California Budget

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazio

Please quit spouting this bull$hit


and also this B.S.




You also receive an exuberant bill the emergency room services!!!

I guess you didn't read this part of the eligibility requirements,
or you don't want to face the truth. Let me sum this up for you



You have to sell real property and be nearly broke in order to qualify

Regardless whether you think this is an equitable deal or not,
it is not the same as Euro basic health insurance, which is what you stated earlier

---

Aparently you didn't see the part about applying for Medicaid if you have high medical bill which you can not pay. I have no problem with people having to seel real property and be nearly broke in order to qualify. If you have enough money for real property then you have enough money to plan ahead and get insurance (it is not that expensive, even full private, and with tax breaks it would be even more affordable). And if you're nearly broke ... well that's the whole point of the program.

What BS am I spouting? I have two points. Number 1 is that 85% of Americans have healthcare, why screw their system up? The second point is that there is a system in place that takes care of the other 15%. That system is a mess, let's fix it before we screw around with the healthcare of the MAJORITY of Americans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

What kind of logic is this?!

1) If everyone has to pay than everyone sacrifices some of their income, not only you! :rolleyes:

2) BTW maybe you should be in their shoes and than we'll see what line you will tow around here, if you will still afford an internet connection, not to mention having a computer.

---

1) That is the issue here. 100% of people paying taxes (about 50% of the population) already pay into a broken healthcare system, Medicare/Medicaid, that takes care of about 15% of the population. So now you are talking about adding the other 85% of the population into that system. How on earth does 50% of the population pay for 100% of the population to have healthcare? And do it without sacrificing all the other stuff we are already paying for? And doing all this without raising taxes on anyone making less that $250,000 a year? Go crunch those numbers and get back to me with a workable plan.

2) So now I'm to be punished for being successfull and planning ahead? You don't lift anyone up by tearing people down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

What BS am I spouting?

---

Must I post it again?
I stated it precisely in post number 75
If you continue to imply Medicaid = health insurance in the manner you had before you lost your job
I will continue to call Bull$hit.
Considering you have since-wise qualified it. I think we have both made our points :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazio

Must I post it again?
I stated it precisely in post number 75
If you continue to imply Medicaid = health insurance in the manner you had before you lost your job
I will continue to call Bull$hit.
Considering you have since-wise qualified it. I think we have both made our points :)

---

I never once intended to say that Medicaid was equal to health insurance that you may have had before you lost your job. If I implied that, I'm sorry for the confusion.

I've been trying to say that there is a "safety net" of sorts. It is a very flawed system that NEEDS to be fixed. But there is no one in the US that can not recieve needed medical treatment. That is all I've been trying to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

I never once intended to say that Medicaid was equal to health insurance that you may have had before you lost your job. If I implied that, I'm sorry for the confusion.

I've been trying to say that there is a "safety net" of sorts. It is a very flawed system that NEEDS to be fixed. But there is no one in the US that can not recieve needed medical treatment. That is all I've been trying to say.

---

You'll never get an arguement from me about our health care system needing to be fixed! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazio

You'll never get an arguement from me about our health care system needing to be fixed! :up:

---

I don't think ANYONE would argue that something needs to be done. It's just the methods proposed that are debatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

What kind of logic is this?!
If everyone has to pay than everyone sacrifices some of their income, not only you! :rolleyes:

BTW maybe you should be in their shoes and than we'll see what line you will tow around here, if you will still afford an internet connection, not to mention having a computer.

---

If everyone has to pay. But in reality, tax brackets (percentage of taxes paid) is based on income level. So at some point, many people pay no income taxes at all, to the state or federal government. As your income level increases and/or deductions and credits decrease, you pay a higher percentage.

But this form of taxation fails in several areas. You could be a wealthy person, owning property in the way of homes, vehicles, etc, but also show (for taxable purposes) a low income and thus be subject to very little in taxes.

As an example, I own my home, all our vehicles, and everything in them outright. Due to the fact that we have nothing but basic living expenses, at the time my income is not very high. Why should people still working harder or more hours to get ahead pay for my insurance (or a larger portion than I would pay) if I'm not first willing to either get a higher paying job or take a loan against my home or property to pay my bills or insurance myself?

Nor should I pay more in taxes to pay for insurance for someone who has chosen to not work when they are capable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Why should people still working harder or more hours to get ahead pay for my insurance (or a larger portion than I would pay) if I'm not first willing to either get a higher paying job or take a loan against my home or property to pay my bills or insurance myself?

---

Not everyone can get a higher paying job, even if they wanted to. Why should you depart from the property you have already earned while at the same paid high taxes just because you happen to have a bad patch in your life at the moment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Nor should I pay more in taxes to pay for insurance for someone who has chosen to not work when they are capable.

---

In June 2009, about 500,000 people more we unemployed in the US and the unemployment rate was 9.5%:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Do you think that all those half a million people just chose to quit their jobs? I know the unemployment rate in the US has been below 5% sometimes. Have the Americans become more lazy?

Insurances are like taxes in the way that every insurance holder pays, but some pay more than they receive. However, private insurance companies are supposed to make profit for the owners, so it's actually more expensive for you than non-profit taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

Not everyone can get a higher paying job, even if they wanted to. Why should you depart from the property you have already earned while at the same paid high taxes just because you happen to have a bad patch in your life at the moment?



In June 2009, about 500,000 people more we unemployed in the US and the unemployment rate was 9.5%:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Do you think that all those half a million people just chose to quit their jobs? I know the unemployment rate in the US has been below 5% sometimes. Have the Americans become more lazy?

---

Eki try to reason, exchanging comments back and forth with somebody who write empty-headed nonsense such as above is silly.

For so many on these forums from the USA, everything is a) very simple and b) always the individual's fault.

So when say GM's executives decide to build unsalable junk, and thousands are laid off in a locality, naturally if they cared, they could "get a higher paying job".
When Finacial speculators and bandits plunder companies, risk hundrds of billions of other people's money on risky ventures---and make salaries of tens of millions per year and drive the Investment banking system to the edge of collaspe and credit freezes, causing millions to lose their jobs, well those out of work, according to the economic geniuses here, should just "get a loan" (at some extortionate rate of interest).

Simple! See?
If they don't "get a higher paying job" or get a loan, then it's their fault.

Impeccable thinking.

Can't you see?

What would happen if everybody contributed some money to a collective Insurance pool for Unemployment, or retraining?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

What would happen if everybody contributed some money to a collective Insurance pool for Unemployment, or retraining?

---

We do. If you are employed and have insurance, you pay for something called COBRA. That program extends some bennifits for people in "transtion" between jobs. As tax payers we also contribute to Medicare/Medicaid which a lot of unemployed people can qualify for. And there are numerous private and government run retraining programs out there. How much more must I pay to give you a warm and fuzzy feeling that "we're all doing our part"?

I really don't think that anyone would argue against some sort of safety net programs. At least I wouldn't. What I do have a problem with is paying for the 6-10 million people that have a job, can afford health insurance, and choose not to. We do still have some freedoms in this country, and one of those freedoms is the freedom to fail. And I'm sorry, maybe I'm heartless or whatever, but if you fail there needs to be consequences. If there are no consequences for failure then there is no motivation to try something better or different.