How does it feel to now be a taxpayer?

Dixie said:
Is EVERYBODY going to pay for this? Or just what you deem to be "RICH" people? Because, if we are talking about something where each American is going to contribute, I have no problem with THAT idea.

No, seriously dude... what you want, is for people who make over a certain income, to have to pay for their insurance and the insurance of someone else too, so that a bunch of people don't have to pay anything. There is no country... heck, no place in our universe of reality, where things are FREE!
Click to expand...

Dude.. you have no idea what I want..

But if the idea of Bill Gates adding a little extra in his end-of the year tax bill to help a kid with a broken arm get a cast offends you? then you've got issues that are above my pay-grade to fix.
 
ekg said:
Dude.. you have no idea what I want..

But if the idea of Bill Gates adding a little extra in his end-of the year tax bill to help a kid with a broken arm get a cast offends you? then you've got issues that are above my pay-grade to fix.
Click to expand...

What offends me is absurd hyperbole for the purpose of propping up envious self-centered stupidity. You want to stand on a soapbox and proclaim that every American needs to provide their own health care coverage, but that's not at all what you really want or think we should have. You want people you've deemed as "rich" to pay for the health care coverage of others, because they don't deserve their money, the poor people do. Instead of being honest enough to just admit that, you run around on your crusade to have all Americans pay for their own health care insurance...with the exception of the half that don't contribute a dime to society, and get a free ride on the backs of others. Not to mention, you expect insurance to insure you against things that have already happened.... And you don't think that will cause the price of insurance to rise much.

Why does your example have to be Bill Gates vs. kid with broken arm? Couldn't it just as likely be; A naturalized immigrant who came here with nothing, and through hard work, sweat and tears, have managed to build their small modest landscape business into a $200k a year company --versus-- some lazy-ass lowlife who has figured out a way to bilk the welfare system? Or maybe it's the relatively middle-class shlub who's job it is to change the light bulb on top of the Empire State building, and since he has to work there, lives in Manhattan... and because it costs so much to live in Manhattan, but is required for this job, he earns $200k a year... he's not wealthy, he barely gets by, because the cost of living is so high in Manhattan, but that's where his job requires him to be....why should a larger chunk of his pay check go to help fund the bum who is fraudulently stealing welfare? We can draw up all sorts of hyperbolic individual examples, it doesn't maturely deal with the issue, does it? I mean... at some point, we become a Chris Farley character.

We already HAVE a nationalized health care system in place in America, we've had this for decades. The department of HHS was created to deal with just this very thing, we didn't NEED a revamp of the entire health care system. If the issue is old or poor people who are sick and can't afford health care... we have Medicare and Medicaid! That's why we invented them. We're already paying a huge chunk of our paychecks to fund these, but in all your brilliance, you don't see where that is enough. In fact, you pretend like, it doesn't even exist. Then, when I point this out, some other idiot tries to make the point that, "Well, we pay for THAT, why can't we pay for THIS?" It's like stupidity on steroids or something.
 
Dixie said:
Of course they can. Congress can vote to do anything they please. IF they wanted to completely abolish Medicare and give a rebate of Medicare funds to current taxpayers, so they can buy health insurance or Obamacare or whatever... they can do this. What they CAN'T do, is appropriate funds that have been collected to pay for Medicare, for the purpose and intent of paying for Obamacare.

The key here is "Congress can vote to..." I am aware of that, and have not argued that they can't. In order to fund Obamacare, they are going to have to vote to do so, because it will have to be paid for with a massive tax increase.

Congress does have authority to tax... yes, they can pass a massive tax increase to pay for Obamacare... that's ultimately what they will HAVE to do, because there is no funding for it otherwise. See.. what you keep arguing, is that they can implement Obamacare through Medicare, by making it a part of Medicare... but the SCOTUS ruled against that.

I suggest you read the ruling again. They specifically stated that the Federal government does NOT have this authority under the commerce clause. They have the authority to do Medicare, because it is part of the Social Security system, and we've passed the tax in Congress for that express purpose. They have no such authority to implement nationalized health care under the commerce clause, it has to be done, like Social Security, as a tax.
Click to expand...

