

    Nobody should be celebrating, because healthcare costs are still going up much faster than wages and much faster than the rate of inflation," says Drew Altman, president and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation, which conducts the annual Employer Health Benefits Survey of more than 2,000 employers in conjunction with the Health Research and Educational Trust. In the face of premium increases of 87 percent since 2000, he says, "this reduction in premium growth is pretty darn meaningless."

    The survey found that the average annual premium for a health plan covering a single worker was $4,242, while the cost for family coverage was $11,480. Most workers pay a part of their premium: on average, $627 for single coverage and $2,973 for family coverage. Workers at smaller firms typically pay significantly more than those at larger firms.



     

     



    So TWO YEARS AGO, people were paying an average (if they DIDN"T have employer coverage, which you don't seem to understand) of $11,480. The part they paid in to their employers if they DID have it??? For families it was almost $3,000 a year. Again, two. Years. Ago.

     



    Under the Obama plan, the most anyone making under $280,000 a year pays is 2.5%. Which again, is far LESS than the $3,000 you'd pay back then.

     

     

    Again, you want to keep paying, be my guest. This is just for those people who don't have the good job where their company can afford a good plan. The government plan is for everyone, not just the fortunate workers at great companies. And it is coming, so brace yourself. :)

     

    You just gave me a quote that supported my argument.  Go reread what I wrote.

  • ThrakkThrakk Member Posts: 1,226
    Originally posted by outfctrl

    Originally posted by daeandor


    Guys, that wasn't the intent.  My intent is:  If you are going to tax me, use my money wisely.
     
    I pay around 70k / year in income taxes, about 22k in other state and property taxes, and about 78k / year in corporate taxes, adding 12k more to that isn't a huge deal, I still have money left.  However, why should I pay it in taxes when I could actually take care of families with it?  Seriously, my household taxes could pay for a ton of crap for an individual family or two, but instead it goes to a government that is going to use it to pay for another program which won't do what is advertised.

     

    It really doesnt matter.  Whatever it is, it is.  It will pass.  The Dems have the majority and if Obama wants something, it gets passed.

    Welcome to Socialism



    I don't understand that argument. Let's think of the past when we have had a republican president and a republican majority in congress. When that congress and president passed something wouldn't it be socialism as well according to your argument? LOL

  • FishermageFishermage Member Posts: 7,562
    Originally posted by protoroc

    Originally posted by Fishermage

    Originally posted by Wolfenpride


    All I know is i'd sooner trust the Government than Private businesses, their only goal is profit even at the cost of others.

     

    And government's only goal is to accrue more and more power, greater and greater dominion over others. Profit is clean compared with that.

    The profit motive or the power motive? I'll take profit anyday.

     

    Fisher, money = power. The rich always have been in power, by oppressing those finacial lessers via economy or oppressing the people via force. One cannot gain power without finacial backing.

     

    You basically have it backwards.

    Money only equals power to those who lust for power, and only because of statism. When you give more and more power to governments, those governments end up being for sale. This is one of the reasons why we who believe in limited government, rule of law, separation of powers, liberty, free minds and free markets do so.

    Money is the power to convince. Government is the power to coerce. Completely different animals,. and they are only in bed together due to socialism (or any form of statism will have the same effect). I am trying to stop that. Socialized medicine, and all socialism,. institutionalizes it and makes it permanent.

     

  • SabbathSMCSabbathSMC Member Posts: 226

    I'must going to say this, if you guys think this is going to help America you are so far off track you dont even have a clue. This will destroy private insurance,its written intot he bill on page 16, no private insuraces can accept any new members. that mean private insuraces is dead and every american will be on the gov plan,and i promise you its ugly.

    This man is set out to remake america in his image and it aint a image i want to see.

    WE have been founded on capitolism and that has made us the greatest country the earth has ever seen. After he is done we will be a 3rd world country begging support from other countries ,is that really what you want to see?

    played M59,UO,lineage,EQ,Daoc,Entropia,SWG,Horizons,Lineage2.EQ2,Vangaurd,Irth online, DarkFall,Star Trek
    and many others that did not make the cut or i just plain forgetting about.

  • protorocprotoroc Member Posts: 1,042

    <Mod Edited>

    Fisher you are just so wrong it blows my mind. If you can honestly deny that money = power in a capitalist society, there's no hope of ever getting any point across to you. Your blinded by your own ideals.

  • DekronDekron Member UncommonPosts: 7,359
    Originally posted by SabbathSMC


    its written intot he bill on page 16, no private insuraces can accept any new members

    That's not entirely correct. They will be able to accept new members, but under new coverage guidelines which no private industry can meet. Only an entity with the ability to deficit spend, tax individuals, print money and use force legally can meet the guidelines. In other words, government.

    *Edited for spelling error.

  • FishermageFishermage Member Posts: 7,562
    Originally posted by SabbathSMC


    I'must going to say this, if you guys think this is going to help America you are so far off track you dont even have a clue. This will destroy private insurance,its written intot he bill on page 16, no private insuraces can accept any new members. that mean private insuraces is dead and every american will be on the gov plan,and i promise you its ugly.
    This man is set out to remake america in his image and it aint a image i want to see.
    WE have been founded on capitolism and that has made us the greatest country the earth has ever seen. After he is done we will be a 3rd world country begging support from other countries ,is that really what you want to see?

     

    Just look at how they return every argument against them. Personal attack, diversion, misrepresentation. They obviously know they do not have a leg to stand on, otherwise they would simply make their case. Instead,  they attack.

    This is about the advancement of socialism, nothing more.

    This is the result of socialist education systems. They don't even understand what capitalism is. It's very sad.

