Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance!


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:26:50 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
. Do you believe a person has a right to receive something they can't pay for, based solely on need? That is, they can demand it be provided to them without any promise of reimbursement for the service or product based solely on need?

You seem to regard healthcare on a par with any other service provided or commodity traded.


It is something that has to be produced, just like other services provided and commodities traded.

quote:

Healthcare is unique as the goal of healthcare is to save lives, cure illnesses and promote well being. Unlike any other industry where the goal is to make money by providing a service or supplying a commodity, cost is a factor in healthcare, not the raison d'etre.


Lots of things have saving lives as it's goals. There has to be a need or a desire for a commodity or service before a profit can be made in producing it. Can you walk into your local grocery store and take whatever you want for food without paying for it?

quote:

Unlike other industries, healthcare decisions must be made using the best interests of the patient as the primary criterion, not profit. Unless this unique aspect of healthcare is taken into account, it is impossible to accurately assess cost factors, whether healthcare a right or an entitlement or a privilege, or make good decisions about healthcare as an industry.
Treating healthcare as an industry like any other inevitably ends with differing levels of healthcare being offered on the basis of affordability or level of insurance cover. Another inevitability is that people die due to inadequate healthcare, as they have been dying in the US at the rate of c50,000 annually.


Back the 50k number again, eh? I didn't realize the "premature" question had been answered to everyone's acceptance.

quote:

You may be comfortable with a death rate of this proportion, or medically forced bankruptcies, or a rich person's child getting first class healthcare while your child goes without. I am not, I regard that as primitive, barbaric and indefensible.
Paradoxically enough, even if healthcare system design decisions are made solely on financial grounds, a universal scheme still comes out as far superior to a private one. It delivers far better healthcare outcomes for far less cost than the antiquated, barbaric pre-Obamacare system the US had to endure until recently.


Show me the change in costs pre-/post- national health care. Pick a country that is currently using a national health care system. Show me. This isn't the first time I've asked on these boards.

quote:

It really is a no-brainer. If you removed your ideological blinkers for a moment, you would see that too.


I'm not wearing blinders, tweak.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 181
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:33:02 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 10/28/2013 6:34:23 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 182
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:39:23 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Bingo, Polite! There is no right to a standing army. Authority was granted to government (by the People) to raise a standing army.
Police force, justice system and all the civil works are all reasons we have a government, but, not a single one of those things is an actual right.

I am glad you agree. Do you view the Constitution as sacrosanct or something that can change as the world moves on ? I am asking this for one reason, many Americans view the right to bear arms as sacrosanct, yet this is something granted by the Government and not a natural right. Thats if there ever can be anything as a natural right, as against what most would call human rights.


The right to bear arms is not provided by the US Constitution. It is a specific mention of a right of the People that government is not allowed to infringe on. Big difference.

Yes, the US Constitution can change, but it's only in one manner; Amendment. A changing in the meaning of a word isn't a proper method of changing the US Constitution, though. A big part of the issue is in that.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 183
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:43:05 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The right to Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, Property, etc. You know, things that don't require someone else provide? If you have a right to something someone else provides, how is the provider not a "slave" to the owner of the right?
Business got into providing health insurance because of Government intrusion into their ability to lure talent. It was a perk. It always has been a perk.

Here is where we differ. What do you think the right to life is, if not healthcare ?


The right to life isn't that we have the right to live to some age. It's that our life can't be taken from us. Health care is a product that extends our life. It doesn't provide life where none exists. It combats disease states.

Since it has to be produced, if you aren't producing it yourself, someone else has to. If you have a right to that which they produce, aren't there a sort of slave to your right?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 184
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:49:21 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: leonine
The right to Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, Property, etc. You know, things that don't require someone else provide? If you have a right to something someone else provides, how is the provider not a "slave" to the owner of the right?
This makes no sense. "Rights" are not something that just happens to you like the colour of your skin, or something that you can count on the Tooth Fairy to bring. The Founding Fathers had just fought a war for liberty, so they knew damn well it wasn't something that they could just expect to happen. They wrote those in as things that the new nation was expected to provide.

How do you get that from the following passage?
    quote:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,


The truths are self-evident. That means they exist in themselves, not because of government.

