Will Soldiers Have to Use Private Ins?

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by lookout123

I know you're joking because... well you're Flint, but there are two very good points in your post.

1) socialized medicine is bad. It isn't bad. Good and bad are subjective labels thrown at things we either like or don't like. I don't like it because I don't believe it is consistent with the focus on the individual that our country was founded on. That's just my opinion. Socialized medicine has some excellent points and under different circumstances I would support it. It would have to operate in a vaccuum free from personal agendas and political maneuvering, and the other important part takes us into your second important point.

I would just like to make the point that many people pay for insurance, but when they get sick, they are denied coverage. So private insurance ain't all that either, sometimes. The thing that would actually be GOOD about socialized medicine, is that it wouldn't be about profit. That would reduce a TON of waste, and leave more for the actual practicing of medicine.

2) The government can't do anything right! While a truism it isn't really the truth. The government can't do anything efficiently - and sometimes that is right. When we are making international agreements I don't want a quick efficient process with too much opportunity for mistakes and misunderstandings. As frustrating as it is, the slow, seemingly unproductive nature of international interaction is useful in that each government has time to choose words and positions carefully with plenty of opportunities to clarify and reclarify until they reach a point where noone is really happy, but each can live with the agreement.
Things like the military, legal system, and currency are areas which ONLY a government can do right.

It is in every other area that the government falters. While intentions may be good the tendency to build up personal empires for the sake of personal power is what makes the government horribly inefficient at most tasks they take as their own. It isn't the idea but the execution that is flawed usually.

You may be right about international contracts, but as far as the government being inefficient, I don't completely agree with that. The Post Office works pretty damn well. Some state colleges are very good, better than private ones. Some public schools are very good, others, not so much. So the system needs to be revised, but it is not completely bad and inefficient. (and I realize you didn't say it was.)

Honestly, I don't know why people pick on the government so much. I wonder how things would run if we had NO government. I don't think privitization of everything is good, because there is always greed involved, and that is never good for the people as a whole. the whole problem with health care right now is beause of the greed and corruption of insurance companies.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

The thing that would actually be GOOD about socialized medicine, is that it wouldn't be about profit. That would reduce a TON of waste, and leave more for the actual practicing of medicine.

You are completely misinformed. Read some of this.

http://www.derbygripe.co.uk/nhs.htm

[lookout123]

Here's the rub, EVERYONE should get EQUAL care and benefits, IMO.

Why? If I can afford it and feel it is worth it, why shouldn't I be able to pay for better or more extensive care? I have had a catastrophic coverage plan for quite awhile because on the whole that is the best balance for my family. A guy I know has the full boat plan through the same company. He feels it is worth the extra expense. We each get what we pay for. I kind of like that.

in many cases paying MORE TAXES than rich people.

BS. People who work their asses off and still don't have healthcare are typically not earning enough to pay ANY taxes so you can take that myth off the plate.

Socialized health care is NOT FREE. It's paid for with taxes.

Nope, it isn't free. It would entail some pretty hefty taxes. Those taxes would have to be paid by someone, certainly not the lower income earners who we certainly don't want to raise taxes for. That means going back to the well of the people who already pay the majority of the taxes for yet another benefit that actually doesn't benefit them in any way. So while the program wouldn't be free, it would be free to the people who actually want it.

I would just like to make the point that many people pay for insurance, but when they get sick, they are denied coverage. So private insurance ain't all that either, sometimes.

Which is no different than any of the government run programs currently in place. That's life, aribitrary lines are drawn because they have to be drawn somewhere. That means someone will inevitably be just on the other side of the line and feel slighted.

The thing that would actually be GOOD about socialized medicine, is that it wouldn't be about profit. That would reduce a TON of waste, and leave more for the actual practicing of medicine.

While there is a lot of waste in the world of medicine, let me just ask this: which organization is more likely to run cost efficiently, one who has no concern over costs and profits or one who is trying to get the job done and turn a profit?

Corporations are to greedy and corrupt to be trusted. The only system left is the government. Sad as that is.

So you are assuming the government isn't motivated by greed?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by lookout123

snip~ Nope, it isn't free. It would entail some pretty hefty taxes. Those taxes would have to be paid by someone, certainly not the lower income earners who we certainly don't want to raise taxes for. ~snip

But, but, with better health care these workers would work harder,
making more money for their employers,
who would in the spirit of appreciation would pay those workers more money,
so the government would collect more taxes,
making the health care costs moot.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Why? If I can afford it and feel it is worth it, why shouldn't I be able to pay for better or more extensive care? I have had a catastrophic coverage plan for quite awhile because on the whole that is the best balance for my family. A guy I know has the full boat plan through the same company. He feels it is worth the extra expense. We each get what we pay for. I kind of like that.

