|
-- Posted by LucidAssassin at 12:01 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
universal health care: ok ill admit that it works in keeping people alive longer (as canada will show us), but that comes with a high price. first of all, the more people we have to take care of because theyre living longer means the more that well have to pay to uphold the system right? especially with older people because they tend to have more health problems. wouldnt it just end up as a more expensive version of medicare? anyway, were also mainly helping out the poor so i can understand that anyone that cant pay for it would love to have the health care because they get it for free while jacking up the prices for the rest of the people that have to pay for it. they get free health care anyway though. if theres an emergency then hospitals will take care of the person even if they dont have insurance and if they cant pay for it then the hospitals get money out of everyone else, so why give them even more freedom and cause us to lose even more money? most people get health care through their jobs, another reason why its bad because its supporting poor people by letting them be lazy and were giving everything they need. whats encouraging them to get jobs? nothing. we give them money and now wed give them health care so they dont need to work. the people that do have medical insurance would most likely be losing the benefits that they have, while paying more and getting worse coverage, treatment, extended times for treatment, etc. lastly, do you guys really want to have what happened in australia happen here? i remember a person posting an article on here a while ago that talked about a kid that didnt get treated by the government because he wasnt sick enough for them to treat him. do you really want this? the money balance thing (idk what its called if it has a name but the thing where the economy is equally split up among all of the people equally): it is yet another way that will take care of the poor, but again at a serious cost to the rest of us. we already give them welfare which they blow off on tv's and random stuff they dont need, but what would they care? its free money for them. do we really want to give them any more money that they will most likely blow off on random luxuries and booze which the rest of us work so hard to be able to have? higher taxes on the rich: again, a policy that helps the lower people, but this time it includes the middle class. well if you dont already know, the top 1% of our population pays some 40% of the taxes. isnt this enough for you people? they already pay almost the majority off the taxes and thats only the top 1 percent! imagine what all of the others are doing! and with the equal economy and universal health care, they'd only be paying more and it would become unfair. theyd be completely holding up the country. well guess what people, what if they decided to leave the country? they dont need us theyre freakin millionaires already. they can leave and theyd probably be just fine with it. and what would happen when they leave? the taxes would only fall back to us harder that what we were gaining over. it will screw us over in the end. i can understand how these would be appealing to the poor and the last one to the middle class, but seriously america, wtf?
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 12:07 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
To answer all of your questions... it's called "wealth envy." Those without are being manipulated by the politicians to believe that those "with" don't deserve what they have and should be forced to share it with everyone "without."
-- Posted by Savren at 12:10 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from LucidAssassin at 12:01 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
 universal health care: ok ill admit that it works in keeping people alive longer (as canada will show us), but that comes with a high price. first of all, the more people we have to take care of because theyre living longer means the more that well have to pay to uphold the system right? especially with older people because they tend to have more health problems. wouldnt it just end up as a more expensive version of medicare? anyway, were also mainly helping out the poor so i can understand that anyone that cant pay for it would love to have the health care because they get it for free while jacking up the prices for the rest of the people that have to pay for it. they get free health care anyway though. if theres an emergency then hospitals will take care of the person even if they dont have insurance and if they cant pay for it then the hospitals get money out of everyone else, so why give them even more freedom and cause us to lose even more money? most people get health care through their jobs, another reason why its bad because its supporting poor people by letting them be lazy and were giving everything they need. whats encouraging them to get jobs? nothing. we give them money and now wed give them health care so they dont need to work. the people that do have medical insurance would most likely be losing the benefits that they have, while paying more and getting worse coverage, treatment, extended times for treatment, etc. lastly, do you guys really want to have what happened in australia happen here? i remember a person posting an article on here a while ago that talked about a kid that didnt get treated by the government because he wasnt sick enough for them to treat him. do you really want this? the money balance thing (idk what its called if it has a name but the thing where the economy is equally split up among all of the people equally): it is yet another way that will take care of the poor, but again at a serious cost to the rest of us. we already give them welfare which they blow off on tv's and random stuff they dont need, but what would they care? its free money for them. do we really want to give them any more money that they will most likely blow off on random luxuries and booze which the rest of us work so hard to be able to have? higher taxes on the rich: again, a policy that helps the lower people, but this time it includes the middle class. well if you dont already know, the top 1% of our population pays some 40% of the taxes. isnt this enough for you people? they already pay almost the majority off the taxes and thats only the top 1 percent! imagine what all of the others are doing! and with the equal economy and universal health care, they'd only be paying more and it would become unfair. theyd be completely holding up the country. well guess what people, what if they decided to leave the country? they dont need us theyre freakin millionaires already. they can leave and theyd probably be just fine with it. and what would happen when they leave? the taxes would only fall back to us harder that what we were gaining over. it will screw us over in the end. i can understand how these would be appealing to the poor and the last one to the middle class, but seriously america, wtf? 
