HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD
Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
HEALTH CARE LAW UPHELD
Most Popular Reply
Realtor, General Contractor, and Developer · Redding, CA · Member since 2009 · 7k+ posts · 4k+ votes
14yI am 100% AGAINST the government requiring the people to purchase healthcare or face a penalty. I am also against the federal government forcing the states to provide healthcare for those that aren't covered by private insurance.
America became the great nation we were because of the free enterprise system. We are now on a course of becoming a socialist country. The working class will be taxed more and more to cover those that do not want to work, and provide for themselves. The government run healthcare system will be like every other government program, overpriced and impossible to access.
We are already paying billions of dollars in California in medical expenses for released convicts (because we can't afford to keep them in prison and 40,000 were released), sexual predators, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. Why should the working taxpayers be required to pay more to cover those that choose not to work?
It's not even the direct penalties, etc. for the working class should they opt out of insurance. The entire system needs reformed. The liberals have expanded disability, healthcare, etc. to such extremes, that soon there will be no business left in California to create the tax base necessary to suport it. You can only tax people and business so much, and when there's more taking than giving, the country collapses, and we become Greece!
I'll stand for a free country, with personal choice, and a free enterprise system, and forego Big Brother thank you.
271 Replies
- Rehabber · Albuquerque, NM - New Mexico · Member since 2011 · 283 posts · 38 votes14y
I have no clue where this with go but I don't see how we can afford it neither...
It will be interesting to see how this goes though! Definitely a case study for medicine socialization!!! I can't wait!
Manuel
- Investor · Mission Viejo, CA · Member since 2012 · 627 posts · 204 votes14y
This bizarre ruling will help elect Gov. Romney.
Allowing Obamcare to stand would indeed hurt the entire economy. Real estate would still be a good investment relative to other things, unless we have another civil war.
- Investor · Central Valley, CA · Member since 2012 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes14y
Originally posted by Billy W.:
Originally posted by Loc R.:
Billy W.I would imagine the realtors could probably get insurance through their professional association.
Lets take your average new agent from Marcus&Milichap selling commercial. I may be wrong, but I dont think M&M offers any form of benefits nor are you part of a professional association.
So, will those new agents have to fork over the $5K - $15K for health insurance each year, even though they aren't making a dime in income?
No one will be forced to buy a policy for 5K. The OC penalty/tax will eventually reach 2.5% of income (by 2016) but has a cap....a little more than $2000 for a family. The penalty starts at $95.00. For many individuals the penalty/tax will be well under $1K per year. For many people it's going to be less than a speeding ticket. The penalty/tax is not large or severe enough to encourage coverage in those that can't easily afford it.
OC doesn't bring down costs and is sure to be full of glitches. That being said, it sounds like no one on this thread has felt the small benefits of the OC already in place? No one here with children and under 26 allowed to stay on their plan? (check) No one denied coverage because of pre existing condition (check). Because of OC, California implemented adequate and easy to obtain (but not cheap) plans available now for everyone with a preexisting condition. Having young adults on a family policy is a godsend.
- Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes14y
K. Marie Poe, I knew I liked you for some reason, now I know! lol
That's good info! $95!
What I'm seeing are attitudes about OC that seem to have been formed by the media if you watch Fox and listen to Rush, OC is the end of the world as we knew it. OTH, the other media outlets reporting more from the center of left have, IMO been more clear about what to expect with MSNBC spinning the good points. Just saying, who you listen to has an impact on your view point and I doubt anyone here has read the bill, I haven't.
Insurance and medical providers spent 2 billion dollars in funding a wave of negative propoganda ads, formed political entities behind the curtian and fought this tooth a nail, very successfully. My Senator, Roy Blunt has stood in protest with his party against all aspects of the bill....until yesterday when he even admitted that there were some good provisions in the bill...
According to my doctor, we did not have the best medical care in our country, we had the best technology and skilled providers, but that just doesn't wash if 30 million can't get to care other than through emergency rooms.
