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

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Phydeaux -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 6:25:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

Why did Big Biz get into health care? I'm sure it was simply for profits and had nothing to do with externalities, like government.

Ask Nixon.


I just did. He didn't answer. So, I'll ask you, again.

Why did Big Biz get into health care?


Big Biziness got into health care because after WWII it was given tax preferential treatment by govt. 1$ in health benefits cost less than 1$ in increase salaries. Same reason that unions negotiated cadillac health plans.



tazzygirl -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:00:50 PM)

Kaiser wanted permission to expand. Nixon gave it to him/



DesideriScuri -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:04:10 PM)

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.





tazzygirl -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:10:52 PM)

quote:

Since you seem to miss the point - I'll spell it out for you. Even if it were free, I wouldn't sign up for it. Nor will I, until the penalties are so egregious that they force me to.

Or until I get seriously ill. In which case I'll quit my job and sign up for it.
You want to force obamacare on people .. congrats - be prepared for people to resist.


I am fully prepared for the industry ignorant among us to ignore both the benefits and the mandates.

Im even cool with you not signing up. They add it as a tax to the next year, and so on and so on and so on.

And, eventually, those people will become what you hated the most until the ACA went into effect.... the bottom sucker of the barrel who wants to simply get things for free.

Im even cool with that.

quote:

YOU decided, by the level of insurance you elected to carry.


I could carry the golden standard of insurance, the best policy available. IF they dont want to pay, they will find a way not to pay, as they often have. Insurance has long had a history of denial of care based upon cost analysis.

Research... do some.




Phydeaux -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:16:08 PM)


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.






Or as our founders put it so well:

"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, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."


As Jefferson said:

Thomas Jefferson in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.







Phydeaux -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:24:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Since you seem to miss the point - I'll spell it out for you. Even if it were free, I wouldn't sign up for it. Nor will I, until the penalties are so egregious that they force me to.

Or until I get seriously ill. In which case I'll quit my job and sign up for it.
You want to force obamacare on people .. congrats - be prepared for people to resist.


I am fully prepared for the industry ignorant among us to ignore both the benefits and the mandates.

Im even cool with you not signing up. They add it as a tax to the next year, and so on and so on and so on.

And, eventually, those people will become what you hated the most until the ACA went into effect.... the bottom sucker of the barrel who wants to simply get things for free.

Im even cool with that.

quote:

YOU decided, by the level of insurance you elected to carry.


I could carry the golden standard of insurance, the best policy available. IF they dont want to pay, they will find a way not to pay, as they often have. Insurance has long had a history of denial of care based upon cost analysis.

Research... do some.




I research hundreds of pages a week on this topic.
You talk about rude. Yet, because I categorically deny your position you make an assertion of ignorance. I think that far exceeds any rudeness of a typing error on my part.

And I would say to you that any government policy that provokes such strenuous objection is not healthy for the country. Feel free to think its a great idea. But if you can't persuade people, imposition by force isn't making any friends.



tazzygirl -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:29:05 PM)

quote:

I research hundreds of pages a week on this topic.
You talk about rude. Yet, because I categorically deny your position you make an assertion of ignorance. I think that far exceeds any rudeness of a typing error on my part.


I give what I get.

quote:

And I would say to you that any government policy that provokes such strenuous objection is not healthy for the country. Feel free to think its a great idea. But if you can't persuade people, imposition by force isn't making any friends.


Same thing that was said about Medicare. Note the ending there....

M-e-d-i-c-a-r-e



DesideriScuri -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 7:32:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

There is a massive difference between a right and a privilege. Privileges change when society changes them. A right, is a right, is a right. It's a right now. It was a right then. It's always a right.

So you are saying people had to fight for the privileged to vote, while others had it a given right.
That some people had to fight for the privileged to be free, while some had the right to claim them as property.
Nixon had a friend who wanted to take healthcare into a profit business. Nixon said "Sure".


>Smirk<

Past actions where rights weren't acknowledged isn't proof that a right didn't exist. Btw, government didn't give anyone a right to vote. Government protected people's right to vote.

Big Biz started offering its employees health insurance to give incentive to gain employees. This happened around WWII. Why would they have to resort to offering a perk to gain employees? Because Big Gov put wage and price controls in place, employers had to get creative to get the employees they wanted.




tazzygirl -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 8:14:52 PM)

Ya know, its amusing that no one remembers what Truman proposed, which was decried as socialism then too.

Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can … the reason he can do it … I had Edgar Kaiser come in … talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because …”

President Nixon: [Unclear.]

Ehrlichman: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.”

The beginning of for profit HMO's.

quote:

Past actions where rights weren't acknowledged isn't proof that a right didn't exist. Btw, government didn't give anyone a right to vote. Government protected people's right to vote.