Spoken like a true rich person. Why should only wealthy people or really poor people have access to really great health care? My god, we are always talking about how this is the greatest (and richest) country ever. What is so fucking great about having such an unfair and unequal system? And ftr, you know some people have really great insurance, and when it comes time to pay up, the companies find ANY REASON not to pay. Do you know how many bankruptcies are filed every year because of THIS problem? And how it has destroyed many people's lives? Not to mention the fact that American BUSINESSES can't compete globally, because corporations in other countries don't have that expense. (Imagine that, me arguing FOR corporations!)

BS. People who work their asses off and still don't have healthcare are typically not earning enough to pay ANY taxes so you can take that myth off the plate.

WOW. Really? You know this how?

Nope, it isn't free. It would entail some pretty hefty taxes. Those taxes would have to be paid by someone, certainly not the lower income earners who we certainly don't want to raise taxes for. That means going back to the well of the people who already pay the majority of the taxes for yet another benefit that actually doesn't benefit them in any way. So while the program wouldn't be free, it would be free to the people who actually want it.

You are under this myth that rich people pay more taxes. They don't. Generally they pay about 17%. And, since they mostly make money off investments, and capitals gains taxes are only, what, 15%, they actually pay even less.

Which is no different than any of the government run programs currently in place. That's life, aribitrary lines are drawn because they have to be drawn somewhere. That means someone will inevitably be just on the other side of the line and feel slighted.

There shouldn't BE lines. IF you need a certain treatment, you should be able to get it. It's wrong that insurance companies (or the government) would withhold a treatment that could save a life or make a life more productive and better. Medicine should be between a doctor and their patient, not being dictated by insurance or government people who know nothing about medicine.

While there is a lot of waste in the world of medicine, let me just ask this: which organization is more likely to run cost efficiently, one who has no concern over costs and profits or one who is trying to get the job done and turn a profit?So you are assuming the government isn't motivated by greed?

I would say the health care industry is out of control BECAUSE of companies trying to turn excessive profits at the expense of the people they are supposed to be serving.

[lookout123]

The people they are serving are their shareholders, just like any other company. They make money for their shareholders by serving clients in as cost effective manner as possible. Welcome to business. They aren't there to be everybody's friend, they are there to turn a profit. If they don't turn a profit they don't stay in business and then they don't get to serve anyone.

There shouldn't BE lines. IF you need a certain treatment, you should be able to get it.

Sounds great, but unless you can convince everyone in the medical fields to work strictly as volunteers then it must be paid for somehow. Any ideas other than "our government should do it"?

You are under this myth that rich people pay more taxes. They don't. Generally they pay about 17%. And, since they mostly make money off investments, and capitals gains taxes are only, what, 15%, they actually pay even less.

Not that many of the so called rich people live purely off capital gains and dividends. If your 17% is accurate then I have two thoughts: 1) you can thank your progressive tax system for that, and 2) that 17% still equates to the lion's share of the tax dollars collected.

WOW. Really? You know this how?

Let's think this one through slowly. If they earn so little they are unable to pay for insurance, then they most likely earn so little they aren't paying income taxes either. You know those people who get more back than they paid in each year?

Spoken like a true rich person.

I wish. the beautiful thing is that if I work hard and make some good choices I can achieve some manner of financial independence in the future.

My god, we are always talking about how this is the greatest (and richest) country ever. What is so fucking great about having such an unfair and unequal system?

This is a great country. For the most part, the harder/smarter I work the more I produce. The more I produce the more I get to keep. Sounds pretty fucking fair to me. Unfair is making it so everyone gets the same thing regardless of their abilities and choices along the way.

And ftr, you know some people have really great insurance, and when it comes time to pay up, the companies find ANY REASON not to pay. Do you know how many bankruptcies are filed every year because of THIS problem? And how it has destroyed many people's lives?

I know it quite well. I have no idea how many BK's are filed each year because of this. I only know about my own some years ago when the insurance companies applied the letter of the law and chose not to cover my wife's problem pregnancy. It didn't ruin our lives one little bit.