I think that the OC plan will affect our economy as we allow it to, popular opinions and our choices in getting care will probably drive the money through our healthcare system, without capping some services (greed) there would be no way to limit costs, so long as services are required to be rendered.
My understanding too is that families will be limited as to losses arising from medical bills, the number one reason for bankruptcy. If anyone knows anything about this aspect, please chime in.
- Orlando, FL · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 282 votes14y
Originally posted by Jeff S.:
Glad I am not an employer with under 25 employees. Why wouldn't the employees jump ship and go to a larger competitor. So much for small business, just one more bullet to digest.I'm glad I don't have employees, period...(joke)
I agree with this law, although I think there will be some kinks to work out. Although I'd rather have a public option or single payer system.
- Investor · Asheville, NC · Member since 2012 · 184 posts · 76 votes14y
I'm a health care policy nerd, having been studying it since '07 when I realized that was the one factor that I couldn't nail down in order for my husband to retire early. We have a child with a genetic disorder, so going without insurance would be foolish for us.
My quick summary of it would be: it's a large complex law with far reaching and unknown consequences. It is a step in the right direction though, a big messy expensive step. One of the problems with health care is so many of the costs are 'off the books' (employer health plans, charity care). This puts most of the costs on the table for everyone to see. It's not pretty.
So for those who worry that this may be very expensive, you are right. But it's like getting someone to sit down and look at all their debt and bills for the first time...
This type of health insurance reform was originally proposed by the Heritage foundation in the 80's. Bob Dole introduced it in '93 against Clinton's plan. Gingrich endorsed it, DeMint endorsed it in 2007. At least 10 Republican senators were cosponsors of a bill with this same basic structure- individual mandate- in 2009- at the same time they voted against Obama's bill. Right now Ryan's budget includes turning medicare and social security into private individual products with penalties for not participating. This reform plan was thought of by republicans and passed by democrats who had given up on a more liberal agenda (single payer or public option).
So for those of you who think it is a step on the road to socialism, I'd say you're letting you political views cloud your outlook. Here's a fun recording of Ronald Reagan in '61 saying if we pass Medicare it will turn us into a Socialist Dictatorship:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bejdhs3jGywThis plan (if implemented- depends on the election) will benefit my family. If we knew we could get health ins., my husband would most likely leave his job and use his valuable skills (hardware design for defense industry) to create more jobs! So we would be even better job creators! My daughter will be able to remain insured even after she leaves our plan. She will be able to be a productive member of society instead of having, at any moment, to quit her job and spend down to less than 1K assets to qualify for medicaid.
I am cautiously for this plan , but know we have a long way to go to make health care work in our society. There's lots more to say, like about physicians and healthcare delivery reform, but this post is already so long!
- Investor · Little Rock, AR · Member since 2010 · 628 posts · 251 votes14y
Originally posted by J Scott:
As a non-religious person, all I can say is that God would be proud -- Matthew 10:8.That said, the health care edict seems unconstitutional to me...but, I guess that's why I haven't yet been appointed to the Supreme Court... :)
J Scott
It never hurts to practice what Jesus taught. Don't forget to drive the "demons" out!!My gripe is we are already paying for the uninsured through higher rates. Lets weed out the real dead beats and drug test them when they rush to the ER, or to get their unemployment check, ETC.
I am all for helping the mother that has been abandoned by a dead beat with kids; so long as I don't have to support her cigarettes, booze, or other sins against humanity. I have a relationship that is absolutely a waste of humanity because she will not stay off of the meth. She knows how to get every government give away there is. She was fired (let go) from her last job and has unemployment coming in now. She also gets the unearned income credit every spring tax time. Guess who is raising her kids now? The wife and I get no compensation (not looking for any) while she is still in the system getting assistance to subsidize her meth business.Why don't we just police what we already have instead of puting big brother in charge of every detail of our life. I have already had a taste of that trying to deal with my grandkid's mother and father. They were more concerned with the mother's rights than the kids; until I spent $$$$ to gain custody. Now they want to visit my house to insure I am doing the right thing by the kids!!!
