Post by Snit Post by Clave Post by Klaus Schadenfreude Post by Snit
Post by Peter Franks Post by Snit Post by Peter Franks Post by Snit Post by Peter Franks Post by Snit
So kill it and move to universal health care... saving us billions.
Who pays for it?
Who pays for the savings? What?
Who pays for the universal health care?
We can split the savings.
Post by Peter Franks
Regardless of any savings,
there will be a net cost. Who pays for those costs?
Taxes. That is how the government works.
Taxes aren't universally applied (they are progressive), so it is no
longer universal healthcare.
Universal healthcare is a system where everyone pays equally for equal
What do you base that on? What country do you think does it that way?
Post by Peter Franks
What you are talking about is yet another entitlement program, paid for
by the rich. Please get your facts straight.
What we are talking about is joining the rest of the industrialized
world and investing in our future so we can compete better. What we are
talking about is having it so people are not a health crisis away from
Snit LOVES the idea of forcing everyone to buy "insurance."
Whereas you love the idea of taking it away from everyone.
I do love the idea that we all pay
Bzzzzzzzzt. There is your lie. You don't want us to ALL pay, you want
others to pay some.
If we all get the same benefit, then we should all pay the same amount.
That's equality, bro.
Propose a system based on equality, and then we can talk.
Post by Snit
into, say, military "insurance" --
where no matter if someone is rich or poor, they are protected by the
military. Same with the police. They should not be checking your bank
account or your level of donations or even your tax bracket to decide if
they help you. Same with firemen and with those who make the roads, even
the poor parts of town should have well maintained roads. I believe we
should have this for much of education and health care, and, sure, if we
want to call these things "taxes" or "insurance" or the like I am find
with it. I also believe this should go for safe food and water and air
-- we should all pay into a system where there is food and water and air
safety maintained -- and even for other consumer products. Even pencils.
This does not mean a rich person cannot buy an expensive pencil or a
poor person should be just handed pencils, but any pencil you buy on the
market should not have lead paint, for example. When you go to a
restaurant, whether low end or high, you should have government
oversight to reduce the chance you will get food poisoning.
What I do not believe in such "insurance" for is paying a wealthy man to
have meal. While I believe in safety nets, there is no moral basis for a
wealthy person to get more deducted from the cost of a single business
meal (with the government covering the rest) than a poor family of four
gets in SNAP benefits for a week. There is no reason to cover the cost
of entertainment for the rich, nor to allow them to have their UNEARNED
income be taxed at a lower rate than the poor man's EARNED income. There
is no reason to have "insurance", or government payments, to cover the
cost of labor. If McDonald's or Walmart want to hire labor that is fine
-- it is a good thing -- but they should cover the full cost, no forced
government "insurance" on all of us to cover that cost.
So Klaus is right to say I back some forms of "insurance", but I do not
back many of the ones those on the right side of the political fence do.
Can Klaus say the same? Will he denounce those forms of "insurance", the
use of our tax money to back such things? I doubt it.
Heck, I doubt he even understood what I wrote. :)