Re July 3 letter, “Health insurance mandate unfairly squeezes middle class”: I agree with Mr. David Weaver that the middle class is getting squeezed. It hurts, but if the newly upheld health care bill is properly administrated, things might get better. I like the fact that the health insurance organizations have to spend 80 percent of their money on actually giving health care. I like the fact that people with conditions, before, after and during, are all covered without limits on coverage. Some people are against the idea that coverage is required and taxable. In some ways, the health-care situation is like our required car insurance. Part of our cost covers the uninsured drivers who crash into us. Someone has to cover those costs, just as we pay for the uninsured people who go to the emergency room. People without any health insurance plan get sick and must pay something — only fair, because otherwise we are paying for them. If more of the healthy and young people join the system, there will be money enough to cover the older and less healthy people in our nation. If there are more people in the system, the costs should go down, or not increase so drastically. The new health-care bill might be good for the middle class, but we have to be willing to do two things. One is to care enough about others to be willing to support a health-care system where most people can get the care they need. The second is to watch the progress of this new system. As active citizens, we need to follow what happens and annoy our elected offi cials if we don’t like how it plays out. Hopefully, Mr. Weaver sent his letter to his elected officials, as well as to the Gazette.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I love this cartoon...It says "requiring individuals to be responsible". Too Funny.
It should say "forcing healthy young people to buy a product they do not need from a corporate crony"
It's true... they don't NEED it... they can always mooch off the taxpayers instead of taking responsibility for themselves.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
It's true... they don't NEED it... they can always mooch off the taxpayers instead of taking responsibility for themselves.
The real gamble is whether or not the healthy young people will buy the insurance or just pay the penalty... If they pay the penalty, this plan is seriously underfunded...in fact, it pretty much is already due to the SCOTUS strikedown of the forced expanded medicare provision. If universal health care is the goal, then say it. Don't try to claim its going to save money, because its not. The assumption that people will be healthier because the care is there is a laugh. If that were so, we'd have no abortions (free birth control), no drug users (treatment) and no repeat felons (prison system).
Most people are in the position they are in because of choice...no one wants to face that fact. Will accessible health care for all make a difference? Yes, to the people that use it...but it won't be close to being universal.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
It's true... they don't NEED it... they can always mooch off the taxpayers instead of taking responsibility for themselves.
There you go again, required responsibility...That's an oxymoron. Box, it is called REQUIRED DEPENDENCY TO THE CORPORATE STATE. You are repeating political talk. That is where they take a word or phrase and it is actually opposite of what it means. Like the Affordable Care Act, it isn't affordable, and it isn't care, it is insurance, and it is actually more expensive by most analysis. But dummy Americans don't know the difference.
There you go again, required responsibility...That's an oxymoron. Box, it is called REQUIRED DEPENDENCY TO THE CORPORATE STATE. You are repeating political talk. That is where they take a word or phrase and it is actually opposite of what it means. Like the Affordable Care Act, it isn't affordable, and it isn't care, it is insurance, and it is actually more expensive by most analysis. But dummy Americans don't know the difference.
Once again... CIC GETS IS WRONG! (You'd think he'd get it right just one time, even if it were by mistake)
Those free loaders who don't buy health insurance, force the rest of us to PAY THEIR BILLS. (Cic always ignores this is a TAX that is forced on the rest of us by the DeadBeats. When the Dead Beats get seriously sick or injured, they will end up in an ER, and the Taxpayers WILL pay their bills. This Tax/Penalty will pay for the Dead Beats instead of the Taxpayers paying their medical bills.
I have no problem with those who refuse to buy health insurance be left outside the ER until they die... but it would make for a messy situation with the bodies piling up and the flies etc... Instead of the TaxPayers paying to clean up Dead Beat bodies stacked up outside the ER, Obama Care will implement the Republican Idea of charging Dead Beats for their own ER services.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Once again... CIC GETS IS WRONG! (You'd think he'd get it right just one time, even if it were by mistake)
Those free loaders who don't buy health insurance, force the rest of us to PAY THEIR BILLS. (Cic always ignores this is a TAX that is forced on the rest of us by the DeadBeats. When the Dead Beats get seriously sick or injured, they will end up in an ER, and the Taxpayers WILL pay their bills. This Tax/Penalty will pay for the Dead Beats instead of the Taxpayers paying their medical bills.
There goes box again, painting with a BROAD BRUSH.