Sorry; I got to ranting about something that may not pertain exactly to the discussion Bill Gulley started. I was just trying to emphasize what it is like dealing with the government yahoos.
Don
- Investor · Mission Viejo, CA · Member since 2012 · 627 posts · 204 votes14yMy wife is from a country with it, and I've got closer experience with it than most every person in the USA. Old and dying from colon cancer, but no money for painkillers? No problem, you don't get any - just wail away in pain until you die. My wife's sisters husband died from colon cancer at age 38, and was in such a ward. He had painkillers and so forth because of our money, but many others did not. Old, with a gall bladder gone bad, as was my wife's father earlier this year? Too bad, you are left in the bed with little attention, that is until your wife provides an envelope of cash (bribes).
Originally posted by Bienes Raices:
I agree with this law, although I think there will be some kinks to work out. Although I'd rather have a public option or single payer system.If you want socialized medicine, you also want waiting, many times until conditions significantly worsen, paying bribes, and being ignored to die if old.
Instead, just get rid of the deductions for company-paid "benefits," a scheme hatched by the leftists during WWII. Make health insurance like car or house insurance. Make it mandatory, as is house insurance and car insurance (except in a trivial number of situations). Allow people to buy health insurance from any provider. Have ahigh risk pool for people born with birth defects. Insurers would charge more for high risks (fat, smoke). Just as with car, house, and life insurance, numerous providers would ofer a wide variety of policies, striving to provide the best coverage, best prices, and best service. Many people would just want major medical coverage, perhaps with an HSA.
- Orlando, FL · Member since 2009 · 2k+ posts · 282 votes14y
Originally posted by Stephen Masek:
My wife is from a country with it, and I've got closer experience with it than most every person in the USA. Old and dying from colon cancer, but no money for painkillers? No problem, you don't get any - just wail away in pain until you die. My wife's sisters husband died from colon cancer at age 38, and was in such a ward. He had painkillers and so forth because of our money, but many others did not. Old, with a gall bladder gone bad, as was my wife's father earlier this year? Too bad, you are left in the bed with little attention, that is until your wife provides an envelope of cash (bribes).Originally posted by Bienes Raices:
I agree with this law, although I think there will be some kinks to work out. Although I'd rather have a public option or single payer system.If you want socialized medicine, you also want waiting, many times until conditions significantly worsen, paying bribes, and being ignored to die if old.
Instead, just get rid of the deductions for company-paid "benefits," a scheme hatched by the leftists during WWII. Make health insurance like car or house insurance. Make it mandatory, as is house insurance and car insurance (except in a trivial number of situations). Allow people to buy health insurance from any provider. Have ahigh risk pool for people born with birth defects. Insurers would charge more for high risks (fat, smoke). Just as with car, house, and life insurance, numerous providers would ofer a wide variety of policies, striving to provide the best coverage, best prices, and best service. Many people would just want major medical coverage, perhaps with an HSA.
"socialized medicine"? Really?
- Real Estate Broker · Canton, GA · Member since 2010 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes14y
I have looked at tons of health care plans and none of them make sense to me.
They cost more than if you just paid cash and received a discount.I can see catastrophic care as that covers big events that cost a lot of money at the hospital but for seeing regular doctor visits the numbers do not work.
Now if I could get my mother in laws health care coverage life would be easy.She has a survivors benefit from the military from her deceased spouse and no matter what the bill is the payment is a whopping 10 co-pay.
Unfortunately only a select few such as her and Congress etc. have access to the great plans and the rest are left with the crap.
So under this bill if you pay cash then they couldn't force you to get insurance correct as you are paying at time of service instead of getting service and them trying to bill you later without health insurance??
