|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 20, 2009 23:44:40 GMT -5
a tax hike on those making less than $250,000.00?
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Sept 21, 2009 6:52:50 GMT -5
Somewhere along the line, people have to take responsibility, and pay taxes. For some reason, today's generation says; "It's all about me!," and forgets the fact that they are part of a nation that has always cared for each other through programs that work.
I keep hearing the whining about taxes, then look back 30, 40 years, or more, and how we paid a much higher percentage of our incomes in taxes, but figured it was the price we paid for having a great nation, where the common good was important.
As far as I'm concerned, I've heard enough of the whining from the; "Me first crowd," to last me a lifetime. There is absolutely no interest in the common good, but it's amazing how quick the "me firsters" line up with their hands out when they hit tough times themselves.
It's appalling when I see it, and hear it. It's time for people to take responsibility for stewardship of this nation, not for their own greed!
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 21, 2009 10:11:35 GMT -5
I've always said I would be a communist if I knew everyone was working their ass off as hard as I was and everything was shared equally, but when the government offers programs where there is no incentive to better one's self or to at least not be a burden to others, government fails though who do work and do sacrifice for the common good.
Again, government wishes to dummy down Americans taking from those who have succeeded under their own ambition and giving to those who made poor decisions.
90 percent of Americans do have health insurance. Why are we changing the system for the 10 percent? Have a system that addresses the 10 percent issue instead of revamping the whole system to meet the needs of the 10.
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Sept 21, 2009 12:16:27 GMT -5
If you're looking at 90% having insurance, you've just included those on welfare and medicaid, because a full 18% of Americans do not have insurance. They're included in the 18% group.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 21, 2009 12:24:49 GMT -5
That's fine. Expend more to cover the 18 percent through Title XIX and pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, cut the DOD to a defensive posture only to pay for it. I would be fine with that.
Still waiting for Obama to go through the budget with a scapel and cut unnecessary underfunding of government projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by TMWight on Sept 21, 2009 13:20:56 GMT -5
It's the 10% of the uninsured that are hurting the country. You sure do hear a lot of crying from the nearly 10% of people unemployed. Why can't the uninsured cry?
If you increase taxes for those making $250k or more and cut frivolous spending (ie $18 for a hammer) then there will be no add to the deficet. Not to get too personal but my paycheck and my wife's paycheck dont even come close to $100k a year, although we're only in our mid to late 20's I still feel like we'll never make that much and neither does 85% (low-balling it) of the American people.
Canada is what America used to be like but with more respect for their fellow man.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 21, 2009 15:08:16 GMT -5
Canada can keep it's rationed healthcare and it's passiveness. They have America to protect their shores, so why spend any money on a military.
I suppose if I had someone else footing my bills, I could buy a lot more crap too.
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Sept 21, 2009 15:38:21 GMT -5
Let's see... you went to college. You didn't pay the entire expenses for it. You paid a portion of it. The government paid the rest. Then there's the retirement that others in your family have enjoyed, and things like Social Security, Medicare, etc...
I guess all of you are like the rest of us. Dependent on social programs.
And, by the way. Your job? Do you think that the facility you're working at would even exist if there wasn't money coming in from Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security to help retired people?
So... you're feasting off the government's money because of those programs.
Social programs are essential in all caring societies. I don't like the idea of us not giving a rip about each other, and never have.
Which brings up a point. Has anyone in your family ever had help from EMT services, or from an ambulance? Yup! Social programs help support them.
Like it or not, social programs are a part of all caring societies. Live with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 21, 2009 15:47:57 GMT -5
The US has a mixed economy with a blend of socialist and capitalist basis. Any sixth grade student knows this.
Yes, a caring nation is the way to be and yes I would give what I have so that others may have. I have no issues with that TW and never did.
What I do have issues with is when it comes to my healthcare. If wheels are set in motion to get this nation to a single payor system, that that is where I draw the line.
I don't have any control whatsoever over SS, Medicare or whre the fricken highway get's built. That is beyond my control and part of the collective concious.
My healthcare, my doctor, my premium, my monthly budgets do not belong to the collective concious and that is what I object too.
I want to maintain control over that which I have always maintained control of since adulthood and that is my healthcare and my healthcare choices and you have no right nor does anyone else have the right to say..."Give it up for the common good."
What is the common good in this instance? Taking a problematic system for a few and making it crappy for everyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by TMWight on Sept 21, 2009 16:01:42 GMT -5
Healthcare is not rationed up in Canada PC, you're being ignorant.