Let's run through this again. Let's say Medicare pays for a check-up. If that was dropped from Medicare and ObamaCare started to pay for check-ups then the cost of Medicare would drop and the tax that paid for that specific service would no longer be necessary to be collected for Medicare. Now, the tax would be collected and applied to ObamaCare. The bottom line being no tax increase has occurred. However, the savings come from having people diagnosed earlier for possible illnesses. For example, high blood pressure. Rather than wait until 65 and find out ones kidneys have been partially destroyed a person at, say, 55 may be diagnosed with high blood pressure and starting medication. When they reach 65 their kidneys are OK. At the cost of 50 cents a day for 10 years that would be less than $2,000.00. Compare $2,000.00 to the cost of paying for medical care for someone who has kidney damage.

Or diabetes and blindness. Compare the cost of insulin to that of looking after a blind person. Or osteoporoses. Consider the cost for periodic check-ups and medication compared to the cost involved in looking after a person with a broken hip.

Is this so difficult to understand?

I am not watching any propaganda videos, or being counted by any pinhead as part of some distorted demographic. Sorry... try another fool.
Click to expand...

It's not propaganda. The pictures are there. You're just too ashamed to admit the current medical system is a scam, through and through.
 
Is Dick-see's headline a lie?

Does the ACA make anyone "now" a "taxpayer" who wasn't before?
 
Dixie said:
What offends me is absurd hyperbole for the purpose of propping up envious self-centered stupidity. You want to stand on a soapbox and proclaim that every American needs to provide their own health care coverage, but that's not at all what you really want or think we should have. You want people you've deemed as "rich" to pay for the health care coverage of others, because they don't deserve their money, the poor people do. Instead of being honest enough to just admit that, you run around on your crusade to have all Americans pay for their own health care insurance...with the exception of the half that don't contribute a dime to society, and get a free ride on the backs of others. Not to mention, you expect insurance to insure you against things that have already happened.... And you don't think that will cause the price of insurance to rise much.
Click to expand...

you are acting like we don't all pay for each other as it is.. I pay for your roads to have street lights, or for your mother to have smoother road to drive on instead of one with pot-holes.. you pay for the books my kids use in their classrooms.. healthcare is just that easy. I would assume you think we're one of, if not the, greatest country there is? are you going to tell me France can get it right but we can't? What does that say for American Exceptionalism when even Cuba can figure out how to pay for healthcare for their citizens and we're sitting here with our thumbs up our ass crying because OMG that lazy person might get treated for TB.. the hOrRor. of it all!!

and btw," half that don't contribute a dime to society" yes they did.. stop listening to Fox. Everyone is this country pays taxes, whether it be income or sales.. but yes my dear, even the lowly ones you loathe and fear, pay taxes..

here's a concept.. we all pay for the defense budget and guess what? it protects you,me and that 'free-rider' you're so afraid of.. and you know why? because it's for the defense of This country, not just the defense of the tax-payer..we can all pay for healthcare for the benefit of the country.. how hard is that to comprehend?

your side is so "personal responsibility' on everything.. well I call bullshit. It's not about that at all, it's about healthcare being the last bastion of the 'haves' over the 'have-nots'... if it was anything close to really being 'personal responsibility', you'd be all over a plan that makes everyone pay their own way instead of getting a free ride.. no, this is about a liberal doing a conservative idea better than the cons.. How dare he!

If this was about "You're taking from some and giving to others" you'd be just as hot over that bloated defense budget.. but you're not.. you don't mind spending or TAXING as long as the money goes to what you want it to go for.. or what about all the subsidizing we give to the gas and oil giants? if you were so worried about that immigrant, then why aren't you complaining that Mobile or Shell or Chevron shouldn't get his money for their pockets.. don't they get enough in the record breaking profits? Again, you simply don't care about that because Fox is ok with it so you'll never be the wiser on how much is really be 'redistributed' from the bottom to the top..



Dixie said:
Why does your example have to be Bill Gates vs. kid with broken arm?
Click to expand...

because you brought it up..

. what you want, is for people who make over a certain income,


Dixie said:
Couldn't it just as likely be; A naturalized immigrant who came here with nothing, and through hard work, sweat and tears, have managed to build their small modest landscape business into a $200k a year company --versus-- some lazy-ass lowlife who has figured out a way to bilk the welfare system? Or maybe it's the relatively middle-class shlub who's job it is to change the light bulb on top of the Empire State building, and since he has to work there, lives in Manhattan... and because it costs so much to live in Manhattan, but is required for this job, he earns $200k a year... he's not wealthy, he barely gets by, because the cost of living is so high in Manhattan, but that's where his job requires him to be....why should a larger chunk of his pay check go to help fund the bum who is fraudulently stealing welfare? We can draw up all sorts of hyperbolic individual examples, it doesn't maturely deal with the issue, does it? I mean... at some point, we become a Chris Farley character.
Click to expand...

addressed already.. everyone, I don't care who they are or where they came from, succeeded off the backs of others before them.. it's just to fucking bad if they can't be bothered to pay for that kind of safety,dependability,and security.. there is a price for civilization.. if there wasn't, we'd be Somalia, and just how 'well' would that immigrant be doing then?