    I will quote another founding father, George Washington, who understood the nature of government. Someone who, while far from the most educated of the founders, was far more educated about the nature of government than the people here advocating government health care:

    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

    Government is FORCE. Force is not the proper means with which you love your neighbor. That is why this way of thinking is as bad in theory as it is in practice.

  • UmbroodUmbrood Member UncommonPosts: 1,809
    Originally posted by daeandor


    WASHINGTON – House Democrats plan to pay for a sweeping health care overhaul by boosting taxes on the wealthy.
    The taxes will hit households with incomes of $350,000 a year and above.
    Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel of New York said the tax would raise $540 billion over 10 years.
    In combination with cuts to Medicare and Medicaid that would pay for a comprehensive health bill in the range of $1 trillion.

    news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090710/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul
     
    So, what do you guys think about the route they are taking with this bill?
     
    Personally, I have a beef with insurance companies, but that is seperate from what this bill is doing.  Essentially, it is saying to me, as one of the "wealthy" that I not only have to pay for my own family's insurance, but that of other family as well.  Why?  Because, my insurance costs about $9.5k per year in payroll deductions.  This bill is going to raise my taxes by 3%, which amounts to roughly $12,000.
     
    But here's my beef with paying more:  If I knew for a fact that paying 12k per year would actually go toward insuring another whole family, I would be more than happy to do it.  Actually, 12k would cover insurance for two families if I set it up myself.  I mean, I already donate tens of thousands of dollars to local charities per year, why not a little more to ensure a whole family or two are insured?  But wait, I also feel that I cannot trust my government to manage that money and in reality it is going to go to something else entirely.  So, I don't like it.  Actually, I don't like it one bit.
     
    So, why not give me the ability to pay that 3% directly to an insurer in the name of a family (or 2) of my choosing?  Sure, if I elect  not do that, tax me 3% more, but if I do choose to do it, give me the tax credit.
     
    Your thoughts?

     

    Pretty good idea, i can see why you are in the income bracket you are.. ;)

    I am not sure though how to solve the logistics of it all. ( And pardon me if this has been asked and answered, did not read this entire thread. )

    An idea would be to let "charity" insurance be tax deductable up to 3%.

    Meaning that any cash you spend on this would lower your tax by exactly that amount, do nothing and you do pay the full 3%.

    This leaves the insurance companies from going almost bancrupt to actually be able to benefit from this.

    Not only that, if I personally set up the insurances for said family/families id be sure to get my moneys worth, no bloody screwing around with the allready helpless, as insurance companies are prone to do.

    Not only will the people who benefit from this get their insurance, they will get a potentially powerful ally if there ever was any wrongdoings in the process.

    All win-win so far.

    The only question that arises is who you choose and how you make that decision, and who would get "government" coverage, wich by all probaility would be a lot worse then what you can provide for the same money?

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Jerek_

    I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by Fishermage

    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."


    image

  • DekronDekron Member UncommonPosts: 7,359
    Originally posted by popinjay


     

    Originally posted by Fishermage
     
    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

     

    Come on Pop. How is that a counter? It's always back to Bush. Everyone, and I mean everyone I have come across who knows I, or anyone else, dislike PresBo counters with Bush. I did not vote for Bush and I am pretty sure Fisher didn't either.

    The Bush counter is irrelevant. There were a few things I liked that he did, but I wasn't a Bush supporter.

    Stop referring to Bush as if every critic of Obama voted for him.

    He was a bad President, we know.

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by Dekron
    Originally posted by popinjay  

    Originally posted by Fishermage
     
    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
     
    image


    Come on Pop. How is that a counter? It's always back to Bush. Everyone, and I mean everyone I have come across who knows I, or anyone else, dislike PresBo counters with Bush. I did not vote for Bush and I am pretty sure Fisher didn't either.
    The Bush counter is irrelevant. There were a few things I liked that he did, but I wasn't a Bush supporter.
    Stop referring to Bush as if every critic of Obama voted for him.
    He was a bad President, we know.

    What makes you think I was "countering him" in that instance?

  • DekronDekron Member UncommonPosts: 7,359
    Originally posted by popinjay
    What makes you think I was "countering him" in that instance?

    It was obvious you were trying to make a statement regarding (dis)approval of use of force.

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by Dekron
    Originally posted by popinjay
    What makes you think I was "countering him" in that instance?
    It was obvious you were trying to make a statement regarding (dis)approval of use of force.

    I wouldn't advice a career in mindreading. You wouldn't make much money.

    I actually agreed with him in that instance in regards to his quote.


    I don't automatically disagree with everything, you know.

  • DekronDekron Member UncommonPosts: 7,359
    Originally posted by popinjay
    I wouldn't advice a career in mindreading. You wouldn't make much money.
     
    I actually agreed with him in that instance in regards to his quote.
     


    I don't automatically disagree with everything, you know.

    To counter is not to disagree.

    He bet Obama, you countered with Bush.

     

     

  • FishermageFishermage Member Posts: 7,562
    Originally posted by Dekron

    Originally posted by popinjay
    I wouldn't advice a career in mindreading. You wouldn't make much money.
     
    I actually agreed with him in that instance in regards to his quote.
     


    I don't automatically disagree with everything, you know.

    To counter is not to disagree.

    He bet Obama, you countered with Bush.

     

     

     

    Plus, since he has shown many times that he doesn't understand that government is force; I kinda doubt he was agreeing with me there. Just another botched attempt at appeal to ridicule, one of the fallacies he likes to fall into when he knows he can't actually argue his case (we saw this earlier in this thread as well).

    And yeah -- I don't support ever really Republicrats -- never have, and I am not likely to in the near future. Of course, the moment anyone comes along that actually believes in our constitution and our founding principles and ACTS that way, I don't care what party that person belongs to, they'll have my vote and my ardent vocal support.

Sign In or Register to comment.