Thread: We need SOMETHING, even if not Obamacare or UHC

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

You know, I'm not against government disability insurance for people who have diseases through no fault of their own.
You don't need to change the whole system, to get care for your granddaughter.

She may qualify for SSI, but under current rules, your kids family would have to be really poor.
Why not lobby to change the rules for SSI, where the income and asset restrictions are no longer an issue.

If we did that, then no one would purchase insurance, and the gov becomes everyones insurance provider by default. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I am all for socialized insurance, but I just wanted to point out that a "safety net" without means testing is no longer a "safety net", it is must another government service/benefit that we all pay for though our taxes directly or indirectly. Sometimes thats not such a bad thing and may be preferable to a bad alternative (like dieing due to a lack of being able to pay).

scrap the individual mandate....but add a public option.

insurance companies wil be forced to lower costs to compete.

Originally Posted by imagep

If we did that, then no one would purchase insurance, and the gov becomes everyones insurance provider by default. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I am all for socialized insurance, but I just wanted to point out that a "safety net" without means testing is no longer a "safety net", it is must another government service/benefit that we all pay for though our taxes directly or indirectly. Sometimes thats not such a bad thing and may be preferable to a bad alternative (like dieing due to a lack of being able to pay).

No, this is for SSI for disabled people, like Bills granddaughter, without the crushing income limitations placed on the parents.
People, who are disabled through not fault of their own (most especially children) should be able to recieve government sponsored medical care, without the need for "credits" or means testing (I could accept a large cap means test).

the plot sickens.....turns out that the insurance company formed some kind of holding company or something to write their policies in another state, clearly to circumvent Arizona laws.....but the other state has since changed their law to match AZ laws, so the insurance company has begun paying claims again. But, the unpaid claims from last year still hang in the balance.
This begs for a class action law suit against the insurance company.....

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

No, this is for SSI for disabled people, like Bills granddaughter, without the crushing income limitations placed on the parents.
People, who are disabled through not fault of their own (most especially children) should be able to recieve government sponsored medical care, without the need for "credits" or means testing (I could accept a large cap means test).

For some of us health care is not a choice.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

No, this is for SSI for disabled people, like Bills granddaughter, without the crushing income limitations placed on the parents.
People, who are disabled through not fault of their own (most especially children) should be able to recieve government sponsored medical care, without the need for "credits" or means testing (I could accept a large cap means test).

I understand. I actually think that we should have no means tested government benefits or services at all. One of the basic tenents of "fairness" is that everyone is treated the same. When we means test to qualify for government benefits and services, then we are not treating everyone the same. When TD rants that he uses less government services than poor people yet he has to pay more in taxes, I understand his rant (although I disagree that he uses less government services). I understand that it is not fair that he is denied certain services because he makes too much money and yet people in his income class pay most of the taxes.

If a government benefit/service is valuable enough that even one penny of tax money should be spent on it, then it is valuable and important enough that the same benefit/service should be available for every taxpayer regardless of income level or wealth level.

Originally Posted by winston53660

For some of us health care is not a choice.

No, it is a choice. You have every opportunity to choose not to use any health care services. People make that decision every day. Humans arn't intended to live forever. But I do understand the added importance that health care services have to you (I'm not unsympathetic).

Originally Posted by winston53660

For some of us health care is not a choice.

When did I ever imply that it wasn't.
I'm for a government policy for people with disabilities, that doesn't have tight restrictions or credit requirements.

Originally Posted by imagep

I understand. I actually think that we should have no means tested government benefits or services at all. One of the basic tenents of "fairness" is that everyone is treated the same. When we means test to qualify for government benefits and services, then we are not treating everyone the same. When TD rants that he uses less government services than poor people yet he has to pay more in taxes, I understand his rant (although I disagree that he uses less government services). I understand that it is not fair that he is denied certain services because he makes too much money and yet people in his income class pay most of the taxes.

If a government benefit/service is valuable enough that even one penny of tax money should be spent on it, then it is valuable and important enough that the same benefit/service should be available for every taxpayer regardless of income level or wealth level.

I believe, that if we create programs for the less fortunate, they should really be for the less fortunate.
A child or adult, who was born or developed a serious disease, through no fault of their own, should be the first people that get social welfare, with few strings attached.
These are faults of nature, which makes it truly, for the less fortunate.

It's incredulous, that a person, whose's disabled because they meth'ed themselves out, can get benefits, with few restrictions, while a child (like Bill's granddaughter, cannot).
It smacks of the stupidity of the system.

Get government out of healthcare, the removal of red tape/paperwork alone will save money. Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to actually pay out what they are obligated to pay out.