You should consider all of them opportunities to prove the claims that you care about them. Instead, you continue to think compassion comes from seeing how much you can get the government to use someone else's money.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Free Shit and Trump Hate
- Thread starter Evmetro
- Start date
You should consider all of them opportunities to prove the claims that you care about them. Instead, you continue to think compassion comes from seeing how much you can get the government to use someone else's money.
You, personally, don't even pay for your own health care now! You even admitted as such earlier.
So here we have a Conservative screeching about people getting health care that others pay for, while saying he doesn't even pay for his own health care!
I have it figured out. You're one of those that believes compensation can only come in dollars and cents.
Last edited:
No, it's not you fucking moron because everyone pays payroll taxes.
How does an unemployed person pay payroll taxes?
I have it figured out. You're one of those that believes compensation can only come in dollars and cents.
How is your employer paying for your health care any different than paying a payroll tax for Medicare for All so everyone is covered?
How does an unemployed person pay payroll taxes?
They did when they were employed.
You should consider all of them opportunities to prove the claims that you care about them. Instead, you continue to think compassion comes from seeing how much you can get the government to use someone else's money.
What do you think health insurance is? Do you even know? I doubt it since you don't pay for your own health care.
How is your employer paying for your health care any different than paying a payroll tax for Medicare for All so everyone is covered?
I don't pay a payroll tax myself in order to have coverage now. I would with what you support.
How is my employer paying for my coverage as part of my compensation mean, as you've claimed, I'm not doing anything for mine yet someone receiving a subsidy, according to you, means they're paying for all of their own.
They did when they were employed.
You're confusing the current Medicare system with the Medicare for All system you want in place.
You still didn't answer my question. There are adults who, all of their life, don't draw a salary/wage. How are they covered?
I don't pay a payroll tax myself in order to have coverage now. I would with what you support.
You don't pay for it right now because someone else is paying for your health care. You even admitted that.
So after you screeched about paying for other people's care, you revealed that is precisely what is happening with you.
But your story on your coverage has changed a couple times in this debate; who knows what the actual truth is?
How is my employer paying for my coverage as part of my compensation mean, as you've claimed, I'm not doing anything for mine yet someone receiving a subsidy, according to you, means they're paying for all of their own.
Because they are literally paying for your care. You're not paying for it; someone else is. So you're guilty of the very thing you screech about.
You're confusing the current Medicare system with the Medicare for All system you want in place.
It's all funded by payroll taxes. It's the same system, just expanded to everyone.
You still didn't answer my question. There are adults who, all of their life, don't draw a salary/wage. How are they covered?
You mean disabled people? Yeah, they're covered because they're disabled.
What do you think health insurance is? Do you even know? I doubt it since you don't pay for your own health care.
Again, you're an idiot if you think being compensated with healthcare coverage paid for by my employer doesn't mean I don't pay for it with work. You're the kind of idiot that thinks my employer paying it on my behalf as part of my compensation is different than my employer giving me an equivalent amount and me writing the check to pay for it.
That you think we have insurance today means you're a fool. We don't have insurance, by definition. We have a transfer of money. True insurance would allow those providing the coverage the ability to choose whether or not they want to insure someone based on the risk and say "no" if the risk outweighed the benefits. When the government tells an entity that they have to provide certain things, the concept of insurance no longer exists regardless of what you want to call it.
The government on the federal level needs to keep their nose out of it.
Again, you're an idiot if you think being compensated with healthcare coverage paid for by my employer doesn't mean I don't pay for it with work
Literally, someone is paying for your health care.
However you justify that to yourself doesn't change the fact that you're not responsible for paying for it.
So you're an example of the very thing that got you so upset; someone paying for your care.
It's all funded by payroll taxes. It's the same system, just expanded to everyone.
You mean disabled people? Yeah, they're covered because they're disabled.
It's not the same system. People who get Medicare today have to be of a certain age to qualify. The Medicare for all you support would involve people of all ages getting something including those that don't contribute to the system despite the claims that 'everyone would pay into it'.
I didn't mention disabled. That's the automatic excuse you bleeding hearts use to defend a socialist system. There are adults who have never worked a day in their life. Why do they get coverage if this proposed Medicare for All supposedly involves everyone paying?
What you propose is exactly like food stamps, welfare, and any other social program in place. There are many who benefit that don't contribute. No one owes them a damn thing.
You're the kind of idiot that thinks my employer paying it on my behalf as part of my compensation is different than my employer giving me an equivalent amount and me writing the check to pay for it.
But you don't pay for it.
That's the point.
You're not paying for it, yet in a single-payer, Medicare for all system, you would pay for it because you'd be paying payroll taxes. So would everyone else who draws a paycheck.
That you think we have insurance today means you're a fool. We don't have insurance, by definition.
That wasn't what you said before, and it was only after I pointed it out that you changed your argument this way.
Literally, someone is paying for your health care.
However you justify that to yourself doesn't change the fact that you're not responsible for paying for it.
So you're an example of the very thing that got you so upset; someone paying for your care.
You confusing writing the check with earning what the check represents.
Someone getting a subsidy is a prime example of someone not paying for their healthcare.
True insurance would allow those providing the coverage the ability to choose whether or not they want to insure someone based on the risk and say "no" if the risk outweighed the benefits.
FFS.
So you don't seem to know what the SHOP marketplace is. It's literally the place where all businesses go to get group coverage for their workers. It's far cheaper than having each worker buy coverage individually, and is done to keep premiums and costs low. Group plans don't exclude people. You don't seem to know anything about this subject.
When the government tells an entity that they have to provide certain things, the concept of insurance no longer exists regardless of what you want to call it.
So you don't seem to grasp the concept of health insurance. You also don't seem to understand the role an insurance company plays in health care either.
The government on the federal level needs to keep their nose out of it.
Because people in Texas get a different kind of breast cancer than people in Maine?
It's not the same system. People who get Medicare today have to be of a certain age to qualify. The Medicare for all you support would involve people of all ages getting something including those that don't contribute to the system despite the claims that 'everyone would pay into it'.
So those that "don't contribute" (aka disabled people) are already covered by government health care now. So nothing changes there. Secondly, it sounds to me that you think disabled people shouldn't get any coverage at all. Is that correct? Do you think disabled people should not get health care coverage through Medicare or Medicaid? What kind of monster are you, exactly?