Dixie said:
We already HAVE a nationalized health care system in place in America, we've had this for decades. The department of HHS was created to deal with just this very thing, we didn't NEED a revamp of the entire health care system. If the issue is old or poor people who are sick and can't afford health care... we have Medicare and Medicaid! That's why we invented them. We're already paying a huge chunk of our paychecks to fund these, but in all your brilliance, you don't see where that is enough. In fact, you pretend like, it doesn't even exist. Then, when I point this out, some other idiot tries to make the point that, "Well, we pay for THAT, why can't we pay for THIS?" It's like stupidity on steroids or something.
Click to expand...

it's not enough.. when there are still MILLIONS of people dying because they can't see a doctor to get their asthma from the coal mine they work for under control, it's not enough.. quit being so damn fatalistic, the country will not turn communist if your deepest fear of Shaniqua getting her food stamps AND her baby daddy gets a shot for his diabetes..

I have faith that we're just as smart as the rest of the civilized world when it comes to providing healthcare to it's citizens.. why you can't believe in your country enough is beyond me..
 
apple0154 said:
Let's run through this again. Let's say Medicare pays for a check-up. If that was dropped from Medicare and ObamaCare started to pay for check-ups then the cost of Medicare would drop and the tax that paid for that specific service would no longer be necessary to be collected for Medicare. Now, the tax would be collected and applied to ObamaCare.
Click to expand...

No, this is where you are wrong. If the tax is collected for Medicare, it can't be used to fund Obamacare. Even if they make cuts in Medicare, they still can't use the savings for Obamacare. They would have to return the money to the taxpayer, or find another part of Medicare to fund.

The bottom line being no tax increase has occurred.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is, a tax increase will HAVE to occur, in order to fund the program. There is no other funding for it, they can't use Medicare funds, they are off the table now. That's the point I think Liberals are missing in this ruling... it zapped the primary source you had laid out to pay for this. I fully understand what you are explaining, and you don't have to keep repeating it and trying again, because what they planned to do, they can't do, according to SCOTUS.

However, the savings come from having people diagnosed earlier for possible illnesses.
Click to expand...

Why aren't they going to the free health clinics and getting diagnosed now? The resource is available, and they are obviously not using it for some reason.

For example, high blood pressure. Rather than wait until 65 and find out ones kidneys have been partially destroyed a person at, say, 55 may be diagnosed with high blood pressure and starting medication.
Click to expand...

Exactly... so why aren't they using the free health clinic to do this now?

When they reach 65 their kidneys are OK. At the cost of 50 cents a day for 10 years that would be less than $2,000.00. Compare $2,000.00 to the cost of paying for medical care for someone who has kidney damage.
Click to expand...

But we are already funding a resource which offers this very same service, and they aren't using it. Maybe we need to pass a law mandating that everyone go have a yearly physical at the free health clinic, which is already available to them?

Or diabetes and blindness. Compare the cost of insulin to that of looking after a blind person. Or osteoporoses. Consider the cost for periodic check-ups and medication compared to the cost involved in looking after a person with a broken hip.
Click to expand...

All good points, and all these things can be seen about at any number of local health clinics which are free to the poor. Why aren't they using them?

Is this so difficult to understand?
Click to expand...

Yeah... It is! I wish you would explain how spending trillions of dollars to duplicate a system we already have, is going to suddenly make more people go see a doc?

It's not propaganda. The pictures are there. You're just too ashamed to admit the current medical system is a scam, through and through.
Click to expand...

If you think the system is a scam, that's fine, but all you've offered is a plan to switch who pays for the scam from individuals to government, the scam remains unchanged.
 
ekg said:
you are acting like we don't all pay for each other as it is.. I pay for your roads to have street lights, or for your mother to have smoother road to drive on instead of one with pot-holes.. you pay for the books my kids use in their classrooms.. healthcare is just that easy. I would assume you think we're one of, if not the, greatest country there is? are you going to tell me France can get it right but we can't? What does that say for American Exceptionalism when even Cuba can figure out how to pay for healthcare for their citizens and we're sitting here with our thumbs up our ass crying because OMG that lazy person might get treated for TB.. the hOrRor. of it all!!
Click to expand...

