Phatscotty wrote: PLAYER57832 wrote:Phatscotty wrote:radiojake wrote:
I see, freedom is about having an advantageous position within the economic structure's hierarchy - thanks for sharing.
nope. Universal health care is tyranny, and freedom is the opposite of tyranny.
I see, ensuring everyone can go to the doctor when they are sick is "tyranny"?
Interesting definition.. that.
oh hi Player. no problemo.
Would you mind extrapolating further what exactly "ensuring everyone....." means?
I thought America was done with forced labor? Why would you force me, under penalty of fine or imprisonment, to insure everyone else?
You already do insure the deadbeats, prisoners, and others who no doubt are in your "I don't want to insure those people" category. You do NOT do anything for the many folks who work to support our system, our economy, but who's employers consider it "too much of a burden" to supply insurance.
Also, the real truth is that even if you think you have insurance now, the truth is that you only have insurance as long as the insurance companies deside to insure you. They are perfectly free to take your profits, then turn around and kick you out when you start getting really and truly sick... and guess who has to pay then? You will at first, then when you lose everything you worked for, other taxpayers pick up the tab. It might be when you are old, or when you are 40. But, unless you are quite fortunate, it will happen.
What does "universal healthcare or universal insurance mean". It means that everyone pays into the system... it might be something like Germany, or France. Its unlikely this country will see Canada's system, but perhaps something like the UK. All of those have some mix of private and public insurance. Private companies even may make a small profit in some of those countries, but nothing like what companies here make. Instead, they make their profit from other types of insurance which people tend to buy from the one offering the medical insurance. Despite your claims of companies going out of business, these companies do fine.
Such a system MUST be required or people will simply decide not to pay when they are well and only buy insurance when they are actually sick. That makes as much sense as allowing people to buy fire insurance after a fire has already begun. The difference is that while few people will see their houses burn, everyone needs medical care at some point.
Yeah, we know, ignore any and all facts because it happens to have the word "socialism" applied.
However, a universal health system will be cheaper for EVERYONE except the very, very few individuals who stay healthy their entire lives. There will be limits, but no where near as arbitrary or draconian as those imposed right now by the insurance companies. And, it will be a more honest system. As I said above, a LOT of people right now have the illusion that they are actually covered, but should they get truly sick will quickly find that the insurance companies can and will use every trick they can to exclude you. Shoot! They even do it now, when there is absolutely no legitimate reason. Talk to any doctor's office and you find that they
routinely have to submit claims 2-3 times to get even the most basic and mandatory claims paid.
I have said it before, but you ignored it, as you do anything that refutes your ideas, but 2 years ago, it took an
average of 8 people per doctor just to fill out insurance claims, deal with insurance companies. THAT is one reason bills are so high.
No, you can brag about the wonders of the "free" market all you want, but we never have had a free market when it comes to insurance.
Finally, the market that does exist has nothing to do with cutting the costs of the insured OR providing better care. The "market" is purely to supply employers with the lowest possible cost of insurance that will meet the law. Only in the upper escheleon jobs and union jobs (and some small businesses where the owners get the same insurance as employees) do you see real insurance still. Everybody else pretty much has to deal with EXTREMELY high deductable policies that cover very little.
Oh, yeah.. and those small business owners who are one of the exceptions.. they are among those hit the hardest, them and anyone wanting individual insurance.
Allowing a marketer to discount volume is OK when it comes to normal products. There is an inbuilt correction in most situations... if cost gets too high, people just do without. healthcare is one thing people cannot do without. They can do without insurance, today, and many do... but that is to the detriment of society, because every person without insurance places an added risk and burden to the rest of society. If I get injured, I will first lose my house, etc and then you and other taxpayers will pay my bills. Why? Because the insurance companies are still allowed to exclude any adult with a pre-existing condition from coverage.
Ooops.. well, sure, we "could have" continued our coverage... at a cost of $1300 a month.