There is absolutely nothing in the constitution or other documents of the time to suggest the goal of the founding fathers was for all americans to achieve the same level of success and have all the same things. We are promised life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To people who whine and complain about the differences we see based on our work and decisions all I have to say is quit your bitching and start pursuing. It's up to you to achieve what you want.

Originally Posted by lookout123

...Let's think this one through slowly. If they earn so little they are unable to pay for insurance, then they most likely earn so little they aren't paying income taxes either. You know those people who get more back than they paid in each year?

Cite, please.

Here is how I would think this one through.

Approximately half of those w/o insurance work for small businesses who dont offer insurance.

Over 90% of persons who earn so little that arent pay income taxes (get more back than they pay) are earning less than $20,000/yr.

Are you suggesting that most small business employees earn less than $20,000/yr.

One reason that SCHIP was expanded was that an increasing number of parents of working families did not have access to affordable health insurance.....this includes people making more than 200% of the poverty level. They pay taxes!

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by lookout123

The people they are serving are their shareholders, just like any other company. They make money for their shareholders by serving clients in as cost effective manner as possible. Welcome to business. They aren't there to be everybody's friend, they are there to turn a profit. If they don't turn a profit they don't stay in business and then they don't get to serve anyone.

Sorry, but a corporation is there to supply a service or product to the public, and jobs to people. Shareholders profits should come after the people doing the work are actually compensated fairly for that work. If it weren't for the workers, there would be no product - no product, no profit. without workers, they go out of business.

Sounds great, but unless you can convince everyone in the medical fields to work strictly as volunteers then it must be paid for somehow. Any ideas other than "our government should do it"?

Why would they have to work as volunteers? I believe doctors and nurses and others in medicine make a very comfortable living in other countries that have a single payer system. Why should medicine be about profit? You see where it's gotten us?

Not that many of the so called rich people live purely off capital gains and dividends. If your 17% is accurate then I have two thoughts: 1) you can thank your progressive tax system for that, and 2) that 17% still equates to the lion's share of the tax dollars collected.

I'm talking about the top 2%. You are talking about average rich people with jobs instead of empires. If the progressive tax system was not riddled with loopholes it would be a very fair system. And so what? Why do hate the majority of the people in this country?

Let's think this one through slowly. If they earn so little they are unable to pay for insurance, then they most likely earn so little they aren't paying income taxes either. You know those people who get more back than they paid in each year?

If you have a family, then you should know how much insurance costs. AVERAGE insurance policies for an individual are over 5k/year, and for a family average over $15k/year. Even people who make $50k-60k/year would have trouble paying that, depending on where they live.

I wish. the beautiful thing is that if I work hard and make some good choices I can achieve some manner of financial independence in the future.

Maybe, maybe not. Hard work means nothing. If executive pay keeps rising the way it has, and nothing is done to address the wages of everyone else, even your job might be outsourced, or insourced, to cheaper workers.

This is a great country. For the most part, the harder/smarter I work the more I produce. The more I produce the more I get to keep. Sounds pretty fucking fair to me. Unfair is making it so everyone gets the same thing regardless of their abilities and choices along the way.

See, I never said everyone should get the same, and if you think I did, you haven't been listening. When you make more, you do keep more, even if you pay more in taxes, because you are making a much larger slice of the pie. And if you think people are rewarded simply for hard/smart work in this country, think again. There are tens of millions of really smart people out there, working really hard, who are completely taken advantage of and not paid fairly, which is why I am for unions.

I know it quite well. I have no idea how many BK's are filed each year because of this. I only know about my own some years ago when the insurance companies applied the letter of the law and chose not to cover my wife's problem pregnancy. It didn't ruin our lives one little bit.

It could have. You were lucky. It is happening a lot more now than in the past. It has gotten much worse over the years.

There is absolutely nothing in the constitution or other documents of the time to suggest the goal of the founding fathers was for all americans to achieve the same level of success and have all the same things. We are promised life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To people who whine and complain about the differences we see based on our work and decisions all I have to say is quit your bitching and start pursuing. It's up to you to achieve what you want.

I never said all Americans should achieve the same level of success or have all the same things. You keep putting those words in my mouth, and nowhere have I said that. But by the same token, it also isn't the Constitution that people should get obscenely rich while walking all over everyone else. They wanted a more equal and fair society. That doesn't mean completely equal in the sense that everyone has the same things. Corporations were not meant to have the power they have now.