I have to agree that it is unfair that people who make more must get taxed more. If you work your butt off and end up making a healthy amount of money (like small business owners making over 250 grand) and thus get forced to pay all of your employees plus taxes, thats BS. I'm not a fan of Obama's tax plan because it has a significant effect in my opinion on the small business owners who are making just over the minimum for the tax raise to be imposed upon them.
-- Posted by rickyspeople at 12:11 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
ok. health care should be a right, not a privilege.
i think you'll find most often the case is universal health care promotes people to be better workers. when they don't have to worry about where there next round of medication is coming from, or when they don't have to sacrifice things like food for health care, people won't have an excuse to be lazy, and worker's comp. & such will see a drop in cases. of course, a universal system is not flawless, and it obviously is a less attractive alternative for people who can afford the best. i think a combination of public and private health care could be implemented. it could work, it does with education, clubs, every other aspect of a society.
-- Posted by LucidAssassin at 12:13 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from rickyspeople at 12:11 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
ok. health care should be a right, not a privilege.
i think you'll find most often the case is universal health care promotes people to be better workers. when they don't have to worry about where there next round of medication is coming from, or when they don't have to sacrifice things like food for health care, people won't have an excuse to be lazy, and worker's comp. & such will see a drop in cases. of course, a universal system is not flawless, and it obviously is a less attractive alternative for people who can afford the best. i think a combination of public and private health care could be implemented. it could work, it does with education, clubs, every other aspect of a society.
or perhaps if the people that couldnt pay for it could have the universal health care and those that choose to keep their insurance can have their own policies that arent government run then it would work
-- Posted by LucidAssassin at 12:14 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from Forever Angel at 12:07 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
To answer all of your questions... it's called "wealth envy." Those without are being manipulated by the politicians to believe that those "with" don't deserve what they have and should be forced to share it with everyone "without."
which is bull. if you went from being poor to being rich because you worked hard at it and always tried your best, then you deserve to keep your money, not simply give it back to the people that didnt feel like working towards success and therefore stayed poor
-- Posted by uWhiteMage at 1:37 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from rickyspeople at 12:11 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
ok. health care should be a right, not a privilege.
i think you'll find most often the case is universal health care promotes people to be better workers. when they don't have to worry about where there next round of medication is coming from, or when they don't have to sacrifice things like food for health care, people won't have an excuse to be lazy, and worker's comp. & such will see a drop in cases. of course, a universal system is not flawless, and it obviously is a less attractive alternative for people who can afford the best. i think a combination of public and private health care could be implemented. it could work, it does with education, clubs, every other aspect of a society.
Actually, welfare benefits(including medicaid) are causing a large increase in unemployed men and especially women with children not actively seeking work. Simply because it pays more not to work. I think we should phase out Medicare, Medicaid, social security and significantly reduce welfare benefits. Not to mention cut the military budget in half by ending the Iraq war and by cutting down on nuclear weapons programs and foreign bases. We could pay off the nation debt in a matter of 15 years and reduce income tax by over 50%.
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 3:42 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from LucidAssassin at 2:14 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from Forever Angel at 12:07 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
To answer all of your questions... it's called "wealth envy." Those without are being manipulated by the politicians to believe that those "with" don't deserve what they have and should be forced to share it with everyone "without."
which is bull. if you went from being poor to being rich because you worked hard at it and always tried your best, then you deserve to keep your money, not simply give it back to the people that didnt feel like working towards success and therefore stayed poor
You don't even understand the questions you asked, do you? What if I didn't go from poor to rich? What if I went from middle class to upper class? Or what if I was rich to start with... does it make a difference? When 'some people' tell the "less fortunate" (what a crappy description) that they are "entitled" to the same things that the "rich" can get (because they can pay for it), they are using the "wealth envy" syndrome to promote a form of class warfare and take their power from that situation. Health care is not a right, although we should, as a society, try to provide it for those that need it. But if I can provide it for myself, should I be "required" by law to pay for someone else's as well?
-- Posted by GeneCosta at 5:24 am on Dec. 20, 2008
Lawlz wealth envy. That's why Warren Buffet and Bill Gates favor all of those.
