Funny email from a crazy liberal

[TFOGGER]

As I said the two issues are not to be mixed. You seem to be still stuck on this. As I laid out before, it costs society more when we don't treat that TB case than it would if we did. We are saving money by treating everyone. As much as you don't like that idea, it costs you less money in the end. So it is in your own selfish best interest for everyone to have healthcare.

As healthcare is a multibillion dollar industry, I would think the 2 are inextricably linked. Taxes and tax analogs, such as a mandatory universal healthcare payment, universally act as a damper on economic growth.

Hypothetically, Joe Paycheck earns $40k a year, less 30%ish for income taxes, FICA, etc. This leaves him about $31,500 to pay for his day to day expenses, including healthcare. Now let's say Joe has a pretty decent health plan that covers him, Mrs Paycheck, and Jr. Paycheck, and this costs him $750 a month. That takes $9000 of his income, but it provides good quality coverage. Start adding in his mortgage, a car payment, and living expenses, and Joe basically comes out even at the end of the month. Not getting rich, but living the dream.

Now universal healthcare comes along. Joe's employer is faced with a dilemma: reduce the workforce by a number of workers to cover the cost of providing healthcare, or asking his employees to take a pay cut of $9k per year to cover it. Now that $9k is going to not only cover Joe and his family, but his neighbor Tom Slacker's family as well.

Suddenly, the same amount of money is supposed to provide coverage for twice as many people. Either the cost of care must be reduced %50 somehow, or the quality of care will be degraded. Now I'll be the first to agree that the current system is horribly bloated and wasteful, particularly at the administrative levels, but to believe you can provide quality care for half the cost is naive at best.

Now say that Joe's employer takes the other tack, and decides to axe 10% of his work force to cover the cost instead. Now you have more people out of work, but still covered by the system.

I absolutely agree that insurance companies need to have incentives other than profit, as profit implies a certain level of acceptable loss.

I ask the following: If universal health care is the answer, why do people from France, England, and Canada come to the US for treatment if they can afford it?

[nynco]

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

And obviously that is not enough to fix the situation either.

[nynco]

As healthcare is a multibillion dollar industry, I would think the 2 are inextricably linked. Taxes and tax analogs, such as a mandatory universal healthcare payment, universally act as a damper on economic growth.

Hypothetically, Joe Paycheck earns $40k a year, less 30%ish for income taxes, FICA, etc. This leaves him about $31,500 to pay for his day to day expenses, including healthcare. Now let's say Joe has a pretty decent health plan that covers him, Mrs Paycheck, and Jr. Paycheck, and this costs him $750 a month. That takes $9000 of his income, but it provides good quality coverage. Start adding in his mortgage, a car payment, and living expenses, and Joe basically comes out even at the end of the month. Not getting rich, but living the dream.

Now universal healthcare comes along. Joe's employer is faced with a dilemma: reduce the workforce by a number of workers to cover the cost of providing healthcare, or asking his employees to take a pay cut of $9k per year to cover it. Now that $9k is going to not only cover Joe and his family, but his neighbor Tom Slacker's family as well.

Suddenly, the same amount of money is supposed to provide coverage for twice as many people. Either the cost of care must be reduced %50 somehow, or the quality of care will be degraded. Now I'll be the first to agree that the current system is horribly bloated and wasteful, particularly at the administrative levels, but to believe you can provide quality care for half the cost is naive at best.

Now say that Joe's employer takes the other tack, and decides to axe 10% of his work force to cover the cost instead. Now you have more people out of work, but still covered by the system.

I absolutely agree that insurance companies need to have incentives other than profit, as profit implies a certain level of acceptable loss.

I ask the following: If universal health care is the answer, why do people from France, England, and Canada come to the US for treatment if they can afford it?

Joe's employer already knows what Joe is paying that goes back to what Joe is willing to work for in the end. Or are you saying the freemarket won't work? Joe's employer chose to cut back on staff. So either Joe's employer had 10% too many people to begin which means he was not efficient or Joes employer has decided that there is not enough market demand for his goods to justify his previous 10 inefficiency. Now since Joe's employer is choosing to give up his market share, that gives an opportunity for another company to come along and fill the demand that he can not meet. That other company would be playing under the same rules as Joe's employer so the market equals out again. Now Joe's employer can still cut Joe's pay, but Joe can chose to find a new employer who will pay him what he is use to making as his end take home pay to cover his lifes expenses.

People come to America because they can afford to. Its a free country and our country permits them to come here. Come on in, thanks for the cash. It was their freemarket choice to come here. On the flip side there are more Americans today leaving America to get surgery overseas because they cannot afford to here. My ex's mother always gets her dental care over seas because she cannot afford to here. She returns to see family and promptly goes to the dentist. This is because our system is so broken that it does not serve a vast amount of our own citizens. Serving others from other nations is only permitted if they pay out of pocket. Again, thanks for the cash.

[nynco]

Stimulated the economy? Who pays for the illegal 21 yr old that I took care of last week and got a free $30k back surgery? He says he can't work and hasn't worked since age 17? He is putting nothing into the system!