Making outlandish statements like assuming that all people that CHOOSE not to purchase health insurance will inevitably get seriously sick and injured, when an actuary working for the insurance company will tell you the odds are that a person between the ages of 18 and 26 will suffer a major illnesses is slim. So during the most productive years of a persons life, the government is forcing them to give the little money they have to the gangster cronies at AIG and the rest of the criminals in the insurance industry. Instead of dealing with the freeloader, box's solution is to PUNISH EVERYBODY by FORCING them to purchase a product the insurance company already knows they will not likely use. But hey, the insurance company isn’t complaining, they are going to make A LOT of money off of perfectly healthy people.
There goes box again, painting with a BROAD BRUSH.
Making outlandish statements like assuming that all people that CHOOSE not to purchase health insurance will inevitably get seriously sick and injured, when an actuary working for the insurance company will tell you the odds are that a person between the ages of 18 and 26 will suffer a major illnesses is slim. So during the most productive years of a persons life, the government is forcing them to give the little money they have to the gangster cronies at AIG and the rest of the criminals in the insurance industry. Instead of dealing with the freeloader, box's solution is to PUNISH EVERYBODY by FORCING them to purchase a product the insurance company already knows they will not likely use. But hey, the insurance company isn’t complaining, they are going to make A LOT of money off of perfectly healthy people.
"Insurance company will tell you the odds are that a person between the ages of 18 and 26 will suffer a major illnesses is slim." ??? So what are we talkin here??? a few hundred injuries??? a few thousand??? Surely NOT in the ten's of thousands of young people injured??? Right???
OMG! Can ya believe it? Cic is wrong again!
From the Center for Disease Control: Leading Causes of Nonfatal Injuries, United States 2010, All Races , Males , Disposition: All Cases Ages: 18-28
Cause of Injury -Number of Injuries
Percentage of All Injuries in Age Group - Ages: 18-28 Overall Injuries 3,636,477 100.0%
As it turns out, what Cicero calls "SLIM CHANCE" is actually 3,636,477 serious injuries. Of course these figures only account for those cases where the person lived. It ignores the 30,368 cases where the person died and who knows how much of our taxpayer dollars was spent in the attempt to save their lives before their deaths...
Cicero's Hospital bill for his "SLIM CHANCE" for those 3,636,477 injuries and the dollars attempting to save the lives of another 30,368 for a total in the age group Ages: 18-28 would be total: (Get this Cicero calls this a "SLIM CHANCE") 3,666,845 young "SLIM CHANCE" American men. Oh yea... Should I also include the women??? No doubt that would raise the SLIM CHANCE numbers considerably.
I wish I could go to Vegas and have such SLIM CHANCES of hitting it big!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
From the Center for Disease Control: Leading Causes of Nonfatal Injuries, United States 2010, All Races , Males , Disposition: All Cases Ages: 18-28
Cause of Injury -Number of Injuries
Percentage of All Injuries in Age Group - Ages: 18-28 Overall Injuries 3,636,477 100.0%
As it turns out, what Cicero calls "SLIM CHANCE" is actually 3,636,477 serious injuries. Of course these figures only account for those cases where the person lived. It ignores the 30,368 cases where the person died and who knows how much of our taxpayer dollars was spent in the attempt to save their lives before their deaths...
Cicero's Hospital bill for his "SLIM CHANCE" for those 3,636,477 injuries and the dollars attempting to save the lives of another 30,368 for a total in the age group Ages: 18-28 would be total: (Get this Cicero calls this a "SLIM CHANCE") 3,666,845 young "SLIM CHANCE" American men. Oh yea... Should I also include the women??? No doubt that would raise the SLIM CHANCE numbers considerably.
I wish I could go to Vegas and have such SLIM CHANCES of hitting it big!
Here we go with fun with statistic. Doing a quick search of the population demographics by age, I found that there are approximately 51.6 million Americans between the ages of 18-29 - 26.2 million male & 25.4 million female(had to go to 29, that is the only way it was broken down). So to take Box's number of "serious injuries" of 3.7 million, it looks like the chances of a serious injury for a person in the male age group is a whopping 14%. That would mean that the 86% will not suffer from a serious injury. If you add in the woman population, which I assume the have less of a "serious injury" rate, the odds of injury would be even less.
So to take your Vegas analogy, I looked at black jack odds, and realized you have better odds winning against the house playing against an 8 deck dealer than suffering from a serious injury.
The following table illustrates the mathematical effect on the house edge of the number of decks, by considering games with various deck counts under the following ruleset: double after split allowed, resplit to four hands allowed, no hitting split aces, no surrender, double on any two cards, original bets only lost on dealer blackjack, dealer hits soft 17, and cut-card used. The increase in house edge per unit increase in the number of decks is most dramatic when comparing the single deck game to the two-deck game, and becomes progressively smaller as more decks are added.