- IL · Member since 2012 · 29 posts · 9 votes14y
There's no need to try to predict the outcome of Obamacare. Fact is, Obamacare has already been implemented in Massachusetts for years (since 2005 if I'm not mistaken) thanks to Mitt Romney, and a large majority of the people in the state support it.
Obamacare is far from perfect, but when it's implemented Americans will like it, and ultimately it will put us closer to getting single payer like every other industrialized nation in the world already has.
- Investor · Southeast, MI · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes14y
I'm against Obamacare because it is more government. If it were up to me, I would reduce the size of government by about 95%. I would get rid of Obamacare, social security, medicare, welfare, food stamps, departments of HUD, energy, education, transportation, and the EPA. The founding fathers would not even recognize our once great country as we become a socialist nation.
I guess that is why I became a Libertarian.
- Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes14y
*chuckles* I guess I'm just an elitist... why is it Americans believe they have the right to live, live well, and live painlessly until they are 80, 90, 120 years old?
Why does every 70 year old with a bad hip need to have it replaced? Why can't we just call 70 a good run?
The 55 year old who needs quadruple bypass or he'll die of a heart attack? Hey, you enjoyed those 55 years of fast food, right?
The US is NOT about equality, the US is about opportunity. Some of those opportunities come at a cost. If you can't afford them, you don't get them. The opportunity to get things you currently can't afford provides incentive... to work harder... to work longer... to innovate. Why can't better health care be one of those opportunities people are now motivated to get? Why do some believe it's a "right" to have?
Sorry, I don't believe you have the right to abuse yourself and use medicine to overcome that abuse at my expense. Nope.
- Note Investor · Pasadena, CA · Member since 2009 · 849 posts · 544 votes14y
Rob K I'm also for minimizing the government.
Nathan Emmert That sums it up. I'd love to live at the beach, but unfortunately, I can't because I simply CAN'T afford it.
The other issue to, in this country, is that just because we can, does it mean we should? Performing triple bypass on a 350-lb man who hasn't exercised since grade school is, for all intents and purposes, eliminating Darwinism with the human species.
- IL · Member since 2012 · 29 posts · 9 votes14y
Originally posted by Nathan Emmert:
*chuckles* I guess I'm just an elitist... why is it Americans believe they have the right to live, live well, and live painlessly until they are 80, 90, 120 years old?Why does every 70 year old with a bad hip need to have it replaced? Why can't we just call 70 a good run?
The 55 year old who needs quadruple bypass or he'll die of a heart attack? Hey, you enjoyed those 55 years of fast food, right?
The US is NOT about equality, the US is about opportunity. Some of those opportunities come at a cost. If you can't afford them, you don't get them. The opportunity to get things you currently can't afford provides incentive... to work harder... to work longer... to innovate. Why can't better health care be one of those opportunities people are now motivated to get? Why do some believe it's a "right" to have?
Sorry, I don't believe you have the right to abuse yourself and use medicine to overcome that abuse at my expense. Nope.
Because Americans are compassionate people when it comes to the health of other Americans?
Do you really think that people eat fast food for 55 years because they know they can get a quadruple bypass for free?
And why are you implying that people that require healthcare are abusing themselves? Seems a little presumptuous to me.
Sometimes people are just born with bad genetics. Some people are dumb and can't feed themselves properly. But it's important to understand that in many cases they were born that way through no fault of their own. Most people understand that and want to take care of the less fortunate.
- Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes14y
Originally posted by Mike B.:
Because Americans are compassionate people when it comes to the health of other Americans?Do you really think that people eat fast food for 55 years because they know they can get a quadruple bypass for free?
And why are you implying that people that require healthcare are abusing themselves? Seems a little presumptuous to me.
Sometimes people are just born with bad genetics. Some people are dumb and can't feed themselves properly. But it's important to understand that in many cases they were born that way through no fault of their own. Most people understand that and want to take care of the less fortunate.
Americans are far from compassionate... if we were, we'd all be donating enough to charity that this wouldn't be an issue... the US Government is MANDATING this BECAUSE of our lack of compassion.
