Tax on rich for healthcare.

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Money can't buy you health care in a government run system. Unless you bribe a doctor or a bureaucrat, but a principled person like you would probably rather die.;-)
Actually, I'd bribe the doctor and the bureaucrat, at that point any attempts to live inside the system are suicidal, and I'm not suicidal.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Oh wow, 440.56, you might go bankrupt...

Sorry, I'm going to laugh my ass off that you're pouting about $440.56. That's a mere drop against the dental work I'm getting done, but paying a health insurance company wouldn't have done a damn thing for my dental. Either, I'd end up paying them more than the dental is worth over the long run, or I'd end up screwing them over.
That's fine, but the point is that the insurance company was supposed to pay for it, which is why she has it in the first place. You really do come off ignorant sometimes in your posts, I had high hopes for actual discussions with you on this board too, oh well.

That is why there is dental insurance too.

If I get a serious disease, I'll die with dignity, not like a bitch.
I am not sure about you, but not being able to piss or shit due to colon cancer (which they say if men lived long enough we all would get) and not being able to pay the 80k for out of pocket treatment (simple procedure). Struggling to piss or shit in constant agonizing pain and unable to sit is not something I call dying with dignity.

In the unfortunate event that something like that does happen, I have access to a good chunk of the bank's money. So, I'll go in debt, and then I'll pay off the debt. I'm not about to steal from my fellow citizens through the coercion, force and fraud of the government.
And if they won't lend it to you? What then. I am not one for cutting off my nose to spite my face.
 

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
And yet you would destroy the best health care system in the world to save a couple hundred bones?
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
And yet you would destroy the best health care system in the world to save a couple hundred bones?
Not in the least! But I may be willing to spend a little extra on the 30th best in the world to get coverage the 1/6th of the American people that are not covered, and to bring it up to the top.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
And after Obama eliminates the charitable contribution tax deduction.
That's stupid. That doesn't even make any sense.

Why would someone contribute to a charitable cause even if they are being taxed to put money into the same system, AND not get a tax deduction for the charitable contribution.

Not only that, but you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
That's fine, but the point is that the insurance company was supposed to pay for it, which is why she has it in the first place. You really do come off ignorant sometimes in your posts, I had high hopes for actual discussions with you on this board too, oh well.

That is why there is dental insurance too.



This goes to show that you should REALLY read ALL of your Explanation of Benefits (EOB) and have a thorough understanding of what you are getting with your insurance. Private insurance (although usually has a higher deductible) is usually better about paying for services and goods than employer insurance.

I'm not an advocate for insurance companies by any means though. I've just got a lot of experience with them in the past couple of years due to a major health issue that popped up.

Remember that there is generally some sort of co-pay first, then deductibles must be met (obviously in this case, the deductible must be more than $440 some odd dollars), once the deductible is met for the fiscal year of YOUR insurance, then the insurance will pay, provided that the illness is not due to or resulting from a pre-existing condition where an additional premium has not been paid to cover the "said" pre-existing condition.

If you understand the EOB of your insurance you will get a LOT further than someone who is oblivious to it, especially when conversing with the customer service rep on the other end of the phone, table, etc.

I'd love to be an "Insured Advocate" if it actually paid somehow.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Yeah the co-pay for a doctor visit is $15. They denied the entire thing. Should just be a simple call them up (or have the human resource people do it) and get it taken off, but just was ironic that while I was posting on here I opened the mail and found the bill that basically is denying coverage of something that we called to make sure it was covered before she went.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
Yeah the co-pay for a doctor visit is $15. They denied the entire thing. Should just be a simple call them up (or have the human resource people do it) and get it taken off, but just was ironic that while I was posting on here I opened the mail and found the bill that basically is denying coverage of something that we called to make sure it was covered before she went.
Either there is a mix-up there, or when you were getting a pre-approval of a procedure, service, or goods things were unclear.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
Does the government have to have it's hands on everything? seriously...

