Read AnnonUSA's post further up in this thread. How exactly is a $500/mo increase affordable? Do you have that much room in your budget for an *extra* $500/mo? And as for lowering standards of living, yeah, that's always the solution. We should all go without food and shelter so we can afford to pay for healthcare. How about instead we look into ways to *reduce costs*, so that healthcare isn't so fucking expensive? Nah, that'd never work.
I'd need details on that: who is being insured, etc...sounds like they have a health history issue and/or possibly smokers. Also I find it hard to believe that is his only option. Regardless it seems as tough as it was he is affording it. That's the key thing in this, the entitlement deal. In my early 20's I was paying my own health insurance while my buddies just banked that into cars, chicks or drinks. By my mid 20's I was able to buy a really nice home in a pretty exclusive area. My parent's helped me a bit growing up with gas and my car insurance, but in return I sometimes worked 3 jobs and saved my money. I was able to go to college for 5 years (3 at a local community college and 2 at University of Florida) with only about $7000 in loans. My parents couldn't help me with college at the time and since financial aid looks at previous income I couldn't qualify for any.
I don't feel health insurance is a right. Anyone on death's door will be treated at a hospital and stabilized. I think that is more than fair. We are not a communistic nor socialistic nation...
There are ways to reduce costs of health care. Flexible spending plans are one. I am part of a health fund with my employer. We each put up $1500 for the year which you can use for deductable and copays. It rolls over if you don't use it. That gives us a cheaper premium on the back end. It's also an open network so you can shop doctors. Some negotiate for a higher rate, some lower.
Yet again, you are taking anecdotal local evidence and extrapolating out to the entire population. You want facts? OK, have a look at these statistics on welfare:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-welfareblack.htm
and these on Medicaid (PDF):
http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/Key Medicare and Medicaid Statistics.pdf
And again, I've already stated that enforcing our existing immigration laws and going after employers who hire illegals would go a long way towards reducing the number of illegals who are provided free care.
I love everyone using anecdotal today as if it means falacy.
Your first link is hardly related to this conversation. It's about the myth that only blacks are on welfare. I don't think anyone stated this, I certainly did not. What I said above is those that can't AFFORD health insurance can get health care.
Also that Keiser pdf is just anecodatal as well. It's no different than anyone just throwing up the numbers. Why not go directly to Medicare and Medicaid for the statistics.
Anyway its showing about 50% of our nation already receiving one or the other and about 30% recieving both. What this doesn't show is (you can look up Miami's rates) is for every one person with these plans there is a high probability that they are caring for others under it...it doesn't show how those with no coverage can also bribe to get it. This is rampant in S. Florida with even our Driver's License places taking thousands of dollars from illegals in return for a full government issued ID/DL. It sucks. 10 people were arrested in Delray Beach, Florida this year for this. It was happening right under everyone's nose.
The government is responding to the will of their constituents, the corporations. Rather than sit down and have a frank, intelligent discussion about what could and could not be done in regards to health care, as usual the vocal fringes took over and it became a game of who can yell the loudest. "Death panels" are a fine example of this. So instead of a workable UHC solution the special interests take over and we get this bastardized system. Perhaps if we spent less time arguing about which side of the coin is "right" and more time demanding accountability from our leaders, we wouldn't have so many issues.
Well you are going to have a 'death panel' with any national program. Whether it's above the board or hidden. Each person is a number and value into the collective. I don't want this for myself. Especially if they mandate things like organ donorship is required. Certain parts need to be taken pre-mortem. Plus come in tramatized and match some billionaire's kids liver need and you just may have been terminal. No thanks, my family donates blood for each other for surgery and a couple of us have done the gift of life deal.
Just like the insurance companies do now. If you don't think private corporations are interested in anything but generating profits, you are sadly mistaken.
Well profits are key. However, I believe now your real reasons have come out. You are anti big-business, the evil corporations...your whole spiel has been a bit biased though so it's no surprise. The corporation I work for still gives back a lot. We run our own insurance plan and Aetna oversees the claims. It's problematic at times because our company covers non-standard Aetna procedures (yeah, technically me healthy contributes to their profit though).
The thing is I have a choice. I don't have to take my company plan. There are golden plans out there for a couple grand a month....chump change to the wealthy, but they can get their teeth cleaned every month if they want.
Still even now some doctors don't accept any insurance. I am sure their are private hospitals that do this as well. Those doctors here have full waiting rooms still. I have chosen to go to one even though I could have paid a ton less with my insurance because they were truly that good and I knew I'd be on my way to getting better fastest.
Once you nationalize a plan, you now cater to the lowest denominator. You also have to make tougher decisions hence how "death panel" comes up.
I've already laid out a few points in previous posts as to why UHC might benefit the population, if you can't be bothered to read them, it's not my problem.
As to my situation, UHC would benefit me greatly because it's a safety net. As it stands right now I cannot afford to be without insurance *at all*, so I am essentially chained to my job as my employer provides the coverage I would not be able to obtain on my own. Without gainful employment I'd be completely screwed.
Why do you think I just don't disagree? You think I have ignored what you believe? The thing is you are looking at this from your own situation, not the masses.
Safety nets are not what our nation was built on. Just read good old Ben Franklin on fear.
Why do you think without employment you wouldn't qualify for the existing plans or the free clinics? Pride?
Again, I fail to see how this is relevant, but I won't have any financial issues, barring a total economic meltdown. I will be debt free by the time I hit 40 (car, house, student loans), which is about 7 years from now. I am incredibly fortunate to have been taught to save early, so by the time I retire I won't have anything to worry about. Many others do not have the same luxury.
So you are all of 33 years old and talking about retiring soon? You are in your prime financial years yet wasted them working for the same company since you were 18? You are making only $50k. Had you jumped ship a couple times you should have been way above that. If you have saved for 15 years you should be ok if you did lose your job now.
My bet is you are planning on starting to save tomorrow like most and then when tomorrow comes today want someone else to hand them a livlihood.