Mitt Romney is a total idiot

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

smashp

Platinum Member
Aug 30, 2003
2,443
0
0
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: smashp
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

Ill Tell You how to Opt out...... Burn your Passport and GTFO

Oh come on, investing in SS and Medicare is a NEGATIVE return. If you look at the ROI, I'll get a better rate throwing it in some online savings bank like ING or whatever. Seriously, SS is a scam that loses to inflation too. If you think of it, the government is taking your money and throwing a chunk of it away.

If given the option to opt out, the government should cut all liability away and if you screw yourself over by investing in Wamu and watch the stock tank to 0, then that's your fault. You should be able to sign some crap allowing you to opt out or in. You can opt back in if you failed after opting out, but once again, you can only get what you put in. End of story.

That would be awesome. Now as for health insurance.... it's trickier because like all insurance, you're not paying for yourself unless something happens to you, so no matter what you're getting a negative return. If there is to be UHC, I would like to be able to opt out not because I don't want to pay for others but because I'd rather pay for a better system.... unless of course somehow the US UHC beats all the private care I can get right now. But the government should act like a health insurance company. It should be fighting Kaiser, United, Anthem, Metlife, etc. just like the USPS is fighting FedEx and UPS (except we throw billions away at the USPS to keep it alive because it can't even sustain itself)

An injured and dying man made it to the hospital, but the hospital couldn't do anything because this individual " Opt ed out" and society wasn't "Liable" for this individual so they locked him out and let him die in the parking lot. But hey, not our fault, a short-sighted mistake that this man had to live with that he made years ago.

In this Utopia of your's hopefully someone is kind enough to give this man cab or Bus fare to the Leper Colony


 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,617
54,564
136
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

I don't think you understand, you're not opting out. Nobody can opt out. Have you ever bought a car? A washer? A candy bar? Each and every thing you purchase (just about) has its cost inflated by the costs health care places on the business selling you that product. If you have insurance of your own your premiums are subsidizing them, etc... etc.

In any system where we guarantee all people health care (and in America we do, we're just retarded about it), there is no opting out. Ever.
 

extra

Golden Member
Dec 18, 1999
1,947
7
81
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: yllus
You know, there's nothing inherently wrong with offering healthcare services for a fee. The best systems in the world are those that offer no-frills universal healthcare, and then have premium services set up in parallel for those who have the money to spend and wish to jump their place in line in the no-frills system.

Can you name one?

Yes, I can. Germany. There, omg that was hard. And they have some of the best health care in the world. There, go troll elsewhere.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: n yusef
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

With Obama's proposal, yes.
Not really. Who here actually believes that with the government competing with private it will be an even playing field? I love my private insurance. The fact is Americans have been put under such fear that despite the majority having no problem with their insurance and realizing better care than in most if not all countries, they have this silly childish fear that they're going to end up the same as some anecdote and end up bankrupt.

 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: yllus
You know, there's nothing inherently wrong with offering healthcare services for a fee. The best systems in the world are those that offer no-frills universal healthcare, and then have premium services set up in parallel for those who have the money to spend and wish to jump their place in line in the no-frills system.

Can you name one?

France, Germany, and more.

The individual workers is required to pay roughly 21% of their income into the national health care system through a payroll tax. In many cases employers pick up half of that cost - similar to how most employers pick up health insurance in this country. French employers have said that high payroll taxes have constrained their ability to hire more workers.

Restricting the ability of employers to grow sounds exactly like what America needs to do in this economic environment.

The money has to come from somewhere.

Wrong. Germans are required to pay approximately 21% of their income into a social security system, one component of which is health care. The other components are a system similar to social security here in the US, unemployment insurance, disability, workman's comp, etc.

Germany and France spend roughly 10% of their GDP on health care, and cover everyone. The US is currently spending about 16% of it's GDP and doesn't come close. For 60% more money per capita we get a crappier system. Sounds like a German or French system is EXACTLY what we need, as our health care costs are strangling our economy.


And as long as their governments can run them for us we might have a chance. Went to the doctor again yesterday with one of my kiddos and the office manager was fighting with medicaid for 20 minutes on the phone. They are inept and the lady was getting so frustrated. I felt her pain. If the government does not take serious steps to make healthcare more simple we will have the complexity of a tax code with the service of a post office that is about to close.