Americans... and IMO mankind in general... are 1) Selfish... and 2) Greedy. They want as much as they can get for as little as they have to do.
Do I think people eat fast food because they could get free service? Nah... do I believe if people knew they wouldn't get health care they would take better care of themselves now? Yes! Many people are afraid of their own mortality and could potentially be scared into lifestyle changes, absolutely.
Some people are born with bad genetics. Some are born dumb. Some are born short. That's life, we all deal with the hand we're dealt. I'm still pissed I wasn't born into the Walton family... I mean really, how fair is that?
So What??!! Life isn't about fair... The US isn't about fair, unless you're talking about fair access to opportunity. Hey, bad genetics, dumb, or short... you still have a shot. Sure, might not be the same shot, or as easy, or whatever else... but you DO have a shot.
Because people are lazy, every time you give them something for free you simply demotivate them further. At some point, if this continues, there will be nothing to work for. I don't want to get into the politics or debates on Government types, but socialism failed for a reason. People ARE lazy. We work because we have to.
- Investor · Central Valley, CA · Member since 2012 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes14y
Originally posted by Bill Gulley:
K. Marie Poe, I knew I liked you for some reason, now I know! lolThat's good info! $95!
In the first year (2014) the minimum penalty/tax is $95 or the percentage of income (with cap) whichever is greater. CNN and Fox News have failed to deliver details on the penalty/tax that would really help people put this in perspecctive. But why bother with facts in an election year. Outrage in your audience is good for ratings and good for advertising. This is true even for the "liberal" media.
It would help if citizens would/could read and understand the primary source material. It's just a little harder to find than Fox News.
- Multi-family Investor · Morton Grove, IL · Member since 2011 · 59 posts · 8 votes14y
Recently, CNN or Fox did a commenatary on other Nations who had to make the same decisions as the USA on making sure ALL CITIZENS had access to healthcare. I wish this would be shown again because it was an "eye opener". Many of the Nations went with Single Payer Systems, some went with Multiple Payer Systems, but the end result for the better of the various Nations. This is needed in this country...it is a shame for anyone not to have access to healthcare...one never knows when one will cross the "line of uninsurabiltiy" and then be dependent on healthcare to save our lives. This could be an "accident, disease etc" over which we have no control, but it should give "peace of mind". Let's give this a chance and then complain as there are ways to change laws.
- IL · Member since 2012 · 29 posts · 9 votes14y
Originally posted by Nathan Emmert:
Originally posted by Mike B.:
Because Americans are compassionate people when it comes to the health of other Americans?Do you really think that people eat fast food for 55 years because they know they can get a quadruple bypass for free?
And why are you implying that people that require healthcare are abusing themselves? Seems a little presumptuous to me.
Sometimes people are just born with bad genetics. Some people are dumb and can't feed themselves properly. But it's important to understand that in many cases they were born that way through no fault of their own. Most people understand that and want to take care of the less fortunate.
Americans are far from compassionate... if we were, we'd all be donating enough to charity that this wouldn't be an issue... the US Government is MANDATING this BECAUSE of our lack of compassion.
Americans... and IMO mankind in general... are 1) Selfish... and 2) Greedy. They want as much as they can get for as little as they have to do.
Do I think people eat fast food because they could get free service? Nah... do I believe if people knew they wouldn't get health care they would take better care of themselves now? Yes! Many people are afraid of their own mortality and could potentially be scared into lifestyle changes, absolutely.
Some people are born with bad genetics. Some are born dumb. Some are born short. That's life, we all deal with the hand we're dealt. I'm still pissed I wasn't born into the Walton family... I mean really, how fair is that?
So What??!! Life isn't about fair... The US isn't about fair, unless you're talking about fair access to opportunity. Hey, bad genetics, dumb, or short... you still have a shot. Sure, might not be the same shot, or as easy, or whatever else... but you DO have a shot.