Who decides my wages...the government? Feds step in and will decide MD and RN pay. Ask a Brit RN about their pay... It sucks. Your previous answers suck
IMHO.

Illegals are not US citizens do not confuse the issue or muddy the water. Deal with them separately. Best way to do that is to abolish any company that hires them or to fine any private individual that hires an illegal. No work, no illegals. They walk home on their own dime with that system.

Who decides wages? The employee always does. Because if they can't get someone to work for the wage level they are paying, then they better pay more till they find a worker who is willing to work for that wage level.

As to my previous answers sucking....... so far your reply indicates you can't knock them down. You just called me a name and that shows I win.

[Zundfolge]

And those charities were failing miserably.

Absolute 110% pure grade bullshit.

Private charities ALWAYS do better than government.

I'm done "arguing" with you ... you're a brainwashed kool-aid drinker not worth my time.

[TFOGGER]

Joe's employer already knows what Joe is paying that goes back to what Joe is willing to work for in the end. Or are you saying the freemarket won't work? Joe's employer chose to cut back on staff. So either Joe's employer had 10% too many people to begin which means he was not efficient or Joes employer has decided that there is not enough market demand for his goods to justify his previous 10 inefficiency. Now since Joe's employer is choosing to give up his market share, that gives an opportunity for another company to come along and fill the demand that he can not meet. That other company would be playing under the same rules as Joe's employer so the market equals out again. Now Joe's employer can still cut Joe's pay, but Joe can chose to find a new employer who will pay him what he is use to making as his end take home pay to cover his lifes expenses.

People come to America because they can afford to. Its a free country and our country permits them to come here. Come on in, thanks for the cash. It was their freemarket choice to come here. On the flip side there are more Americans today leaving America to get surgery overseas because they cannot afford to here. My ex's mother always gets her dental care over seas because she cannot afford to here. She returns to see family and promptly goes to the dentist. This is because our system is so broken that it does not serve a vast amount of our own citizens. Serving others from other nations is only permitted if they pay out of pocket. Again, thanks for the cash.

And the money to cover the administrative costs comes from?

Your supposition that the 10% of the workforce that Joe's employer had to let go was excess fails to recognize that there are such things as seasonal fluctuations, economic fluctuations, and that you can't drive people to work at maximum effort all the time, or they burn out. If you attempt to run a business on the ragged edge of minimum manpower, you make no allowance for sick time, personal days, or vacations. You can't expand your business, or in some cases even keep abreast of current demands.

People who come here for care from other countries do so for one reason: The quality and/or immediacy of the care is significantly better than their money can buy there. Like I said, you can't spread the same resources out over a larger number of people without reducing the quality or quantity of care devoted to each person. Many health care resources are currently finite, so increasing them is not practical.

[nynco]

Never called you a name...learn to read. I said your ideas sucked...so I guess you don't win.

Like to know when "employees" decide wages. Ever heard of minimum wage? Who sets that?

We the people through gov. decide on the base floor for wages or Min Wage. If a company can not follow those base rules then they have no rights to incorporation. Anything after that base point is decided by the worker who is willing to work for that wage level. Workers make those determination by what it costs to live and that is an after tax dollar reality not a pretax dollar one.

As to saying my ideas suck, why don't you step up to the plate more and prove me wrong.

[Byte Stryke]

20 million illegals aren't going back home- not gonna happen. Who take care/pays the ones here? You want amnesty for the ones already here? Make them citizens? Great. You spout good intentions but we ain't running a damn daisy farm.

That didn't work last time, wont work this time.
just throwing that out there

[nynco]

Address the name calling first- you said I called you a name and I didn't- not nice.

You sure talk pretty Civics 101. Think you need a reality check.

20 million illegals aren't going back home- not gonna happen. Who take care/pays the ones here? You want amnesty for the ones already here? Make them citizens? Great. You spout good intentions but we ain't running a damn daisy farm.

Why don't you work a few years in a hospital and see how bad it is and how bad it is gonna get. The population is growing, baby boomers are demanding care and a new facility is $1 million a bed. Will you take care of everyone including illegals? They will just keep coming. Deny illegals treatment? Pretty mean and Libs will eat you alive.

As to the name calling I apologize for misreading what you wrote. I will try to have better attention to detail in the future.

As to working in a hospital........I have many times over many years in a few different continents and states. Both in uniform and out. I was also working on sept 11th victims that day.

As to Amnesty.... I don't really want to get into that. But I will say that any employer who already breaks the laws by knowingly employing illegals deserves no mercy. Illegals come here because they can find work. Dry up that and they stop coming so fast and so much.

[sniper7]

So if you moved to California you vote straight Democrat for your entire time living there right?

most populations outside the major cities are republican and very conservative. maybe you should expand your world a little bit and research some things. But when the major cities are corrupt, more than outnumber the conservatives, the votes and politicians are going to reflect that, just the same as they do in denver and boulder around here.