?Let those who pay have a say.??

[36654]

Actually, I have made that connection for years. Seat belts shouldn't be required either!

Have you ever heard of the Darwin awards?

 

[Ken F]

Quote Originally Posted by 36654
Have you ever heard of the Darwin awards?


....well I have, what's your point?

I've been in two serious car crashes in my life where had I been wearing a seat belt, I'd now be the headless horseman.

Therefore I don't wear them either. Whats more, I don't intend to start.
I carried a gun in the armed forces of this country, and supposedly fought for liberty and freedom,
which I think includes the right to make your own choices.

I don't need nor will tolerate someone looking down your nose at me because of my personal choices.

out.

 

[ricochetrider]

Funny, we are still leaving Healthcare in the hands of insurance companies, the Government is just requiring people get it and regulating it so the insurance companies play on a level playing field. I still think single payer would have been better. The big insurance companies have way to much $$ to buy politicians, and pocket billions in profits. The insurance companies are why we spend the most $$and ranks so low for quality.

But to your statement, there is a couple Government administered health care systems the Veterans benefits, and medicare, and both seem to work quite well, and in fact the military benefits are one big draw to get people go to a large sand box to become targets.

I cannot begin to express how riled I get when it comes to insurance companies and the way they skin us alive... For mega mega profits. We pay, pay, & pay some more, yet when we have a crash, or need them somehow, we get dropped from their service or our rates get jacked. Pure highway robbery- and super blatant at that- they don't EVEN make the slightest effort to disguise it!

To address the second point about having two government administered health care systems in place, I counter there are actually THREE such systems in place, the 3rd being the one our politicians enjoy... For EVER, for their entire lives. Yet somehow, it's us whom they refer to as being "entitled". Harumpf. Grrrrrrr.

To comment on compassion, and how one might express it, via volunteering or whatever... You want to volunteer, to "give something back"? There's no wrong way. True compassion is as much a lifestyle, a way of being, a system of belief- as it is anything else. Those who are truly, genuinely compassionate believe it, live it, breathe it...heart and soul. They believe everyone deserves the same level of compassion, not just a select few. You can't turn compassion on & off, or apply it to some, and deny others of it. Doing so negates the very meaning of the word.

 

[36654]

I don't need nor will tolerate someone looking down your nose at me because of my personal choices.

out.

"There's no use saying anything in the schoolyard because there's always someone with an answer and there's nothing you can do but punch them in the nose and if you were to punch everyone who has an answer you'd be punching morning noon and night."
― Frank McCourt, Angela's Ashes

 

[classicvw]

Going from there, I don't get your point?

Well, I explained it further. I give up too... back to helmets

 

[Ken F]

Good quote by Frank, however I don't intend to punch you in the nose.

But, I have the right to call you on a slanderous, derogatory, and narrowminded comment.

 

[36654]

Good quote by Frank, however I don't intend to punch you in the nose.

But, I have the right to call you on a slanderous, derogatory, and narrowminded comment.

Yes, and I have the right to comment on the technical merit of your statement. You have the privilege of taking that as you please.

 

[kantuckid]

Can you validate the figures 30% and 97%?

I will vouch for the governments ability to spend lots(as in huge! numbers beyond my comprehension of "our money") of money & to make certain that much of it goes to their buddies. I'll avoid the % talk to stay out of the dog house...

 

[kantuckid]

I cannot begin to express how riled I get when it comes to insurance companies and the way they skin us alive... For mega mega profits. We pay, pay, & pay some more, yet when we have a crash, or need them somehow, we get dropped from their service or our rates get jacked. Pure highway robbery- and super blatant at that- they don't EVEN make the slightest effort to disguise it!

To address the second point about having two government administered health care systems in place, I counter there are actually THREE such systems in place, the 3rd being the one our politicians enjoy... For EVER, for their entire lives. Yet somehow, it's us whom they refer to as being "entitled". Harumpf. Grrrrrrr.

To comment on compassion, and how one might express it, via volunteering or whatever... You want to volunteer, to "give something back"? There's no wrong way. True compassion is as much a lifestyle, a way of being, a system of belief- as it is anything else. Those who are truly, genuinely compassionate believe it, live it, breathe it...heart and soul. They believe everyone deserves the same level of compassion, not just a select few. You can't turn compassion on & off, or apply it to some, and deny others of it. Doing so negates the very meaning of the word.

Ha! I was just remembering that Jimmy Stewart flick: Mr Smith Goes to Washington.
What we have these days is a "win an election, win the lottery" mentality? The insurance companies have the largest lobby of all-go figure as to whats really going on now. The real change in what we call "insurance" is yet to come! I cannot imagine that lobby & it's money is going to fall on its face?
There's sure nothing about the insurance industry that involves compassion. Doesn't mean good people don't work there just not what drives that business model.

 

[pffog]

I really have to laugh though at the lengths the Government goes to "FIX" very simple problems. the ACA is 11,00 pages long, no one can really comprehend it all. Here was the SIMPLE fix!

1) Repeal the anti-trust exemption the health insurance companies were given years ago, this exemption allows insurance companies to establish monopolies and shut out competition (sounds a lot like organized crime) thus allows them to control prices through collusion.

