Universal Health Care in the US. Yea or Nea?

[Francesca R]

So we give up then?

What else are you doing? Are you hollering down the phone at them to squelch down on moochers? They are probably telling you they are very good at that. However, Nobel award winning scholarship says that they can't. Of course they don't want to lose non-risky people like you because you're required in as large numbers as possible to pony up the same as the moochers yet take out less than them, so they are going to tell you not to worry about it to keep you sweet.

Are you going to try to tell me that you can quality assure all your health insurance policies as having moocher-free pools? I am not going to believe you if you do, and will refer you to the links I posted previously (today)

So anyway, you continue to pay for moochers, you have paid a bit more since your last post. What's your solution? These people are leeching off you. Darn parasites. Going to cancel the insurance and pay as you use?

 

[ponderingturtle]

exactly, so lets get rid of them. Personal responsibility means people who are supposed to keep track of the moochers need to do a better job too.

Define the difference between a moocher and someone who needs the support.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

How?

Well, I have to say I don't have all of the answers off of the top of my head, but the insurance companies make a gajillion dollars a year. It seems it would be beneficial for them to find a non-invasive way of holding their clients accountable. I still think there is a difference between someone saying they haven't smoked in 5 years instead of four to get on insurance, and someone who lies about being married so they don't have to pay for medical at all.

 

[ponderingturtle]

So we give up then? Believe me, this mooching frame of mind spreads. I'm sure people in here mean well, but how many of you grew up around people that get free medical care and entitlements? .

The US has free medical care. Emergency rooms need to treat emergency patients under force of law, regardless of the patients ability to pay.

Now if you want them to throw the moochers out into the street say so.

 

[Random]

YOU THINK! Thankfully, just because YOU think something doesn't make it so. Do you realize you are saying "moochers are everywhere, so lets just let them all get away with it!" NO. I don't accept that. The reason opur system isn't working how it is supposed to is because people cheat it.

Governments and charities have been trying to find a way to keep moochers out while maintaining services to the deserving since the dawn of time. Still haven’t been able to figure it out. You either have to accept that moochers are going to get benefits or that truly deserving people will not get help. Probably a bit of both. That happy middle ground where the truly needy get help and the deadbeats get nothing simply doesn’t exist.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Define the difference between a moocher and someone who needs the support.

Someone who needs support= a person who is disabled, or can't work, or too poor, to afford medical insurance or doctor care on their own. This person either still contributes, or would contribute if physically possible.

Moocher= someone who can afford insurance but is still taking free care and not contributing, just because they can.

Let's see what I got wrong.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Now if you want them to throw the moochers out into the street say so.

SO!

 

[Lonewulf]

Well, I have to say I don't have all of the answers off of the top of my head, but the insurance companies make a gajillion dollars a year. It seems it would be beneficial for them to find a non-invasive way of holding their clients accountable. I still think there is a difference between someone saying they haven't smoked in 5 years instead of four to get on insurance, and someone who lies about being married so they don't have to pay for medical at all.

You DO realize there are legal restrictions on what information a business can pull on you... don't you?

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Governments and charities have been trying to find a way to keep moochers out while maintaining services to the deserving since the dawn of time. Still haven’t been able to figure it out. You either have to accept that moochers are going to get benefits or that truly deserving people will not get help. Probably a bit of both. That happy middle ground where the truly needy get help and the deadbeats get nothing simply doesn’t exist.

Some do better than others and I'm not asking for a perfect system, just one that is more accountable. There are also other ways to cut our HC cost besides ditching the moochers.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Someone who needs support= a person who is disabled, or can't work, or too poor, to afford medical insurance or doctor care on their own. This person either still contributes, or would contribute if physically possible.

Moocher= someone who can afford insurance but is still taking free care and not contributing, just because they can.

Let's see what I got wrong.

Define afford. What percentage of income does it mean someone can afford it, what about expenses, what should be forgone to afford insurance.

But you do want the moochers thrown out to die in the streets right?

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

You DO realize there are legal restrictions on what information a business can pull on you... don't you?

Of course, but is a marriage lic. one of the documents? I don't see why, if so.

 

[Lonewulf]

Of course, but is a marriage lic. one of the documents? I don't see why, if so.

I fail to see why a marriage license is the only variable to consider.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Define afford. What percentage of income does it mean someone can afford it, what about expenses, what should be forgone to afford insurance

Again, there are a bunch of smarter people out there to figure out what afford means to a specific income bracket. I'd even be happy if they set up medical payment plans for people like they do here in SA. To answer your question, I don't know what the threshold would be for people to contribute, but something is better than nothing.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

I fail to see why a marriage license is the only variable to consider.

It's not, but if medicaid would check the marriage license of the woman at work they would see she is married and they wouldn't be giving her assistance at all. That was just a quick example from my previous post.

Okay, I'm trying my best to answer all of the questions I'm being asked but I want to ask just a couple. I might have to wait just a sec though, brb.

 

[Darat]

So we give up then? Believe me, this mooching frame of mind spreads. I'm sure people in here mean well, but how many of you grew up around people that get free medical care and entitlements? I

...snip...

Unless we have some very privileged Brits posting in this thread every single one of us will have grown-up and live today with and among people who get "free medical care and entitlements".

And do you know what - whilst we do have a growing obesity problem that will put additional strain on our universal health system it is not as bad as the obesity problem that the USA already has that seems to be such a concern for you. Think through what I have just said - in a country that has free medical cover for all and much more generous welfare system our "self inflicted" health problem is not as bad as yours.... In other words yet another of your reasons for not wanting a universal health care system is shown to be simply wrong.

 

[Lonewulf]

It's not, but if medicaid would check the marriage license of the woman at work they would see she is married and they wouldn't be giving her assistance at all.

lol wut


Wow. That's just... wow.

After that, I'm not sure if I could ever take you seriously again.

 

[Francesca R]

I'm not asking for a perfect system, just one that is more accountable.

Then you should prefer a universal system over a company-wide one, and over a completely voluntary one. Because the proportion of moochers in it is likely to be lower due to the reduction in selection bias. And supportive evidence for that can be found in the observation that they cost you less.

Er, . . . just like people have been saying.

Ignorance is an emptier wallet.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

What else are you doing? Are you hollering down the phone at them to squelch down on moochers? They are probably telling you they are very good at that. However, Nobel award winning scholarship says that they can't. Of course they don't want to lose non-risky people like you because you're required in as large numbers as possible to pony up the same as the moochers yet take out less than them, so they are going to tell you not to worry about it to keep you sweet.

Are you going to try to tell me that you can quality assure all your health insurance policies as having moocher-free pools? I am not going to believe you if you do, and will refer you to the links I posted previously (today)

So anyway, you continue to pay for moochers, you have paid a bit more since your last post. What's your solution? These people are leeching off you. Darn parasites. Going to cancel the insurance and pay as you use?

I'm not expecting perfection. I would be happy if we could cut costs down to the per capita average. I can also take more responsibility by reporting abuses in the system (thats the hard part) that I see. Once we get a better mindset going, people will realize that their friends/relatives cheating the system costs us all more, they'll be more likely to report abuses.

 

[Francesca R]

I would be happy if we could cut costs down to the per capita average.

More likely if you follow post 517.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

lol wut


Wow. That's just... wow.

After that, I'm not sure if I could ever take you seriously again.

Somewhere our lines got crossed. I'm talking about the situation with a co-worker who is cheating our system for free medical care by claiming she isn't married. I suggested that if someone would just check for a marriage lic. they could see she is obviously lying and that her and her husband can afford it.

Taking me seriously is something even I avoid.