-- Posted by GeneCosta at 5:26 am on Dec. 20, 2008
Quote: from Savren at 12:10 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
Quote: from LucidAssassin at 12:01 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
universal health care: ok ill admit that it works in keeping people alive longer (as canada will show us), but that comes with a high price. first of all, the more people we have to take care of because theyre living longer means the more that well have to pay to uphold the system right? especially with older people because they tend to have more health problems. wouldnt it just end up as a more expensive version of medicare? anyway, were also mainly helping out the poor so i can understand that anyone that cant pay for it would love to have the health care because they get it for free while jacking up the prices for the rest of the people that have to pay for it. they get free health care anyway though. if theres an emergency then hospitals will take care of the person even if they dont have insurance and if they cant pay for it then the hospitals get money out of everyone else, so why give them even more freedom and cause us to lose even more money? most people get health care through their jobs, another reason why its bad because its supporting poor people by letting them be lazy and were giving everything they need. whats encouraging them to get jobs? nothing. we give them money and now wed give them health care so they dont need to work. the people that do have medical insurance would most likely be losing the benefits that they have, while paying more and getting worse coverage, treatment, extended times for treatment, etc. lastly, do you guys really want to have what happened in australia happen here? i remember a person posting an article on here a while ago that talked about a kid that didnt get treated by the government because he wasnt sick enough for them to treat him. do you really want this? the money balance thing (idk what its called if it has a name but the thing where the economy is equally split up among all of the people equally): it is yet another way that will take care of the poor, but again at a serious cost to the rest of us. we already give them welfare which they blow off on tv's and random stuff they dont need, but what would they care? its free money for them. do we really want to give them any more money that they will most likely blow off on random luxuries and booze which the rest of us work so hard to be able to have? higher taxes on the rich: again, a policy that helps the lower people, but this time it includes the middle class. well if you dont already know, the top 1% of our population pays some 40% of the taxes. isnt this enough for you people? they already pay almost the majority off the taxes and thats only the top 1 percent! imagine what all of the others are doing! and with the equal economy and universal health care, they'd only be paying more and it would become unfair. theyd be completely holding up the country. well guess what people, what if they decided to leave the country? they dont need us theyre freakin millionaires already. they can leave and theyd probably be just fine with it. and what would happen when they leave? the taxes would only fall back to us harder that what we were gaining over. it will screw us over in the end. i can understand how these would be appealing to the poor and the last one to the middle class, but seriously america, wtf?
I have to agree that it is unfair that people who make more must get taxed more. If you work your butt off and end up making a healthy amount of money (like small business owners making over 250 grand) and thus get forced to pay all of your employees plus taxes, thats BS. I'm not a fan of Obama's tax plan because it has a significant effect in my opinion on the small business owners who are making just over the minimum for the tax raise to be imposed upon them.
Prove they work more. Most wealth acquired above a million dollars is from owning property, not working. When you're wealthy, you can make money from owning money.
-- Posted by tkster at 12:43 pm on Dec. 20, 2008
Quote: from GeneCosta at 7:24 am on Dec. 20, 2008
Lawlz wealth envy. That's why Warren Buffet and Bill Gates favor all of those.
Egocentrism is easier than pragmatism. tk
-- Posted by Forever Angel at 12:57 pm on Dec. 20, 2008
Quote: from GeneCosta at 7:24 am on Dec. 20, 2008
Lawlz wealth envy. That's why Warren Buffet and Bill Gates favor all of those.
Do you have evidence of this claim?
-- Posted by bluenight at 6:40 pm on Dec. 20, 2008
Quote: from LucidAssassin at 2:01 pm on Dec. 19, 2008
universal health care: ok ill admit that it works in keeping people alive longer (as canada will show us), but that comes with a high price. first of all, the more people we have to take care of because theyre living longer means the more that well have to pay to uphold the system right? especially with older people because they tend to have more health problems. wouldnt it just end up as a more expensive version of medicare? anyway, were also mainly helping out the poor so i can understand that anyone that cant pay for it would love to have the health care because they get it for free while jacking up the prices for the rest of the people that have to pay for it. they get free health care anyway though. if theres an emergency then hospitals will take care of the person even if they dont have insurance and if they cant pay for it then the hospitals get money out of everyone else, so why give them even more freedom and cause us to lose even more money? most people get health care through their jobs, another reason why its bad because its supporting poor people by letting them be lazy and were giving everything they need. whats encouraging them to get jobs? nothing. we give them money and now wed give them health care so they dont need to work. the people that do have medical insurance would most likely be losing the benefits that they have, while paying more and getting worse coverage, treatment, extended times for treatment, etc. lastly, do you guys really want to have what happened in australia happen here? i remember a person posting an article on here a while ago that talked about a kid that didnt get treated by the government because he wasnt sick enough for them to treat him. do you really want this? the money balance thing (idk what its called if it has a name but the thing where the economy is equally split up among all of the people equally): it is yet another way that will take care of the poor, but again at a serious cost to the rest of us. we already give them welfare which they blow off on tv's and random stuff they dont need, but what would they care? its free money for them. do we really want to give them any more money that they will most likely blow off on random luxuries and booze which the rest of us work so hard to be able to have? higher taxes on the rich: again, a policy that helps the lower people, but this time it includes the middle class. well if you dont already know, the top 1% of our population pays some 40% of the taxes. isnt this enough for you people? they already pay almost the majority off the taxes and thats only the top 1 percent! imagine what all of the others are doing! and with the equal economy and universal health care, they'd only be paying more and it would become unfair. theyd be completely holding up the country. well guess what people, what if they decided to leave the country? they dont need us theyre freakin millionaires already. they can leave and theyd probably be just fine with it. and what would happen when they leave? the taxes would only fall back to us harder that what we were gaining over. it will screw us over in the end. i can understand how these would be appealing to the poor and the last one to the middle class, but seriously america, wtf?
it will not work in the US cause we are too fat, we eat to many hamburgers
|