Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:OH GREAT, eliminate one of the things that makes the bill pay for itself....
Also, you DO realize (no, you don't... because you have denied this in the past ) that this was one way of not passing medical costs onto the rest of us. For someone who goes berserk over the possibility of paying less than a penny for women’s care, you are strangely on the other side of this one!
Considering the bill never paid for itself since it's passing, I don't know how you care about whether or not it's paid for. Furthermore, how does increasing taxes on medical devices lower the prices of health care? Every single business tax is passed on to the consumer or cut from other business spending (this specific one will directly harm medical device R&D).
Typical.. the bill has not been fully implemented, was not projected to pay for itself until a few years after its full implementation, for reasons already discussed and you seem to thing the argument "its not yet paid for" has validity, and further that its just fine that one of the provisions that would add money to the budget was removed.
A cynic might see a pattern there...
Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:If that really were the issue, then your demand would be to insert a co-pay, NOT to demand that employers get the right to choose.
I have demanded that as well.
No, that's a copout. If that is your argument, then that is your ONLY demand... the rest is just garbage or, yes, denying women the right to healthcare coverage.
Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:This claim, again! Seriously, you just got through saying that you know its not free….. and now you are claiming that you are paying for “other people’s healthcare!’
No, you pay for your insurance. I pay for my insurance. I realize you like to ignore the purpose of insurance, but stop pretending this is about a crusade of payment instead of just a backdoor attempt to control women’s ability to get care they need.
Every person who gets a governmental subsidy to buy their insurance is not paying for their own insurance. Every person who gets coverage through the major expansion in Medicaid is not paying for their own insurance. So no, it's a lie the every person is only paying for their own insurance. Taxes are meant to pay for governmental services, not passing money to other people.
No dice. The debate here is specifically over women’s health care, and whether employers can select this specific coverage to exclude, not providing care for the indigent. That is a different issue.
No, but go on trying to convince yourself that.Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh brother! There is nothing consistant or honest about any of your views. Just face it. Your real objection is you don’t like women taking birth control or getting other services. The rest is just a back-pedaled attempt at justifying your views.
If I didn't like women taking birth control, we wouldn't be using it. I think it's very wise to use birth control....I think it's very unwise to expect someone else to pay for it.
You oppose this because of misguided ideas about birth control and sex, not to mention women’s health. Several folks have tried to educate you, but you prefer ignorance.
However your desire to remain ignorant does not translate into a right to tell people outside of your immediate family what medication they should and should not have.
And again, “paying for other people’s issues” is precisely what insurance is about. I don’t see you raising objections to paying for people’s insulin. Same principle.
Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:YOU are not paying for my or anyone else’s healthcare. You ARE paying for insurance. The way insurance works is that money gets pooled so that when you really need something incredibly expensive, its there for you. To claim it is somehow “abusive” because you stay healthy is not “free marketism”, its stupidity. Might as well cry because your house didn’t burn down!
Except that I'm paying for my insurance AND providing subsidies for other people to buy insurance. So yes, that IS paying for someone else's healthcare.
No, not in this case. You are buying your own insurance. ALL insurance is about “providing subsidies” to people who need more care. You are not paying one iota more because birth control is covered under your policy than if it were not. In fact, there is a good chance that use of birth control is keeping your health care costs down, since raising a baby and taking time off from work cost far more than a few pills (even if the more expensive type) Women who need it, however WILL be paying more. Your argument plain and simply FAILS.
Right now, you and your family are apparently not ones who have a lot of insurance claims. You can sulk and continue to pretend this is some big plot or you can be thankful that you have your health AND that should you get sick or seriously injured, the insurance will still be there…
OH, yeah, and while you are about it, (heaven forbid, but..) if you happen to have a disabled child or get into a serious accident, then you and your family will continue to receive coverage under your insurance plan, which they would not if the prior rules had remained in force.