2) A 20 page set of rules for all that sets the rules, no dropping after someone gets sick, no refusal for existing conditions, keep kids on till 26 etc. DONE!!!!!!

Now on to Social Security, same simple solution exists:

1.) REMOVE the 103K cap on taxed wages for SS taxes DONE!!!, the system becomes solvent for the foreseeable future!

It REALLY IS THAT SIMPLE!!!

Ever wonder why we allow our politicians to repeatedly spend years and billions investigating ways to create NEW rules, for problems that could be fixed by REMOVING the ones they already put into place?? Because WE let them.

Congress is like Wally In Dilbert, He gets paid for doing nothing, but looking busy and pumping up his own worth..........................Sad

End of political rant .......................(maybe)

 

[akbeemer]

What everyone needs to do is have a Big Mac (supersize those fries), smoke a few cigarettes while sipping your favorite whiskey, then go for a high speed run down to the local tattoo shop on an 883 Sportster, wearing a wife-beater shirt, shorts (with a concealed .380 in the waistband), flipflops, and with your hair flowing in the breeze around your Raybans. That ought to clear your mind so you can come to grips with the political, social and religious implications of mandatory stuff. Now i know this is silly advice... high speed run on an 883 Sportster... come on.

 

[osbornk]

2) A 20 page set of rules for all that sets the rules, no dropping after someone gets sick, no refusal for existing conditions, keep kids on till 26 etc. DONE!!!!!!

Now on to Social Security, same simple solution exists:

1.) REMOVE the 103K cap on taxed wages for SS taxes DONE!!!, the system becomes solvent for the foreseeable future!

There is something I can't figure out. If someone is healthy, why would they buy health insurance if they can buy it after they get sick? If the insurance company cannot deny coverage and cannot charge them more than other people, there is no reason to buy it when they are healthy. Isn't that like forcing companies to insure a house after it is burning or a car after it is wrecked?

Also, regarding Social Security, the main problem is that people are living far longer than the government planned. I think the ACA might be a solution to the Social Security problem.

 

[pffog]

There is something I can't figure out. If someone is healthy, why would they buy health insurance if they can buy it after they get sick? If the insurance company cannot deny coverage and cannot charge them more than other people, there is no reason to buy it when they are healthy. Isn't that like forcing companies to insure a house after it is burning or a car after it is wrecked?

Also, regarding Social Security, the main problem is that people are living far longer than the government planned. I think the ACA might be a solution to the Social Security problem.

Insurance is a funny thing, when you pay it, you are betting the company that you will die, get sick, crash your vehicle, burn your house down, etc. and WIN, monetarily, they are betting you will not. They win more than we do, so either way we loose, we spent big $$ needlessly, or got ourselves in a bad state, to come out even.

The answer on the pre-existing is your cost would be much higher, again the insurance company looks at the risk, and sets premiums accordingly. BUT with the anti trust exemption gone, there is hundreds of companies competing to take that bet, making rates cheaper. Just as smokers, obese people etc. do now.

Not the best solution and this quandary supports the single payer plan, everyone has insurance, and everyone pays for it through taxes. But the "socialism" cry goes out, ignorantly IMHO, because the working class is already paying through high premiums, inflated hospital bills, and tax $$ going to medicaid, to support treatments and care. Lets face it, currently every body can walk into a hospital and get care, whether they pay or not, and those that do pay, pay the uninsured tab too. What we have now is only semi-socialist, with the burden falling on the middle class. Spreading that burden around makes it better for all, IMHO.

And unfortunately those that don't have insurance don't get the preventive care, thus are more likely to already have burned down or crashed, when buying a proper space heater, or replacing those bald tires would have been a lot less $$ in the long run, for the rest of us paying for it.

 

[36654]

Insurance is a funny thing, when you pay it, you are betting the company that you will die, get sick, crash your vehicle, burn your house down, etc. and WIN, monetarily, they are betting you will not. They win more than we do, so either way we loose, we spent big $$ needlessly, or got ourselves in a bad state, to come out even.

The answer on the pre-existing is your cost would be much higher, again the insurance company looks at the risk, and sets premiums accordingly. BUT with the anti trust exemption gone, there is hundreds of companies competing to take that bet, making rates cheaper. Just as smokers, obese people etc. do now.

Not the best solution and this quandary supports the single payer plan, everyone has insurance, and everyone pays for it through taxes. But the "socialism" cry goes out, ignorantly IMHO, because the working class is already paying through high premiums, inflated hospital bills, and tax $$ going to medicaid, to support treatments and care. Lets face it, currently every body can walk into a hospital and get care, whether they pay or not, and those that do pay, pay the uninsured tab too. What we have now is only semi-socialist, with the burden falling on the middle class. Spreading that burden around makes it better for all, IMHO.

And unfortunately those that don't have insurance don't get the preventive care, thus are more likely to already have burned down or crashed, when buying a proper space heater, or replacing those bald tires would have been a lot less $$ in the long run, for the rest of us paying for it.

I never thought of Bismarck as a rabid socialist.
http://imagine.wikia.com/wiki/Health_Insurance_Act_of_1883

Teddy Roosevelt liked this plan..........