SNAP benefits cut!!! Musk gets a trillion dollars!

QP! said:
@T. A. Gardner argues a nihilist position.

He pushes a view that Obamacare should be entirely cancelled and insurance should not exist.
Click to expand...

Correct. It is an abject failure. Like other obvious failures it should be abandoned. Keeping it is like trying to fix all the problems with an Edsel rather than start over with something new.
QP! said:
he has no answer, as to why if Obamacare is so obvious terrible that in 10+ years the GOP and magats now have not been able to offer to swap it out with anything better to accrue political benefit.
Click to expand...

Because they haven't tried. That doesn't mean there aren't better solutions, there are.
QP! said:
When i pointed out medical bankruptcies would soar, his reply was 'so what'.
Click to expand...

That's an issue with our current system of health cost coverage regardless and due to a myriad of reasons.
QP! said:
Few in the MC and certainly almost no one at the lower MC or below would be able to avoid bankruptcy with a single serious car accident that required emergency room care and beyond. Cancers, etc, families all bankrupt.
Click to expand...

Most automotive insurance has medical coverage included in it. Aside from that, if you aren't the responsible party for the accident then it isn't coming out of your pocket.
QP! said:
His only answer to me raising that was 'politicians do not give a shit about citizens going bankrupt', as if that somehow means citizens should then not care, also.
Click to expand...
They don't. There are better ways, they just don't have political backing because of vested interests. Do you really think politicians getting piles of cash from insurance companies are going to implement something that kicks insurance companies to the curb?
 
QP! said:
@T. A. Gardner argues a nihilist position.

He pushes a view that Obamacare should be entirely cancelled and insurance should not exist.

he has no answer, as to why if Obamacare is so obvious terrible that in 10+ years the GOP and magats now have not been able to offer to swap it out with anything better to accrue political benefit.

When i pointed out medical bankruptcies would soar, his reply was 'so what'.

Few in the MC and certainly almost no one at the lower MC or below would be able to avoid bankruptcy with a single serious car accident that required emergency room care and beyond. Cancers, etc, families all bankrupt.

His only answer to me raising that was 'politicians do not give a shit about citizens going bankrupt', as if that somehow means citizens should then not care, also.
Click to expand...
When the populace can’t afford a service or product

They never enter the market place

Their contribution to this portion of the economy ends

Most families will go back to not being treated for injuries and diseases

That money stops flowing

When a service had a decrease in money flow to that service they are cut back

It results in fewer places and people in that service or product production

The republican’t party wants market forces to run our healthcare

It will destroy that slice of the economy

And make for a very sick population


What’s the upside of your idiot plan righties?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Correct. It is an abject failure. Like other obvious failures it should be abandoned. Keeping it is like trying to fix all the problems with an Edsel rather than start over with something new.


Because they haven't tried. That doesn't mean there aren't better solutions, there are.


That's an issue with our current system of health cost coverage regardless and due to a myriad of reasons.


Most automotive insurance has medical coverage included in it. Aside from that, if you aren't the responsible party for the accident then it isn't coming out of your pocket.

They don't. There are better ways, they just don't have political backing because of vested interests. Do you really think politicians getting piles of cash from insurance companies are going to implement something that kicks insurance companies to the curb?
Click to expand...
NAME THE BETTER WAYS


You never provide any
 
QP! said:
@T. A. Gardner argues a nihilist position.

He pushes a view that Obamacare should be entirely cancelled and insurance should not exist.

he has no answer, as to why if Obamacare is so obvious terrible that in 10+ years the GOP and magats now have not been able to offer to swap it out with anything better to accrue political benefit.

When i pointed out medical bankruptcies would soar, his reply was 'so what'.

Few in the MC and certainly almost no one at the lower MC or below would be able to avoid bankruptcy with a single serious car accident that required emergency room care and beyond. Cancers, etc, families all bankrupt.

His only answer to me raising that was 'politicians do not give a shit about citizens going bankrupt', as if that somehow means citizens should then not care, also.
Click to expand...
No. TA's problem is really simple. Hatred. He literally hates Obama and any other politician with a "D" after their name. That's why to him; Obama care is doomed in its crib - IT'S IN THE NAME!

Until TA stops with the hate and begins thinking rationally - which I know he can - his posting style will remain the same.
 
evince said:
NAME THE BETTER WAYS


You never provide any
Click to expand...
No one has asked.

The solution I suggest follows. I spent a lot of time thinking it up, more than Congress has, that’s for sure. It involves getting government out of the way, making people responsible for their own health care costs, and gives crumbs to big insurers and the government to make them feel better they’re being kicked to the curb.

First, we make all health care expenses 100% tax deductible. Your personal health care costs are high? You can deduct all of them from your taxes. Why should the government be taxing people for trying to stay healthy?

Next, we expand the Individual Health Savings account program immensely. Money put into these accounts is pre-tax now. Second, the limit is taken off. You can stuff as much into one of these as you want.

If you take the cash out for health expenses, it’s tax free. If you take it out for something else (ie., you don’t direct pay a health provider by debit card or check) then you get it taxed as income.

For those who are low income and get things like EIC (Earned Income Credit) this money doesn’t go to the taxpayer directly but is instead deposited in their health care payment account to cover their costs up to a maximum amount of say $5,000 (the exact amount can vary this is just illustrative). Once they hit that number, they get the EIC as a tax return just like now.

That means virtually everybody has a health care savings account. Better, we could make these earn some interest too. That’s for discussion.