Government doesn't provide the right, but secures it.

quote:

A right is something you should be able to expect to have provided. That's what it means. If you only get it because you're rich enough to buy it or tough enough to fight for it, then either it's not a right, or you're being deprived of your rights.


Wrong. If you have to rely on government to provide it, it's a privilege, not a right. Government is granted authority from the people. The people don't get their authority from government.

quote:

quote:

Business got into providing health insurance because of Government intrusion into their ability to lure talent. It was a perk. It always has been a perk.

If you honestly believe that being healed when you're wounded or sick is a "perk," we're so far apart that I can't even understand what planet you live on, I'm just glad I don't have to live there.


You are equating health care to health insurance. Health insurance is a way to finance health care. Health insurance is not health care. Employers providing a way to finance health care for their employees is most definitely a perk.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to leonine)
Profile   Post #: 185
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 6:50:34 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?


The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 186
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 10:07:24 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Show me the change in costs pre-/post- national health care.

Pre socialized medicine contains profit as a function of cost.
Socialized medicine does not.
That would seem prima facia evidence of lower cost with socialized medicine, for anyone with a three digit iq and a pulse.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 187
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 10:12:25 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		This makes no sense. "Rights" are not something that just happens to you like the colour of your skin,

Yes they are. Rights are inalienable...just like my skin color.



or something that you can count on the Tooth Fairy to bring. The Founding Fathers had just fought a war

Really???which one of them had a musket in his hand with "incoming mail" on the way?


for liberty, so they knew damn well it wasn't something that they could just expect to happen. They wrote those in as things that the new nation was expected to provide.

Now you are saying that the government provides us our rights?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 188
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 10:18:48 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
"Rights" are not something that just happens to you like the colour of your skin, or something that you can count on the Tooth Fairy to bring. The Founding Fathers had just fought a war for liberty, so they knew damn well it wasn't something that they could just expect to happen. They wrote those in as things that the new nation was expected to provide.

The right to bear arms is not provided by the US Constitution. It is a specific mention of a right of the People that government is not allowed to infringe on. Big difference.

Speaking out of both sides of ones mouth must hurt.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 189
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 10:20:37 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?


The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.




I will ask for proof of the claim.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 190
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 10:26:21 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
You are equating health care to health insurance.

You are taking the asanine position that health care can exist without health insurance. While it may exist for some single digit percentage of the population it does not affect this discussion and to try to inject such a mindnumbingly stupid concept into this discussion is not productive.


Health insurance is a way to finance health care.

No shit!


Health insurance is not health care.

Without health insurance there is no meaningful health care



Employers providing a way to finance health care for their employees is most definitely a perk.

If one defines "perk" as part of ones compensation for services rendered. If it is not then it may be withdrawn at will. So which is it perk or compensation?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 191
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 12:32:36 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		Well defended Desi

That was, frankly brilliant.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 192
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 1:14:29 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Tazzy hadn't responded yet.
Your agreement with leonine's description certainly does show that I wasn't putting words into your mouth at all.
Do you believe a person has a right to receive something they can't pay for, based solely on need? That is, they can demand it be provided to them without any promise of reimbursement for the service or product based solely on need?

I am guessing you dont include the right to have a standing army ready to protect your nation, or an efficient police force, or justice sytem, or civil works such as transport, water and sewage. None of which your tax even begins to cover.


Bingo, Polite! There is no right to a standing army. Authority was granted to government (by the People) to raise a standing army.

Police force, justice system and all the civil works are all reasons we have a government, but, not a single one of those things is an actual right.


Actually 'police force', and 'justice system' are rights covered under the 2nd Amendment. "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary for the SECURITY of a FREE STATE,..." Ever heard of that line? Yeah its the first half of the amendment that 99.99999999% of conservatives forget exists. Yeah, the founding fathers didn't have much use for six or eight lane highways back in the late 18th century. How well could the USA operated without highways in 2013, DS? How do canals, roads, rail, and airports help the economy in the nation, DS? How about if we just got rid of them; how well would the country run in the next ten years?

As the United States rose up, many of the ideas and concepts of the founding fathers simply never explained how to approach different situations. They said that future generations of Americans would know how best to keep the nation going. Or are you one of those 'limited intelligence and wisdom folks that 'unless its spelled out' we cant do it' types? Go find me in the US Constitution or the Federalist Papers were it states you can be on the internet, DS.....

