- Joined
- Aug 7, 2009
- Messages
- 16,164
- Reaction score
- 5,060
- Location
- St Thomas, VI
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
I don't know, why not ask Ron Paul's uninsured 2008 campaign manager? I know why, because he's dead.
the irony is thick.
I don't know, why not ask Ron Paul's uninsured 2008 campaign manager? I know why, because he's dead.
No, by paying the bill himself.
And if he is poor, low income, or even middle income, and cannot afford to pay the bill himself?
And if he is poor, low income, or even middle income, and cannot afford to pay the bill himself?
I don't know, why not ask Ron Paul's uninsured 2008 campaign manager? I know why, because he's dead.
I don't know, why not ask Ron Paul's uninsured 2008 campaign manager? I know why, because he's dead.
Charity. People are charitable when they are not forced to do be that way.
Don't see the connection. He raised the money and he still died. It just shows that medical care is not perfect and people still die even when they can afford the care.
What a load of manure.Charity. People are charitable when they are not forced to be that way.
You keep using the word "force". It's not a matter of forcing you to pay for someone's health care, it's a matter of deciding where to spend the tax money that you're already paying. Besides, you're already paying for expensive health care programs like medicare anyway.
It's a strange argument. "Socialism won't work because people naturally don't want to share. Charity will work because will naturally share"
What a load of manure.
As if charitable donations could even begin to fill the gaps in this nation's horrendous health care system. Hilarious.
You keep using the word "force". It's not a matter of forcing you to pay for someone's health care, it's a matter of deciding where to spend the tax money that you're already paying. Besides, you're already paying for expensive health care programs like medicare anyway.
It's a strange argument. "Socialism won't work because people naturally don't want to share. Charity will work because people will naturally share"
It has to do with wanting tax dollars going to you, not for services for other people. Its about using tax dollars to promote the protection of rights and liberties, not general services.
I have no doubt that's the entire solution for Libertarians(and other GOP refugees).As if it's the entire solution.
You keep using the word "force". It's not a matter of forcing you to pay for someone's health care, it's a matter of deciding where to spend the tax money that you're already paying. Besides, you're already paying for expensive health care programs like medicare anyway.
It's a strange argument. "Socialism won't work because people naturally don't want to share. Charity will work because people will naturally share"
Income is kind of irrelevant. You can earn $500k a year and have $499.9k in total expenses. Where could you possibly get a good insurance plan for $100 a year? It has to do with how much disposable income you have.
Are you kidding? I want universal healthcare for everyone because I secretly want free health care for myself? I am insured and I'm currently pumping money into the pockets of the private insurance companies that I'm dependent on. I pay taxes, and I want my tax dollars going to public health care. I haven't used my insurance in years, but I pay taxes every year.
The average person making $500k/year probably has a more disposable income than the average person making 20k/yr. I haven't ran the numbers, that'd just be my guess, though.
Yes, very true. The keyword here is probably. What I'm getting at is if Bob makes $500k and has $499.9k in expenses, and his neighbor Ted makes $100k but only has $50k in expenses, Ted has more disposable income percentage-wise (and in this case, literally). Income doesn't really matter, what does matter is the amount of expenses you have relative to your income. Ted here could afford an awesome health insurance plan compared to Bob who earns 5 times more money than he does.
I don't know, why not ask Ron Paul's uninsured 2008 campaign manager? I know why, because he's dead.
I wasn't talking about you. I'm talking about the general idea. Its not about protection of rights and liberties, its about services for people that they couldn't otherwise afford. Its a system designed for the few while forcing everyone else to be part in either the form of tax money they see no return on(medicare) or forcing them on a system with tax payer money they don't need(UHC)
That was hardly some standing ovation. It was two or three people. Extrapolating that to the entire group is wrong.
Facing a life-threatening condition without the money to pay for the treatment or paid membership to a club that shares the cost means you may die. You may die anyway. It is no surprise or shock. Humans have a 100% death rate.
Charity. People are charitable when they are not forced to be that way.