Because people are lazy, every time you give them something for free you simply demotivate them further. At some point, if this continues, there will be nothing to work for. I don't want to get into the politics or debates on Government types, but socialism failed for a reason. People ARE lazy. We work because we have to.
I understand what you're saying, but the verdict is in. If you look at the facts, America has passed yet another law that will help the less fortunate. If Americans were as discompassionate as you say, then Darwinism would be the law of the land, right? We wouldn't have elected the guy who campaigned on universal healthcare, right? Wouldn't we have elected someone who supported letting the weakest among us suffer until death?
And as far as everyone having a shot, I agree that what you say is true. But you have to put yourself in the shoes of the people that aren't as smart as you to understand what I'm trying to say. If someone is too dumb to realize that they have a shot at happiness, then it might as well be the same as having no shot at all. I hope that makes sense. I'm sorry I'm failing to express my point articulately.
- Rehabber · Albuquerque, NM - New Mexico · Member since 2011 · 283 posts · 38 votes14y
Originally posted by Nathan Emmert:
Originally posted by Mike B.:
Because Americans are compassionate people when it comes to the health of other Americans?Do you really think that people eat fast food for 55 years because they know they can get a quadruple bypass for free?
And why are you implying that people that require healthcare are abusing themselves? Seems a little presumptuous to me.
Sometimes people are just born with bad genetics. Some people are dumb and can't feed themselves properly. But it's important to understand that in many cases they were born that way through no fault of their own. Most people understand that and want to take care of the less fortunate.
Americans are far from compassionate... if we were, we'd all be donating enough to charity that this wouldn't be an issue... the US Government is MANDATING this BECAUSE of our lack of compassion.
Americans... and IMO mankind in general... are 1) Selfish... and 2) Greedy. They want as much as they can get for as little as they have to do.
Do I think people eat fast food because they could get free service? Nah... do I believe if people knew they wouldn't get health care they would take better care of themselves now? Yes! Many people are afraid of their own mortality and could potentially be scared into lifestyle changes, absolutely.
Some people are born with bad genetics. Some are born dumb. Some are born short. That's life, we all deal with the hand we're dealt. I'm still pissed I wasn't born into the Walton family... I mean really, how fair is that?
So What??!! Life isn't about fair... The US isn't about fair, unless you're talking about fair access to opportunity. Hey, bad genetics, dumb, or short... you still have a shot. Sure, might not be the same shot, or as easy, or whatever else... but you DO have a shot.
Because people are lazy, every time you give them something for free you simply demotivate them further. At some point, if this continues, there will be nothing to work for. I don't want to get into the politics or debates on Government types, but socialism failed for a reason. People ARE lazy. We work because we have to.
I'm with Mike B. on this one. People are innately good, it's only when we are bread with capitalistic upbringings (and those upbringings stick, and they mostly do) that people do bad things. And they do them with reason. Of course this isn't true for people with actual chemical unbalances, schizophrenics, and sociopaths.
Now, I'm all for capitalism, Milton Friedman is my favorite economist, but here is the main difference between capitalism and socialism and even better, anarchism.
Capitalists believe that people are motivated by greed, profit, money. And we are, cause that's how are system is. It's a system of profit.
Anarchists believe that people are motivated to good for the community. Which is communism; community-ism. It's a system of happiness.
You see the root assumptions now? In an anarchist society, and socialism is a step towards it, people aren't motivated by greed, instead out of the passion to help others. They then, like the smurfs, just take what they need from the community and also give back. Whether it be, being a police officer, or building a nice bridge to make travel easier for people. Now I know you must use your imagination, but think of it; no body in absolute power, no need for greed as you're not looking for profit to get a lavish car because you are already, from the day you are born, generally much more happy then a capitalist.
Why would you be happy? This isn't a simple question, thus a simple answer isn't available. There are many nuances to be covered, and they are. If you are interested, you should read these authors about anarchy and happiness. Noam Chomsky, Marx, Lao Tzu (and the Tao), Plato, Sarte, Marcuse, Fromm, and Camus. And this is just a start. People like to bash the "hippy" way, but it is very well studied and people who bash it, just haven't studied it. I know you can't see how it works, but if you do a lot of reading, you will understand. I can give you exact passages from all these authors if you want.