If you really want to see a crappier system have kids that get medical cards. Their UHC sux the big one. Just ask health care providers.

Anyhow our "crappy system" still provides the most cutting edge care and most of the worlds drug innovations. That didn't happen under a government socialized system. Innovation dictated by goverments in healthcare just does not work as well as innovation brought about by the chance to make it rich. That is America. This America was not set up by people who wanted a strong end all centralized government like in europe. The Entrepreneurial Spirit made America great and financial freedom to risk what you got to reap the rewards from your hard work. It still makes people come here for the financial freedoms as well as the best health care possilble on earth that we enjoy.
We really screwed things up when somehow your employer had to provide its workers healthcare. Can you imagine where GM would be if they had nothing to do with healthcare? What if they paid their workers more money and had them purchase their own insurance? Would it cost the company less? Sure it would. I'm not saying that would have saved GM but ultimately they got screwed by the weight of their healthcare obligations.
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
Originally posted by: sportage

George: Gov healthcare has worked for Medicare and veterans care hasn?t it?


NOPE have you been to a VA recently? Did we not just have a scandal involving the VA and care at their hospitals? Do they ration care?

Regardless of Romney being a boob or not Georges premise that the VA works well is wrong.
 

SammyJr

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2008
1,708
0
0
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sportage
Personal note:
I noticed Mitt and republicans constantly refer to the term private insurance.
What they are actually referring to is healthcare for profit.
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
Republicans support healthcare for profit. Shameful!

Its a little hard to run a company when that company doesn't turn a profit. Just ask GM.

Nonprofits seem to do ok. One of the local hospital non-profits is building a $270 million addition to their campus.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: NeoV
where did this Patranus guy come from?

well done Eskimo, Lupi and the new guy owned in the same thread

Seriously... After getting pwned I'm sure they will move on to troll in other threads. Some things never change.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sportage
Personal note:
I noticed Mitt and republicans constantly refer to the term private insurance.
What they are actually referring to is healthcare for profit.
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
Republicans support healthcare for profit. Shameful!

Its a little hard to run a company when that company doesn't turn a profit. Just ask GM.

Ever heard of a non-profit company. I bet you have!
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sportage
Personal note:
I noticed Mitt and republicans constantly refer to the term private insurance.
What they are actually referring to is healthcare for profit.
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
Republicans support healthcare for profit. Shameful!

Its a little hard to run a company when that company doesn't turn a profit. Just ask GM.

Ever heard of a non-profit company. I bet you have!

Non-profits can earn a profit. They just cant disperse those profits to owners of the company.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sportage
Personal note:
I noticed Mitt and republicans constantly refer to the term private insurance.
What they are actually referring to is healthcare for profit.
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
Republicans support healthcare for profit. Shameful!

Its a little hard to run a company when that company doesn't turn a profit. Just ask GM.

Ever heard of a non-profit company. I bet you have!

Non-profits can earn a profit. They just cant disperse those profits to owners of the company.

Good enough, since it basically removes the profit motive.
 

SammyJr

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2008
1,708
0
0
Originally posted by: EXman

And as long as their governments can run them for us we might have a chance. Went to the doctor again yesterday with one of my kiddos and the office manager was fighting with medicaid for 20 minutes on the phone. They are inept and the lady was getting so frustrated. I felt her pain. If the government does not take serious steps to make healthcare more simple we will have the complexity of a tax code with the service of a post office that is about to close.

And UnitedHealthCare still owes me $400 for an ultrasound from when my son was in utero. They never paid the claim, despite the fact that the doctor was in network, radiology services are covered, the referral was properly done, they had paid a similar claim from the same doctor, and said they were going to pay the claim.

My daughter was born at home and I had to call Social Security to figure out how to get her a number. One 5 minute call and no hold time later, I had my answers on the documentation needed and advice on the fastest way to get her number. I followed the instructions and had her number very quickly.

Quality of service is entirely dependent on the people hired and who is running the department. Private service isn't magically better than public.