Oh then do please tell me what rights you speak of as not being subjective to the people or society.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 10:55:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Ya know, its amusing that no one remembers what Truman proposed, which was decried as socialism then too.
Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can … the reason he can do it … I had Edgar Kaiser come in … talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because …”
President Nixon: [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.”
The beginning of for profit HMO's.
quote:

Past actions where rights weren't acknowledged isn't proof that a right didn't exist. Btw, government didn't give anyone a right to vote. Government protected people's right to vote.

Oh then do please tell me what rights you speak of as not being subjective to the people or society.


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.





tazzygirl -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/27/2013 11:08:23 PM)

Property can be taken away. No one is guaranteed property. And if you own it, it can be taken away.

Life can be taken away.

Liberty can and has been taken away.

Persuit of happiness is far too subjective to consider it a right in itself. What makes one person happy everyone else may say "NO way!"

All these things are a right given depending on how you look at it.

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.


Business got into health care because the government wouldnt provide it themselves and the unions saw it as a way to lure more desirable talent and keep them... in a backwards effect, they locked people into those positions, creating a form of slavery.



joether -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 1:01:14 AM)

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.







tweakabelle -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 4:04:52 AM)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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



Politesub53 -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 4:27:29 AM)


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.



Politesub53 -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 4:32:58 AM)


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 ?



leonine -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 5:24:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Ya know, its amusing that no one remembers what Truman proposed, which was decried as socialism then too.
Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can … the reason he can do it … I had Edgar Kaiser come in … talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because …”
President Nixon: [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.”
The beginning of for profit HMO's.
quote:

Past actions where rights weren't acknowledged isn't proof that a right didn't exist. Btw, government didn't give anyone a right to vote. Government protected people's right to vote.

Oh then do please tell me what rights you speak of as not being subjective to the people or society.


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.

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.
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.



tweakabelle -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 5:31:10 AM)

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

Indeed. There it is in black and white, making a mockery of the entire rights vs entitlements vs perk argument too.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 6:01:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Property can be taken away. No one is guaranteed property. And if you own it, it can be taken away.


True. I meant the right to own property. Did you read the On Property thread?

quote:

Life can be taken away.


Obviously, it can be taken away, but is it okay to do so? Typically, the only time it's "okay" to take someone's live away (ignoring war and military activities) is when a person has infringed on another's rights to the point where the penalty is death. It's not okay for you to walk next door and kill your neighbor.

quote:

Liberty can and has been taken away.


Again, it's not taken away just because. It's taken away, typically, as a penalty for infringing on another's rights.

quote:

Persuit of happiness is far too subjective to consider it a right in itself. What makes one person happy everyone else may say "NO way!"


And that right there is why we have our right to the pursuit of happiness. We have the right to the pursuit of our own happiness. I don't have to pursue what would make you happy, unless I decided it would also make me happy. We, also, don't have the right to be happy. We make our own decisions as to the pursuit of that happiness.

quote:

All these things are a right given depending on how you look at it.


All these things are protected. Do you disagree with the Declaration of Independence? Your arguments sure sound like you do.

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.

Business got into health care because the government wouldnt provide it themselves and the unions saw it as a way to lure more desirable talent and keep them... in a backwards effect, they locked people into those positions, creating a form of slavery.


Business got into it because they couldn't attract talent through wages. They had to get around wage controls put in place by the Federal Government. That's why businesses started offering benefits outside of wages.



mnottertail -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 6:16:19 AM)

Business got into it during WWII as added bennies to attract workers from a small job pool.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Suing over not wanting to pay $18/month for health insurance! (10/28/2013 6:19:26 AM)

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?


The local police force is a militia? How can you type that shit without laughing your ass off?!?

Are you making the claim that there is no way that we'd have these things without the Federal Government providing them?

quote:

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.....


It doesn't state that. It doesn't have to state that. The US Constitution and the Federalist Papers are not the source of what we can and can not do.

[quoe]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.

We were wrong to have considered black men as slaves. Oddly enough, there was a provision in the US Constitution aimed at ending the slave trade.

That blacks and women didn't have the right to vote was wrong as we see it now. It's also been changed, via the US Constitution, too. Not surprisingly, the US Constitution states that the right to vote may not be infringed upon for various reasons. It doesn't state that women have the right to vote, that blacks have the right to vote, or that people over the age of 18 have the right to vote. It states that the right to vote may not be infringed (that is, the right exists and can't be taken away because of certain characteristics). Where does it state that a white male has the right to vote? Where does it state that an Asian, Hispanic, etc. male has the right vote?

It sure seems to me that the TSA is skirting the 4th Amendment.

The US Constitution was a framework of ideas that were to be the basis of the Federal Government. All authorities the Federal Government has (according to the Constitution) were granted to it. That means, it was given the authority. Where was that authority before there was the Federal Government? How was it that the Federal Government was given an authority if that authority didn't already exist? How does your local government get it's authority to do anything it does?

From the People. That's where. Government is a construct of the People. It derives its "just powers from the consent of the governed." Recognize that phrase?



Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875