The US Government evolved from its starting point. If you have a problem with that, then its safe to say you have a problem with every company, military organization, charity, and religious group in America. They all started with meager resources and flourished with time. The sort of logistical frame work they started is simply not the same as the current incarnations. Over time, rules, ideas, and events changed the entity. Right now, we do not consider black people as slaves, do we? Or that women are not allowed to vote? Or that we can just get on an airline without anyone checking us or our luggage? These are all pivotal moments in US History that the founding fathers could never have predicted. So the concept of our government changed.





You seriously underestimate the founding fathers.

While the founding fathers did not have I-95 - they understood the necessity of trade, and so made provision for the regulation of trade between the states. It is under the framework they created that things like the interstate highway system were created.

And while they didn't forsee women voting, they did put in place a mechanism to allow the modification of the constitution.

what they crafted was do so well that in 200 years we have only seen fit to amend it a couple of dozen times.

As for slavery - it was an issue they fully understood but could not solve - and in this case they believed the creation of the country was more important. And this too, eventually was resolved and ratified into the constitution.

The constitution doesn't concern itself with the internet, or the Apollo program.
Rather, it is a framework for how we govern ourselves. What things (internet, Apollo program) the government can do; and what things it can't. What things are left to the states, and what things fall upon the people - or the federal government.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 193
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 1:36:43 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.

I will ask for proof of the claim.


No proof needed. You've participated on enough of these threads to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the claim is out there.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 194
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 2:44:11 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Since it has to be produced, if you aren't producing it yourself, someone else has to. If you have a right to that which they produce, aren't there a sort of slave to your right?

Of course you are a slave to my rights. Just as I am a slave to your rights. Any chance we could actually have a discussion instead of this mindnumbingly stupid rhetoric?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 195
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 2:51:33 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.

I will ask for proof of the claim.


No proof needed. You've participated on enough of these threads to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the claim is out there.





No, I do not and have never seen that claim, I believe it is a nutsacker derail and has nothing to do with the $18 a month.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 196
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 3:33:27 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.

I will ask for proof of the claim.

No proof needed. You've participated on enough of these threads to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the claim is out there.

No, I do not and have never seen that claim, I believe it is a nutsacker derail and has nothing to do with the $18 a month.


You haven't participated in enough threads about the US health care system to see the claims that our costs are twice what other countries are because we haven't nationalized the system here?

You lie.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 197
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 3:39:33 PM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.

I will ask for proof of the claim.

No proof needed. You've participated on enough of these threads to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the claim is out there.

No, I do not and have never seen that claim, I believe it is a nutsacker derail and has nothing to do with the $18 a month.


You haven't participated in enough threads about the US health care system to see the claims that our costs are twice what other countries are because we haven't nationalized the system here?

You lie.



Adding nutsackerisms and participating are not synonymous

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 198
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 3:50:17 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
what does the change in pre and post do for you? Isn't that as meaningful as pre and post percentages of GDP in medicare part D? I mean if you have asked it repeatedly, why don't you do your own homework to disparage your own strawmen?

The claim is made by others. I'm asking for proof.

I will ask for proof of the claim.

No proof needed. You've participated on enough of these threads to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the claim is out there.

No, I do not and have never seen that claim, I believe it is a nutsacker derail and has nothing to do with the $18 a month.

You haven't participated in enough threads about the US health care system to see the claims that our costs are twice what other countries are because we haven't nationalized the system here?
You lie.

Adding nutsackerisms and participating are not synonymous


You don't lie.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 199
RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health ... - 10/28/2013 5:19:44 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Here is where we differ. What do you think the right to life is, if not healthcare ?


The right to life isn't that we have the right to live to some age. It's that our life can't be taken from us. Health care is a product that extends our life. It doesn't provide life where none exists. It combats disease states.

Since it has to be produced, if you aren't producing it yourself, someone else has to. If you have a right to that which they produce, aren't there a sort of slave to your right?




A slave to medicene, thats an asinine suggestion. As for the right to life, your reply is somewhat missing the point. A government making it law your life can not be taken from you, and a government making a law that you are entitled to healthcare, is still a government making a law.

As for the other post about the right to bear arms, of course its provided by the Constitution, since its provided by the same Government that wrote the Constitution and the defining amendment. Thats hardly difficult to follow.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 200
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109