Anyhow our "crappy system" still provides the most cutting edge care and most of the worlds drug innovations. That didn't happen under a government socialized system. Innovation dictated by goverments in healthcare just does not work as well as innovation brought about by the chance to make it rich.

The NIH, a Federal Government agency, funds most basic research in the United States. Most basic research is done at state funded Universities. Without this cutting edge research, the Pharmaceutical firms would have to fund the very expensive, very time consuming basic research themselves. Simply put, our high health care and insurance costs DO NOT contribute to most innovation. Our tax dollars do.

And its not greed that drives most researchers. Most of these guys make comfortable salaries but are far from rich. The drive comes from a desire for personal accomplishment, love of science, and to make the world a better place.

Most Big Pharma companies have larger advertising budgets than R&D budgets. That ought to tell you something. Also, look up where the large pharmaceutical firms are headquarted. Many are headquartered in Europe.


That is America. This America was not set up by people who wanted a strong end all centralized government like in europe. The Entrepreneurial Spirit made America great and financial freedom to risk what you got to reap the rewards from your hard work. It still makes people come here for the financial freedoms as well as the best health care possilble on earth that we enjoy.

Society has evolved. Being able to read used to put you in the top 1% of people by intelligence. Now, its so basic we expect children to be able to do it. Health care used to be leeches, cocaine, and booze. Now we have things that work. All of these things cost money and are essential for a modern society. Taxes are the price of maintaining a modern society. If you want a free for all, go to Somalia, but instead of taxes, you'll pay for protection, schooling, travel for any kind of remotely decent health care, etc.

We really screwed things up when somehow your employer had to provide its workers healthcare. Can you imagine where GM would be if they had nothing to do with healthcare? What if they paid their workers more money and had them purchase their own insurance? Would it cost the company less? Sure it would. I'm not saying that would have saved GM but ultimately they got screwed by the weight of their healthcare obligations.

I agree.

I think we should have done as FDR wanted and implemented an NHS system back then. Without the added health insurance costs, American business would be a hell of a lot more competitive. I doubt you agree with that part, though, since conservatives seem to view health care as akin to buying a DVD - purely optional.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Good enough, since it basically removes the profit motive.

Yes I know the left has recieved their barking orders about profit motive being the problem within our healthcare system. But I'd actually like to see how many for profit healthcare providers and insurance companies pay dividends and what % of their profit is paid. Then compare the costs of profit vs non-profit and see if non-profits provide higher quality care for a lower cost. Or are they providing the same care for the same cost?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: sportage
Personal note:
I noticed Mitt and republicans constantly refer to the term private insurance.
What they are actually referring to is healthcare for profit.
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
Republicans support healthcare for profit. Shameful!

Its a little hard to run a company when that company doesn't turn a profit. Just ask GM.

Ever heard of a non-profit company. I bet you have!

Non-profits can earn a profit. They just cant disperse those profits to owners of the company.

Good enough, since it basically removes the profit motive.

No, it most definately doesn't remove the profit motive.

"Non profit" is a just a tax term, non-profit hospitals need profits to operate and grow; that's how they build those $270 million additions. And like other (for profit) businesses they need to retain some profits to help them through 'bad years'.

The hospitals in my area are all non-profit, but the CEO was just canned because they weren't making a profit and it scared the county (they own this one in I speak of).

Fern
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,617
54,564
136
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Good enough, since it basically removes the profit motive.

Yes I know the left has recieved their barking orders about profit motive being the problem within our healthcare system. But I'd actually like to see how many for profit healthcare providers and insurance companies pay dividends and what % of their profit is paid. Then compare the costs of profit vs non-profit and see if non-profits provide higher quality care for a lower cost. Or are they providing the same care for the same cost?

Who is this 'left' you speak of, and can you point to a credible source that has directed them to complain about the 'profit motive' being the problem with our system? The problem with our system isn't the profit motive, it's that we actually have a UHC system where retards want to pretend that we don't, screwing everyone.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
George: Gov healthcare has worked for Medicare and veterans care hasn?t it?
Mitt: Since LBJ signed Medicaid into law, costs rose into the billions.
George: I actually said Medicare. I don't want to bring up the cluster which is Medicaid.