[TheMercenary]

[quote=sugarpop;549790]Sorry, but a corporation is there to supply a service or product to the public, and jobs to people. Shareholders profits should come after the people doing the work are actually compensated fairly for that work. If it weren't for the workers, there would be no product - no product, no profit. without workers, they go out of business.[quote]No, they are there to make a profit off a product. Private corps exist to sell something to people who want their product and in the long run they do only to make money. They need people to help them make that profit, so they hire them at a wage that people will accept to do the work. People can choose not to work there if they think the pay is to low or if they did not feel they were being fairly compensated.

Why would they have to work as volunteers? I believe doctors and nurses and others in medicine make a very comfortable living in other countries that have a single payer system. Why should medicine be about profit? You see where it's gotten us?

Who sets the bar for what is "comfortable"? There is no way you can compare anything about "a very comfortable living" in the US to say "a very comfortable living" in Spain, or Somalia. In this country medicine is a for profit business, that is just the way it is, I think that is unlikely to change in our life time. Many aspects of the field of medicine require people to go to school and training for many more years than the average person is willing to do, and incur mounds of debt. If everyone could do it the job would be easy to get and easy to do. It is not.

I'm talking about the top 2%. You are talking about average rich people with jobs instead of empires. If the progressive tax system was not riddled with loopholes it would be a very fair system. And so what? Why do hate the majority of the people in this country?

Hate?

If you have a family, then you should know how much insurance costs. AVERAGE insurance policies for an individual are over 5k/year, and for a family average over $15k/year. Even people who make $50k-60k/year would have trouble paying that, depending on where they live.

I agree, we don't have a health care crisis, we have a health insurance crisis. Thank the people who let the HMO's and insurance companies take over your care. I promise you the federal government is not going to do a better job for you. And when and if they do you will get what you pay for.

But by the same token, it also isn't the Constitution that people should get obscenely rich while walking all over everyone else. They wanted a more equal and fair society. That doesn't mean completely equal in the sense that everyone has the same things. Corporations were not meant to have the power they have now.

The framers of the Constitution and what they thought have very little to do with where we are in our economy today. We have evolved. "Pursuit of happiness", not a promise or right to happiness.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No, they are there to make a profit off a product. Private corps exist to sell something to people who want their product and in the long run they do only to make money. They need people to help them make that profit, so they hire them at a wage that people will accept to do the work. People can choose not to work there if they think the pay is to low or if they did not feel they were being fairly compensated.

Well, since wages suck pretty much everywhere for many people, how exactly do you suggest they do that? Corporate America has been taking advantage of workers for years, and it gets worse all the time. My god, I made more money waiting tables in the late 70s/early 80s than many professional people make today. WTF? When the minimum wage was enacted, it should have been raised every year to keep up with cost of living. If it had, we might find ourselves in a much more equitable situation today. Corporations should not be allowed to to give ceos and execs boatloads of money while ingoring the very people who actually MAKE the product. It's just wrong.

Who sets the bar for what is "comfortable"? There is no way you can compare anything about "a very comfortable living" in the US to say "a very comfortable living" in Spain, or Somalia. In this country medicine is a for profit business, that is just the way it is, I think that is unlikely to change in our life time. Many aspects of the field of medicine require people to go to school and training for many more years than the average person is willing to do, and incur mounds of debt. If everyone could do it the job would be easy to get and easy to do. It is not.

Why? European countries are just as civilized (one might argue more) as we are. Doctors in those countries have to go to school too. And I am not saying doctors, or lawyers, or other professionals, who go to school and get degrees do not deserve to earn more money, they do. I am arguing against insurance companies, because they are scams. My god. We have corporations in this country who are nothing more than scam artists and loan sharks.

Hate?

You do seem to have a real aversion to people who are less fortunate, who don't have much money. Not personally, but when arguing these big questions.

I agree, we don't have a health care crisis, we have a health insurance crisis. Thank the people who let the HMO's and insurance companies take over your care. I promise you the federal government is not going to do a better job for you. And when and if they do you will get what you pay for.

I just don't believe it. I think it would be a LOT better if we got rid of insurance companies, and allowed doctors to treat their patients as they see fit, and then the government pays for it. It works in other countries.

The framers of the Constitution and what they thought have very little to do with where we are in our economy today. We have evolved. "Pursuit of happiness", not a promise or right to happiness.

I would argue that we haven't evolved, but devolved. Where is the humanity in our governing?