Single deck 0.17% Double deck 0.46% Four decks 0.60% Six decks 0.64% Eight decks 0.65%
Cic loves to quote numbers... here's a few for him.
Right now All of us taxpayers... 100% of the taxpaying public, share paying the freeloaders bills when they show up at the ER injured or dying. That's 100%
Under Obama Care the ONLY people paying the penalty/tax, will be the FREE LOADER DEADBEATS who can get health insurance, but prefer that the rest of us pay their bills.
Under Obamacare, 0% of the taxpayers will pay for the DeadBeat Freeloaders medical bills... because that tax/penalty will pay thei DeadBeat Freeloaders medical bills
~ Cicero's plan... You and I (taxpayers) pay 100% of the DeadBeat Freeloaders Medical bills
~ Obama Care... They pay their own medical bills through the Tax/penalty.
(sounds like an easy choice for American Taxpayers)
Had these freeloaders taken responsibility for their own medical bills, this tax/penalty would not be necessary.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Once again... CIC GETS IS WRONG! (You'd think he'd get it right just one time, even if it were by mistake)
Those free loaders who don't buy health insurance, force the rest of us to PAY THEIR BILLS. (Cic always ignores this is a TAX that is forced on the rest of us by the DeadBeats. When the Dead Beats get seriously sick or injured, they will end up in an ER, and the Taxpayers WILL pay their bills. This Tax/Penalty will pay for the Dead Beats instead of the Taxpayers paying their medical bills.
I have no problem with those who refuse to buy health insurance be left outside the ER until they die... but it would make for a messy situation with the bodies piling up and the flies etc... Instead of the TaxPayers paying to clean up Dead Beat bodies stacked up outside the ER, Obama Care will implement the Republican Idea of charging Dead Beats for their own ER services.
those young folk who choose not to purchase health insurance end up with bills/loss of college etc....but I AM NOT THEIR BLOW UP DOLL FOR A COMFY LANDING SO THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR EDUCATION/PURCHASE OF CAR ETC ETC...
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
those young folk who choose not to purchase health insurance end up with bills/loss of college etc....but I AM NOT THEIR BLOW UP DOLL FOR A COMFY LANDING SO THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR EDUCATION/PURCHASE OF CAR ETC ETC...
The topic is Obamacare and why should you and I pay deadbeat freeloader's medical bills.
Nothing at all to do with 'college', 'cars or even buying you a 'new blow up doll.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cic loves to quote numbers... here's a few for him.
Right now All of us taxpayers... 100% of the taxpaying public, share paying the freeloaders bills when they show up at the ER injured or dying. That's 100%
Under Obama Care the ONLY people paying the penalty/tax, will be the FREE LOADER DEADBEATS who can get health insurance, but prefer that the rest of us pay their bills.
Under Obamacare, 0% of the taxpayers will pay for the DeadBeat Freeloaders medical bills... because that tax/penalty will pay thei DeadBeat Freeloaders medical bills
~ Cicero's plan... You and I (taxpayers) pay 100% of the DeadBeat Freeloaders Medical bills
~ Obama Care... They pay their own medical bills through the Tax/penalty.
(sounds like an easy choice for American Taxpayers)
Had these freeloaders taken responsibility for their own medical bills, this tax/penalty would not be necessary.
This actually passes as logical to many Americans...That is why we are where we are in this Country.
Box makes the claim that currently, 100% of the taxpayer pays a share for the deadbeat freeloader. Well, as Box points out, only 14% of the 18-29 male age demographic are "deadbeat freeloaders", since that is the percentage getting "seriously injured" using the system. So the other 86%, which are also part of the 100% taxpayer that pays for the "deadbeat freeloader", and are not getting seriously injured, but their tax money is still paying for the 14% "deadbeats" in their age demographic. And box's claim is, if we penalize the 86% not getting seriously injured and not requiring medical care, they are now somehow, in box's world, now paying 0%.
Now, anybody with the smallest bit of common sense would come to the conclusion that, not only is the 86% STILL PAYING THE SAME TAXES AS BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, BUT ARE NOW PAYING AN ADDITIONAL PENALTY(TAX) FOR NOT PURCHASING PRIVATE INSURANCE FOR A SERVICE 86% WILL NOT USE.
UNDER OBAMACARE, THE 86% OF 18-29 YEAR OLD'S ARE NOW GETTING DOUBLE TAXED FOR NO OTHER REASON BUT FOR BEING YOUNG AND HEALTHY!!!
Logged
