Funny email from a crazy liberal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

So this correlates to healthcare the same as taxes have. If everyone is playing by the same rules then the market forces are equal.

---

They are all already playing equal. No company is currently forced to buy health insurance*. It's an added benefit used to attract employees. Just like paying that $50k in salary as the market rate...health insurance benefits are dictated by what the employee market wants. So government forcing companies to buy health insurance is the same as government controlling the market rate of pay. i.e. US.gov rules say forklift drivers must be paid $100k/yr...should we do that too?


*this was true but last I checked Obama care forces companies to buy health insurance for employees or pay a fine...still true? If it's still true, Obama Care sounds right up your ally nynco...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollohas

They are all already playing equal. No company is currently forced to buy health insurance*. It's an added benefit used to attract employees. Just like paying that $50k in salary as the market rate...health insurance benefits are dictated by what the employee market wants. So government forcing companies to buy health insurance is the same as government controlling the market rate of pay. i.e. US.gov rules say forklift drivers must be paid $100k/yr...should we do that too?


*this was true but last I checked Obama care forces companies to buy health insurance for employees or pay a fine...still true? If it's still true, Obama Care sounds right up your ally nynco...

---

The base rules need to be changed that is the point of reform. Healthcare is not a commodity. It is not a right either. But we as a society can chose to help each other or let others die. Your choice guys...... dark ages or civilization? That is the point of America we can chose.

Obama care is unconstitutional because it forces people to buy from a private individual (insurance provider). Hence the reason I said medicare for all and paid for by taxes. You can still buy healthcare on your own and the company can chose to pay for additional coverage or you can too. Free market at work... Obamas biggest mistake was doing Romnie care on the national level. He went against his base and listened to the corporations who bought Washington long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

We are saving money by treating everyone.

---

This is the fundamental disagreement. By treating everyone, even those that cannot pay, MORE will use the system...more that can't pay that is. Not being able to pay deters some from seeking care...reducing the load. You can't say they will get other's sick without care, increasing the load. They will get others sick care or no care...

This just doesn't make sense.

On top of that, the system can't handle more people so quality of care for ALL will go down.

Unless this bright idea of giving care to all, even those that don't pay, includes some sort of plan to double or triple our healthcare providers, we all lose a lot more than money. The extra patients in the system don't pay so there will be no funds to educate, train, equip and hire new providers to care for those extra patients. So we need to pay both for non-payers' care AND pay for the extra doctors needed to treat them to make this work. That's a big bill to foot...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

But we as a society can chose to help each other or let others die. Your choice guys...... dark ages or civilization?

---

Government is not a synonym for society, prior to government getting into the charity business real heavily in the 60s there were plenty of church groups, charities and mutual aid societies to take care of the truly downtrodden.

Once government gets involved it breeds waste and corruption, both on the provider end AND the patient end (you give something away and people that don't need it will likely be the first in line to mooch).

You have created a false dilemma fallacy of logic with your "dark ages or civilization" bushwah. The choice you propose is between effective and free private enterprise or enslavement to government (which will end in WORSE service to the poor).


If you truly want to help people, leave it to private enterprise and private charity ... government is just a mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollohas

This is the fundamental disagreement. By treating everyone, even those that cannot pay, MORE will use the system...more that can't pay that is. Not being able to pay deters some from seeking care...reducing the load. You can't say they will get other's sick without care, increasing the load. They will get others sick care or no care...

This just doesn't make sense.

On top of that, the system can't handle more people so quality of care for ALL will go down.

Unless this bright idea of giving care to all, even those that don't pay, includes some sort of plan to double or triple our healthcare providers, we all lose a lot more than money. The extra patients in the system don't pay so there will be no funds to educate, train, equip and hire new providers to care for those extra patients. So we need to pay both for non-payers' care AND pay for the extra doctors needed to treat them to make this work. That's a big bill to foot...

---

The people are in the system now and if there are more that come into be seen well that means more jobs for workers now doesn't. Wow, you just stimulated the economy. As to providing the best care in the world for all Americans... Well this is up to us to decide what level of care is to be the base level. Today we have death panels run by for profit insurance companies with an incentive to kill you rather than treat you. I would rather take my chances with a panel that I can change through my elected representative than one where I have no say at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

But we as a society can chose to help each other or let others die. Your choice guys...... dark ages or civilization? That is the point of America we can chose.

---

I do choose to help...through donations. My choice. Not forced by government. That's not government's role to tell me how much to pay for others through taxation and medicare. They misuse my funds everyday and I rather send my money direct to those in need. My funds will buy an oxygen tank for 150 bucks when sent directly to a hospital but when sent through medicare...well that tank costs $1000.

Sure, argue that the system needs to be fixed, that medicare can improve and bring costs down (yeah right, no proof that they can manage that, but in theory sure), but that's still ignoring the fundamental belief that government shouldn't be telling me where to spend MY money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

Government is not a synonym for society, prior to government getting into the charity business real heavily in the 60s there were plenty of church groups, charities and mutual aid societies to take care of the truly downtrodden.

Once government gets involved it breeds waste and corruption, both on the provider end AND the patient end (you give something away and people that don't need it will likely be the first in line to mooch).

You have created a false dilemma fallacy of logic with your "dark ages or civilization" bushwah. The choice you propose is between effective and free private enterprise or enslavement to government (which will end in WORSE service to the poor).


If you truly want to help people, leave it to private enterprise and private charity ... government is just a mess.

---

And those charities were failing miserably.

You yourself are creating a false dilemma. Gov is supposed to be we the people who elect it. Therefore we are only enslaved by gov when gov is corrupted and not longer beholden to the people. Gov is a tool. And in our system, we the people are supposed to be the ones in charge of the tool. Or do not understand our constitution at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

Today we have death panels run by for profit insurance companies with an incentive to kill you rather than treat you.

---

I say again, they make profits from premiums paid by LIVE people...dead people don't pay. This simply ins't accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

And those charities were failing miserably.

---

Shriners Hospital for Children is one of the best in the world...run by donations. Free for patients.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollohas

I say again, they make profits from premiums paid by LIVE people...dead people don't pay. This simply ins't accurate.

---

And living people sometimes won't live long enough to make up for the cost...... your childs injury is costing the company 5 million to fix her....... well that is too much let her die.