If you talk to some of the Canadians about their healthcare they love it. They don't have to worry about paying insurance and have the risk of being dropped at any moment.
My sister has epilepsy, my father has diabetes and my mother takes various medications and she has the hardest time fighting wtih the insurance company to cover some things. Luckly my mom had great healthcare when my sister had to have brain surgery 15 years ago but they tried retroactively cancelling her - - do you think that's right!?
My mom and dad saved $500 a month for the two of them to work for the same city but once my dad lost his job they were forced to pay that ammount again. Not fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Sept 21, 2009 22:16:32 GMT -5
What would you call it when a Canadian citizen has to leave Canada for the US to get prompt, life saving care because of having to wait?
If you are restricting consumpion of medical services by making a person wait weeks, is that not rationing of care or have liberals re-defined that term as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by gopackgo2000 on Sept 21, 2009 23:23:41 GMT -5
What would you call it when a Canadian citizen has to leave Canada for the US to get prompt, life saving care because of having to wait? If you are restricting consumpion of medical services by making a person wait weeks, is that not rationing of care or have liberals re-defined that term as well? Not to mention the family doctor lotteries in several cities in Canada. I have seen that on a Dateline Special! Not Fox! all healthy people like universal health care. They never use it! Those that need care, but don't qualify according to the government find it terrible! |
|
|
|
Post by TMWight on Sept 22, 2009 10:09:30 GMT -5
What would you call it when a Canadian citizen has to leave Canada for the US to get prompt, life saving care because of having to wait? If you are restricting consumpion of medical services by making a person wait weeks, is that not rationing of care or have liberals re-defined that term as well? Life saving care? Please tell me you're talking about Shona Holmes and her brain tumor. What about the thousands of Americans who get Canadian citizenship for free health-care in Canada? There is no medical professional in their right mind who would withhold life-saving treatment. It doesn't happen in America and it doesn't happen in Canada. Doctor lotteries happen here in America as well especially when you have more and more doctors getting away from family practices to speciality services. I had to wait 6 months to see a new doctor because he was over-booked with patients and only took 1 new patient in ever month if he can. |
|
|
|
Post by TW on Sept 22, 2009 11:10:32 GMT -5
Let's see how it works here in the US. Insurance companies "weigh" the value of the services they offer. If a person is terminal, and the services would only grant a person a year or two more of life, it's "not worth it" to them based on actuarial tables to give them the services. Life and death is decided on what bean counters say is the probability of long term survival.
How do they carry out their plan of letting this patient "die" before giving services? They delay the approvals of the services, by taking time to "decide" if the services should be given, under their policy.
If pressured, they send an attorney to court to fight against the issue of services, and they use continuances to insure they beat the policy holder since they'll die before they get the help they need.
So much for the way it's done here in the US. Bean counters decide who lives, and who dies. And nobody can say that isn't the way it works, because it does.
|
|
|
|
Post by gopackgo2000 on Sept 22, 2009 12:14:32 GMT -5
Let's see how it works here in the US. Insurance companies "weigh" the value of the services they offer. If a person is terminal, and the services would only grant a person a year or two more of life, it's "not worth it" to them based on actuarial tables to give them the services. Life and death is decided on what bean counters say is the probability of long term survival. How do they carry out their plan of letting this patient "die" before giving services? They delay the approvals of the services, by taking time to "decide" if the services should be given, under their policy. If pressured, they send an attorney to court to fight against the issue of services, and they use continuances to insure they beat the policy holder since they'll die before they get the help they need. So much for the way it's done here in the US. Bean counters decide who lives, and who dies. And nobody can say that isn't the way it works, because it does. I won't deny your senario totally, I will say that having sold Insurance the companies are bound by th econtracts that are written. If a patient has full medical insurance and they need a heart transplant and their policy language says that they are to be covered...they are covered...the company can try to fight it, but they will lose. If it is an emeergency their are laws saying care cannot be denied. People showing up at the emergency room have to be seen. That is why poor people with no coverage show up to the emergency room for sinus infections. THey want care and they know they have to be treated! If they are turned away and something happens then there is a huge liability suit waiting for that hospital!!! And tmwight, if doctor lotteries are already happening here really...how is granting 40 million more people insurance going to help that situation? Would that not just fill up the already crowded waiting rooms? Book doctors out even further and make care crappy for all? We will all have care, but it all sucks! Sounds like a great plan!!! Oh and with Universal Heath Care we will see less and less minds wanting to become doctors. When they knwo their education cost sare so high only to be over worked with capped incomes as a result....there will be little incentive to become a doctor...sounds like more crowding and more crappy care for all!!! |
|