We also make these accounts available to businesses. But we do it a bit differently with these. Like the personal ones, each employee gets an account up to a limit of say $5,000 to $10,000. The exact amount isn’t critical here for discussion. The employer simply reimburses the employee for health costs as they occur, and the employee reports them.

This system is easily implemented. Most employers already have companies managing employee pay, like ADP, due to the complexity of government regulations.

Now comes the sweet part for employees and employers. At the end of each year, the employer and employee are allowed to split the remaining funds in each account 50 – 50.

That means if the employer account is $5,000 per year and the employee doesn’t use the account they get a $2,500 bonus at the end of the year. The employer, likewise, gets a similar “bonus” to use towards reducing their costs next year on employee health care costs. This could possibly be run by current health insurance companies if the employer doesn't want to themselves.

Now, to cover massive, costly health problems… That’s where insurers and the government come in. What we do is abolish Medicare / Medicaid and replace it with a national catastrophic health insurance program with a $5,000 to $10,000 deductible. This might be higher or lower. Again, that’s for debate. But everybody has this coverage. The number, I suggest, should be about equal to the expected value in an average healthcare savings account.

That means hospitals will only be out the deductible for anybody they treat at most. That’s collectable if the individual doesn’t pay up front or make payments. They can live with that It also means almost anyone will be able to cover most or all of the deductible from their own pocket via their health spending account.

Thus, individuals can have their own spending account to pay for health care, employers and employees have a similar account they use together, and everybody gets covered for major medical disasters in their lives.

The government stops taxing people for paying for their health care, and insurers are running the catastrophic plans.

If someone wants more health insurance coverage, they’re free to pay for that too. You, the individual, get to pay for what you think you need in health care rather than have the government decide for you.

So, given you haven't given so much as a second of thought to what might be better, instead just parroting the Left's / Democrat's whining about "Universal government run healthcare" and other massive, high cost, socialist bullshit, I'm streets ahead of you on this. Try and poke holes in my plan.
 
Lionfish said:
She just ate an entire person.
Click to expand...
R.3a624e106bbb26117c0fce53699a0873
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Correct. It is an abject failure. Like other obvious failures it should be abandoned. Keeping it is like trying to fix all the problems with an Edsel rather than start over with something new.


Because they haven't tried. That doesn't mean there aren't better solutions, there are.


That's an issue with our current system of health cost coverage regardless and due to a myriad of reasons.


Most automotive insurance has medical coverage included in it. Aside from that, if you aren't the responsible party for the accident then it isn't coming out of your pocket.

They don't. There are better ways, they just don't have political backing because of vested interests. Do you really think politicians getting piles of cash from insurance companies are going to implement something that kicks insurance companies to the curb?
Click to expand...

As i pointed out prior, voters across the board want to keep their ObamaCare and while you replied that you do not care what people want, politicians who want to stay in power need to, as Magats learned prior with even the threat of cuts.

So if only for self serving reasons the 'magats in power should then WANT TO provide something better, if it is as easy as you say'.

And no, car insurance will not prevent the type of medical bankruptcies i am speaking to not even close. and your view of 'letting the people who cause the accidents and their families just go bankrupt' is not one the voters want.

So while you can say 'I Terry do not care and thus do not think Politicians should care', that is not how the world works. The majority of citizens want Obamacare or something better to replace it, and Politicians, by their very existence need to consider that because while the system is corrupted, citizen votes on how they want their tax dollars spend still do matter, at some level.
 
Althea said:
Every penny that anyone spends on health insurance comes from pre tax dollars. Employers pay lower salary when offering 'free' or low cost insurance to employees.

Further, any compensation that employers offer via health insurance is NOT included in matching FICA contributions. In essence employers pay lower salary, save 8+% on FICA, and write off all policy costs.

There is no health insurance in the nation that is not subsidized.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'd like to know what that outlay by private employers comes to annually. I suspect that the myth that "we can't afford health care insurance for all" is just that -- a total myth. How many BILLIONS per year would employers be saved if they didn't offer it? Those billions that taxpayers help subsidize could go instead to fund a national health care plan.

You are right about salaries, too. I've worked in places where those who don't want benefits were paid more per hour than those who took it.
 
QP! said:
Terry has now taken a position that using AI or Google to research a position and to post that data here is inferior to doing it the old manual way of instead going to each website yourself and initiate old school manual searches (newspaper sites, scholarly article sites, government sites).

Why has he done that? Because both AI and Google searches can quickly show, with full citations and data that what he is spewing is wrong.

So he now refuses to engage with anything that comes from an AI or google searches saying his data was sources the old fashioned 'better way', (which means he only searches magat media and does not use Ai or google [as he does not want to see stuff that goes against what he is saying]) and he just hand waves it away as if it does not exist.

What AI and Google do is invaluable. They allow the same person to more quickly access all the same info they get on manual search and so much more, thus allowing them to see more sides of the same position and to check citations and facts. There is not one single advantage to manual searches, as Terry claims.

But mark my words as i will shame him off his stupid position he stated and he will soon say he never said it, as constantly happens with him.
Click to expand...
I find that a good number of his own citations directly contradict the point he is trying to make. He neither reads nor comprehends the references he posts. He’ll then double down on stupid by continually referencing the same source.
 
evince said:
NAME THE BETTER WAYS


You never provide any
Click to expand...
he told me last time 'he could create a better one' but refused to provide details.

When i said 'voters consistently demonstrate they want ObamaCare or something better to replace it and politicians know that', his reply was he 'does not care what voters want'.

His only schtick is to parrot 'it is so terrible, and easy to build something better, ... but it should just be scrapped and nothing be put in place'.

He is stuck on stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top