EDIT: hello from DC btw :) :) :)
Wow! That's a loaded question. Who hasn't been molested by the government? Gee I remember, not all that long ago, I guess about 9 or 10 years ago. . . there were definitely some people coming forward about this.
 

jfgordon1

Well-Known Member

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
When considering the cost of a public option, one must take into account what one already pays in medical costs. The average decent medical insurance costs for a family of 4 is around 1,000.00 a month for the premiums, and co-pays of from 5-50 bucks a visit. Perscriptions run from 5.00-100.00 or more for specialized drugs. some operations are put off untill the patient is critical or dies. It is not a good system for the majority of average Americans, let alone the 50+ million un-insured. Now take into account that employers have been fitting arount 60% of the premium costs and you have the massive burden on business, encumbering them to the tune of 1800.00 per new GM automobile coming off the production line. Universal (Single payer) would free up these corporations from the burden and overall, cost less to the taxpayer than current costs. The only reason to not do it is to fill the coffers of the insurance giants. So all you naysayers, do you guys actually work for these assholes or are you just ignorant?
The merits of the proposed system are irrelevant if the funds are derived through extortion.
Why do people always skirt that detail when pushing "free" health care...do you beleive in initiating violence?
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Your radical individualist ideals have no place in modern society. Yes taxes are taken forcefully, I get it....Unfortunately they are necessary. We do not live in a perfect world, things are not black and white. Try to be a little pragmatic. either we can have voluntaryism, and you can keep all your money, and do nothing against your will, and we can have a shithole of a society....or we can have taxes, and use those taxes for the betterment of society.

Now if you want to argue tax reform, I'm right there with you, but getting rid of them altogether....well that seems a little naive.
Thank you at least aknowledging that you support government extortion.
Many never take the blinders off long enough to admit that fact.

My "radical individualism" does not prevent you or others from having your system, yet your system prevents me from being free from involuntary extortion. Sounds like I've got the moral high ground. How do you rationalize any different?

I'm the radical huh?
Do you support violence, theft and a nanny state ? Yes you do. THAT seems radical to me.

What other choices in my life would you leave to government? I haven't insisted you or anyone else do what I think is best, yet you readily know what's best for me and would back the use of force to get it. I want to leave you alone, all I ask is for you to reciprocate. That philosophy makes me the radical and naive?

Perhaps you will be the first to answer the question so many dodge...Tell me why do you belive it is acceptable to use force against somebody that harms nobody? Is governments bad behavior to be judged any different than yours or mine?
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
That's easy, the social contract. Order.
EPIC FAIL!

Your Social Contract requires that society secure individuals in their rights to life, liberty and property. The violation of these rights by society violates the Social Contract, and thus terminates any obligation by members of society to contribute to society.

You've also neglected to come up with justification for the use of force to extort money from people that are doing nothing criminal. You are attempting to defend a system of slavery, by saying that the fact that it exists justifies its existence.
 

hom36rown

Well-Known Member
EPIC LOSER(seriously. What are you? 16?)

Anyway...taxes are part of the social contract. The citizenry pays taxes in exchange for government services.

Violation of the social contract(not paying taxes, for example) warrants a police reaction.

You are attempting to defend a system of slavery, by saying that the fact that it exists justifies its existence.
I have no idea wth you are talking about here.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
EPIC LOSER(seriously. What are you? 16?)

Anyway...taxes are part of the social contract. The citizenry pays taxes in exchange for government services.

Violation of the social contract(not paying taxes, for example) warrants a police reaction.


I have no idea wth you are talking about here.
What happens when YOU as a citizen are paying taxes and the government isn't providing the services you've payed for? Do you get your taxes back? Can you stop paying them and say you don't want their services anymore? Can I take the services back (like I take things back to Wal-mart) and say I want a refund or exchange because it's broken or it doesn't work correctly?
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
EPIC LOSER(seriously. What are you? 16?)

Anyway...taxes are part of the social contract. The citizenry pays taxes in exchange for government services.

Violation of the social contract(not paying taxes, for example) warrants a police reaction.


I have no idea wth you are talking about here.
I'm stating that you can not justify the use of force by saying that the use of force justifies itself. Which is what you are arguing.

Your demonstrating an amazing amount of circular logic.

Of course, as the Social Contract does not grant the right for "society" (which is the sum of individuals) to steal from its members then the supposed Social Contract doesn't actually exist, having been broken by the violation of its central tenant of voluntary association.

Seeing as how it is no longer true that members of society are members of their own free will, but are coerced into it through extortion, fraud and force the social contract has been breached and is no longer enforceable.

When society decided to use force to enslave its members it destroyed the social contract.

Let me reiterate, that you are attempting to use the existence of a system of slavery for justification of itself. To state that any man is obligated to provide you with goods and services is to enslave them, and slavery is immoral. Something that I am sure you would agree with, even if you are incapable of performing the feat of critical thinking to reach that most logical of ends.
 
Top