So Virginia bans O-Care

[mrsleeve]

No, the man bought a t-shirt. The guy that commissioned those shirts to be printed "has a point".

How do you know he didnt go to the T-shirt place in the mall and have it commissioned him self??????

just saying

[kronus]

But the man has a point

No, the man bought a t-shirt. The guy that commissioned those shirts to be printed "has a point".

[mrsleeve]

yes I get the irony in that pic. But the man has a point

[z31maniac]

Yeah, you're right. I read a few people as arguing against any kind of reformation, but after re-reading through, my argument might be misdirected.

I'm just want them to start small. The way gov't basically fucks up everything, let's go in small increments and see if it works. Versus handing 1/6 of the economy over to a group of dip shits who can't even keep the street lights on and the pot holes filled.

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd, that even though tax revenues are continuing to plummet and the private sector is freezing pay/cutting benefits/eliminating positions, that the gov't is giving it's employees raises and hiring more and more people?

The Fed gov't has the most employees now as it has in the last 20 years. Yet, we continue to run huge deficits, etc, etc, etc.

Just a few reasons why those of us on the otherside can't possibly fathom why some people think MORE GOVERNMENT is the answer.

[Wiglaf]

"only 14% of my paycheck" isn't really a great argument if you are making upwards of 100k. Not saying that you are, but what is 14% for you might be 40% for me. I imagine that anyone making more than 80k is still all like "wtf is the big deal?"
If you make 3x the average, of course it will be a less than average problem for you.

[mar1t1me]

fukken +1, but China isn't really a communist state anymore.

You might wanna tell these guys! They need an update...LOL

[Bill 84 318i]

Follow up on it.

You have to understand we all think it sucks, but those of us against are pointing to past precendent on what happens when the gov't gets involved.

Yeah, you're right. I read a few people as arguing against any kind of reformation, but after re-reading through, my argument might be misdirected.

[z31maniac]

Follow up on it.

You have to understand we all think it sucks, but those of us against are pointing to past precendent on what happens when the gov't gets involved.

[Bill 84 318i]

I have a very simple argument for those who are against the government /regulation of healthcare.

Whether or not you believe that healthcare is something that should be provided by the government, I think the end result of the "freedom from government" attitude towards healthcare is the exact opposite of the freedom you all call for. Paying for a service that can drop you when you need it most is an "unfreedom". Leaving healthcare to the free market is clearly not working, and somebody needs to get in there and do something.

As for HOW to fix it, I'm not touching that yet. I went to an interesting discussion at a medical school on the intrinsic faults of our healthcare system and why it's expensive. I have to dig up the powerpoint slides, but I may have a followup on that later.

[kronus]

doesn't Germany have almost 20% sales tax too?

Not on food and agricultural products. 7% for those.

[88driftIS]

doesn't Germany have almost 20% sales tax too?

[ck_taft325is]

The biggest issue I have with Obama Care is that it's not even what they are advertising it to be. It's not that if I can't make enough money (currently I cannot) to pay for insurance, I'm covered. It's JUST as expensive and will drive the costs of health care up further making it even further from my reach. So, now I can't afford insurance still, I make less money (higher tax rate), my business which is small makes less money (higher tax rates) and I'll be taxed, penalized and fined for not being able to afford it. How does this work again?

You can strangely enough, place the same arguement from the left to the left's whole case.

Vehicle insurance is another game entirely. I understand your point, but that doesn't stop people from driving without insurance and the fact that insurance companies have ridiculous ways of not paying. For instance... my buddies parents house was robbed. They had had the same insurance company for 20+ years. Paid every month. Countless dollers went just to home owners full coverage insurance. You name it, they had it. Including theft. They get robbed. Then told to buy everything back, the insurance company would refund them based on reciepts. Shortly after work commenced to repair their house (over $100,000 in damages to the inside alone) they got a letter saying their claim was under investigation. The insurance "adjuster" then came out and pretty much told them the $130,000 THOUSAND dollers they had paid out would not be refunded at all. 7 years later their court case ends. They lost. As compensation for a 7 year court case, the judge sentanced the insurance company to pay the court fee's, but anything purchased or work done on their homes was denied past $10,000 per home repair/replacement of stolen items.

Bottom line is it's not the Government's job to be responsible for me or anyone else. That's my job and I might suck at it half the time, but I'm doing my best and learning.

[Hallen]

I am not all that up to date on the whole Obama health care thing but........
I live here in Germany, pay 14% of my wages for health care -like everyone- and 10 euros every 3 months-- that covers me, wife and all of the kids I want. Doesnt seem too bad to me- and it covers ALOT- braces, glasses, all that jazz.

with your question above-- I remember there was a time when vehicle insurance was not required--- I am sure you would be happy that "everyone" has to have it when someone sideswipes your car.

honestly I dont know which is better, but its not too bad when you know your covered-even when I am visiting family in the U.S. and something would happen.

That's very interesting. Thanks for posting. I am glad it works well for you and I am glad you are satisfied with it.

I do think that's a bit unfair. If I make $100,000 per year, I have to pay around $1200 per month. If I make $30,000 per year, I have to pay $350 per month. Yet I get the exact same health care. That kinda sucks.

Also, I currently pay about 11% per year in federal income tax. I pay almost 40% overall taxes after SS, Medicare, and state taxes. I really don't want to add an additional 14% to that number. Seriously, I could almost pay the entire bill for my company provided health care plan right now on 14% of my pay, and it is a very good plan.

Think about this for a second. If we do 14% of our pay for health care, that's more money than the government currently brings in from most people on their income tax. Wow. The government would be more than doubling their budget right there. How many of you think that's a good deal?

[quickervicar]

Everyone who drives is required to carry car insurance in this county. Many, many people do not. When they are in an accident they simply run. Who pays for it? All the honest people. I see no difference whether talking about mandating car insurance or health insurance. Those that choose not to pay for it will still leave everyone else to pay for their bill.

My city used to have 3 hospitals. They have gotten so screwed with walk-in/walk-outs that don't pay their bills that they found it to be cheaper to move their whole operations outside the city limits. We are left with 1 ER in the city. Another case of urban flight.

[z31maniac]

Mike, just curious if that is 14% of your gross or net pay?

Granted I don't know exactly what my employers portion of my health insurance is, but I know that my personal contribution is on the order of 2.9% of of my net pay.