No wonder why George "corrected" Romney
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

Can we opt out of paying into your SS, your kid's schooling, and your access to public services. Since you don't like paying in, then don't be a hypocrite. And neither will we.
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

Can we opt out of paying into your SS, your kid's schooling, and your access to public services. Since you don't like paying in, then don't be a hypocrite. And neither will we.

I mean I sure like paying into SS knowing that I will never see a penny of it back.
 

Zstream

Diamond Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,395
277
136
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

Can we opt out of paying into your SS, your kid's schooling, and your access to public services. Since you don't like paying in, then don't be a hypocrite. And neither will we.

Back off fool. Not everyone goes to public school, if I get the same tax money your child spends on public school then I have no problem with it. Not everyone uses public services outside of roads (tax for roads is in the gas tax), possibly police officers and a few minor things.

Quit making assumptions...
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
Originally posted by: SammyJr
Originally posted by: EXman

And as long as their governments can run them for us we might have a chance. Went to the doctor again yesterday with one of my kiddos and the office manager was fighting with medicaid for 20 minutes on the phone. They are inept and the lady was getting so frustrated. I felt her pain. If the government does not take serious steps to make healthcare more simple we will have the complexity of a tax code with the service of a post office that is about to close.

And UnitedHealthCare still owes me $400 for an ultrasound from when my son was in utero. They never paid the claim, despite the fact that the doctor was in network, radiology services are covered, the referral was properly done, they had paid a similar claim from the same doctor, and said they were going to pay the claim.

My daughter was born at home and I had to call Social Security to figure out how to get her a number. One 5 minute call and no hold time later, I had my answers on the documentation needed and advice on the fastest way to get her number. I followed the instructions and had her number very quickly.

Quality of service is entirely dependent on the people hired and who is running the department. Private service isn't magically better than public.

Anyhow our "crappy system" still provides the most cutting edge care and most of the worlds drug innovations. That didn't happen under a government socialized system. Innovation dictated by goverments in healthcare just does not work as well as innovation brought about by the chance to make it rich.

The NIH, a Federal Government agency, funds most basic research in the United States. Most basic research is done at state funded Universities. Without this cutting edge research, the Pharmaceutical firms would have to fund the very expensive, very time consuming basic research themselves. Simply put, our high health care and insurance costs DO NOT contribute to most innovation. Our tax dollars do.

And its not greed that drives most researchers. Most of these guys make comfortable salaries but are far from rich. The drive comes from a desire for personal accomplishment, love of science, and to make the world a better place.

Most Big Pharma companies have larger advertising budgets than R&D budgets. That ought to tell you something. Also, look up where the large pharmaceutical firms are headquarted. Many are headquartered in Europe.


That is America. This America was not set up by people who wanted a strong end all centralized government like in europe. The Entrepreneurial Spirit made America great and financial freedom to risk what you got to reap the rewards from your hard work. It still makes people come here for the financial freedoms as well as the best health care possilble on earth that we enjoy.

Society has evolved. Being able to read used to put you in the top 1% of people by intelligence. Now, its so basic we expect children to be able to do it. Health care used to be leeches, cocaine, and booze. Now we have things that work. All of these things cost money and are essential for a modern society. Taxes are the price of maintaining a modern society. If you want a free for all, go to Somalia, but instead of taxes, you'll pay for protection, schooling, travel for any kind of remotely decent health care, etc.

We really screwed things up when somehow your employer had to provide its workers healthcare. Can you imagine where GM would be if they had nothing to do with healthcare? What if they paid their workers more money and had them purchase their own insurance? Would it cost the company less? Sure it would. I'm not saying that would have saved GM but ultimately they got screwed by the weight of their healthcare obligations.

I agree.

I think we should have done as FDR wanted and implemented an NHS system back then. Without the added health insurance costs, American business would be a hell of a lot more competitive. I doubt you agree with that part, though, since conservatives seem to view health care as akin to buying a DVD - purely optional.