Manuel
- Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes14y
I don't really think that OC will be changing our form of government.
Lazy people? By that do you that people fail to inform themselves? That people take the path of least resistance? That people would rather get things with the least effort and expect others to provide for them what they should be doing for themselves? That may not only apply to government, healthcare but maybe also in their business? Sometimes it's pretty obvious.
I'd like to ask how we could motivate everyone to do the responsible thing and buy insurance? Is there an agreement that if one does not have insurance and they go into a hospital, that others have to flip the bill?
- Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes14y
Originally posted by Bill Gulley:
I don't really think that OC will be changing our form of government.Lazy people? By that do you that people fail to inform themselves? That people take the path of least resistance? That people would rather get things with the least effort and expect others to provide for them what they should be doing for themselves? That may not only apply to government, healthcare but maybe also in their business? Sometimes it's pretty obvious.
I'd like to ask how we could motivate everyone to do the responsible thing and buy insurance? Is there an agreement that if one does not have insurance and they go into a hospital, that others have to flip the bill?
Bill, I don't think people should have to buy insurance...
But at the same time, I don't believe hospitals should have to serve people who don't have insurance or proof of adequate assets to pay for care.
I believe people in the US have elevated the standard of life they believe they are guaranteed by others too high.
- Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes14y
Nathan, I understand that as a feeling, but it is not reality. Do you have, say even $250,000 in cash lying around to pay your bills for intensive care after a plane crashes into your home? No one knows what can or will happen to them, and I doubt you really just want them to shove you out the door and say...go die!
You can self insure the little things, you're not going to self insure major medical.
- Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 17k+ posts · 17k+ votes14y
Originally posted by Nathan Emmert:
But at the same time, I don't believe hospitals should have to serve people who don't have insurance or proof of adequate assets to pay for care.There's absolutely nothing wrong with that belief...
That said, I'm glad that we live in a country where (for the most part), the majority opinion prevails, and I'm glad the majority of people in this country disagree with you on this.
- Investor · San Ramon, CA · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 569 votes14y
Originally posted by Bill Gulley:
Nathan, I understand that as a feeling, but it is not reality. Do you have, say even $250,000 in cash lying around to pay your bills for intensive care after a plane crashes into your home? No one knows what can or will happen to them, and I doubt you really just want them to shove you out the door and say...go die!You can self insure the little things, you're not going to self insure major medical.
Yep, you're absolutely right... but then that's why I have insurance. That's why I choose to get 3 college degrees... so I could demand insurance from my employer. I empowered myself with a skill set which allows me to demand from the market the perk of insurance.
I took initiative to get something I wanted. I did the work... now I reap the benefit. Why do you feel that benefit needs to be given away when it can be earned? It's not a unicorn, insurance isn't some make believe unattainable, pot at the end of a rainbow dream. Lots of companies offer insurance...
If you want insurance just in case a plane lands on your house (pretty sure the plane's owner would be covering the tab in this case anyhow), get a skill set which allows you to demand insurance. If you're fine with risking that a plane won't land on your house or further that you won't need insurance if a plane were to, and even further if you don't want to do the work necessary to have insurance... then don't do the work necessary. Your choice... welcome to America. The land of opportunity, of choice.
I believe people choose to drop out of high school. I believe people choose not to go to college. I believe people choose bad majors in college. I believe people choose to get pregnant. I believe people choose to have kids. I believe people choose to take on too much debt. I believe people choose to be complacent in advancing their skill sets as they age.
I believe people should be responsible for the choices they make, it's really that simple. I've made a lot of good choices, some bad, and enjoy the benefits of the good outweighing the bad. Others too should reap the consequences of their choices, whether those consequences be good or bad is a result of the choices they make.
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.