Well I agree with you on the first part people are a problem. And I have had my fair share of private insurance companies not living up to their end of the bargain. So I got different insurance. Although your magic comment seems silly. With in the private sector hiring/firing people is neccessary to get good quality or else you can get different insurance. Essentially firing them and they lose money. If NHC is run by a government run entity so striving for excellence retaining good people and providing highest quality service will not win you more customers and vice versa. Have you ever been to a welfare office? Have you run a company? If you are not striving for excellence what are you doing?

Your second point is flawed in many ways and also contradicts your own arguement. Sure the government gives out money and yes many universities do research but you are totally discounting and cheapening R&D by these companies. You make it sound like their just a small insignificant part of the process which is not the case. Just the government giving them money shows you they cannot do it themselves efficiently. Yea who doesn't hate Drug adds! But that is due to the more regulation. Drug companies can no longer give such lavish perks and send doctors on as many vacations/ junkets. If I have to hear drymouth as a possible side effect again... barf!

3rd point --- WOW! This is where you think that our constitution needs to evolve? Society has evolved! If you'd like to throw the constitution in the trash because of our modern times I suggest you book the ticket to your suggested destinations. I cannot tell you what a rationalzation for warping what our country was set up to be.

4th point -- when you talk about conservatives buying health insurance as you would DVD suggests that conservatives do not take their healthcare for their families seriously. If so I cannot help you because that is tragic that you would even entertain that thought much less believe it so. I remind you conservatives value life far above everything else. You value a choice in murdering kids but want healthcare to have no choice and somehow that makes you superior or as you might put it evolved? This is the disconnect that you cannot see.
It is plainly obvious that your partisanship has clouded your common sense. I have directed some sharp words at you here but, I have not accused you of caring any less about your family's healthcare. Not one bit. You might be way off on some ideas but I bet you want the best medical care for them.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: masteryoda34
I absolutely disagree with public healthcare, but I really wouldn't mind it as long as I have an OPTION to COMPLETELY OPT OUT. I don't want to pay for it in my taxes, and I will be completely willing to pay for health services myself or purchase insurance at fair market values. Since the government system will be so wonderful, opting out couldn't possibly be an issue, right?

Also, please let me know where I can opt out of social security. I would very much like to have a 14% increase in after tax earnings.

EDIT: It would actually be impossible to truely opt out because a person could never avoid the inflation tax created by the Federal Reserve and deficit spending required to fund such a program.

You won't be able to opt out because when you are without insurance and in a car wreck we'll still pay to patch you back up. You are already being taxed every day in the products you buy in order to pay for others' health care. If you wanted to opt out you missed the boat by a century or so.

Well, you didn't really answer the question. Can I opt to continue exactly as I am now after the new system takes effect?

Can we opt out of paying into your SS, your kid's schooling, and your access to public services. Since you don't like paying in, then don't be a hypocrite. And neither will we.

I mean I sure like paying into SS knowing that I will never see a penny of it back.
Yet you slammed Gore's plan to put the surplus in a locked box, you supported Bushes tax cuts for the rich to bankrupt the country, and you never asked the Republicans how they planned to pay for the Medicare drug law.
So basically you screwed YOURSELF out of the money.

 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Patranus
Originally posted by: yllus
You know, there's nothing inherently wrong with offering healthcare services for a fee. The best systems in the world are those that offer no-frills universal healthcare, and then have premium services set up in parallel for those who have the money to spend and wish to jump their place in line in the no-frills system.

Can you name one?

France, Germany, and more.

Also Sweden and Netherlands. Holland in particular is paid for by taxes but paid for through non profit insurance companies. And everyone is covered.

 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
Healthcare for profit should be eliminated.
damn those doctors



Originally posted by: techs
Yet you slammed Gore's plan to put the surplus in a locked box,

and just exactly what would that entail? piles of money in a corner in washington somewhere?
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
I think we need to eliminate profits on all necessities.

- Food
- Water
- Housing
- Blankets, bedding
- First-aid supplies, over the counter drugs, sunscreen, bug spray
- Glasses, contacts
- Haircuts (or hair cut supplies)
- Dental care and supplies

I think all of the following profit should be eliminated since all are required to be a working member of a non-profit society:
- Clothing, shoes
- Exercise facilities
- Transportation
- Alarm clocks & watches
- Communications devices
- Soap, toothbrushes, etc.


Did I miss anything?