LOL... No... HORROR is being operated on in a Cuban hospital! Give that a try sometime!

Here's the difference in roads and schools, versus health insurance... We both use the roads and schools, I don't use your health insurance. We both get a benefit from roads and schools, I get no benefit from your health insurance. And for the record, unless we live in the same state, you and I don't really pay very much for each other's stuff. There is a small federal supplement, but the vast majority of roads and schools are paid for locally, not by our federal government.

and btw," half that don't contribute a dime to society" yes they did.. stop listening to Fox. Everyone is this country pays taxes, whether it be income or sales.. but yes my dear, even the lowly ones you loathe and fear, pay taxes..
Click to expand...

But we all have to pay sales taxes, don't we? How is it, poor people get to count their sales taxes as paying their share, when this is something we all have to pay? What we should do, is eliminate sales tax for rich people.. then the poor people who pay sales tax would be doing their part, while the rich did theirs by paying income tax.

here's a concept.. we all pay for the defense budget and guess what? it protects you,me and that 'free-rider' you're so afraid of.. and you know why? because it's for the defense of This country, not just the defense of the tax-payer..we can all pay for healthcare for the benefit of the country.. how hard is that to comprehend?
Click to expand...

I'm not afraid of the free rider, I just don't want them riding for free. It has nothing to do with fear of them. Again... the Defense protects us all, we all gain a benefit... not the case with your health insurance, only you gain a benefit.

your side is so "personal responsibility' on everything.. well I call bullshit. It's not about that at all, it's about healthcare being the last bastion of the 'haves' over the 'have-nots'... if it was anything close to really being 'personal responsibility', you'd be all over a plan that makes everyone pay their own way instead of getting a free ride.. no, this is about a liberal doing a conservative idea better than the cons.. How dare he!
Click to expand...

No, this is about absurd redundancy and expansion of government for no reason. Again... All for a plan where everyone pays their own way! When when can we have the vote on that???

If this was about "You're taking from some and giving to others" you'd be just as hot over that bloated defense budget.. but you're not..
Click to expand...

Okay, first of all, the entire defense budget is a just over a half trillion dollars.. and that's not a small amount, but remember... Obama has spent 3 trillion on stimulus programs which have done nothing. At least with the defense budget, military bases remain open, and military towns have some economic activity. Oh... and if we are invaded by China, we have at least a snowball's chance in hell....there's that aspect. We can cut the military budget, I have no problem with that, but remember it has consequences, unlike many inefficient or redundant programs that aren't working. I would rather have the town of Hinesville, GA functioning and the people there employed, instead of getting rid of $50 billion in grants to study whatever dope smokers think up to study.


you don't mind spending or TAXING as long as the money goes to what you want it to go for..
Click to expand...

Nope...would LOVE to live in a universe where tax wasn't needed. I have often endorsed a consumer-based tax to replace income tax. I don't think people's incomes should be taxed, only their consumption. As for what I want "the money" to go for, which we necessarily have to collect to operate a federal government...well.. that says it right there. I want it to go for what our government HAS to do, as a matter of essential services, and pretty much nothing else. I think we'd all be FAR better off.

or what about all the subsidizing we give to the gas and oil giants?
Click to expand...

Again, a VERY SMALL amount, compared to the total amount of debt this president has amassed. If you added the cumulative budget deficits of ALL previous American presidents together, they would not equal what Obama alone has spent.

We give subsidies to oil and gas companies to explore for oil in places that are better for the environment than where they traditionally look... should we stop doing that? I mean... I'm fine with it, I don't think we need to pay them to drill someplace else, if they know where to find the oil already. We also pay gas companies a subsidy so they can formulate gasoline for the seasons, so as to not contribute to 'global warming' and such, should we eliminate those subsidies? Again.. when can we have a vote?

you were so worried about that immigrant, then why aren't you complaining that Mobile or Shell or Chevron shouldn't get his money for their pockets.. don't they get enough in the record breaking profits? Again, you simply don't care about that because Fox is ok with it so you'll never be the wiser on how much is really be 'redistributed' from the bottom to the top..
Click to expand...

Oil companies sell a product which has increased dramatically in value, so it's reasonable to conclude they are making record-setting profits. Let's cut to the chase, you are a Marxist Socialist who believes we should redistribute the wealth. Evil capitalists control too much of it, and it needs to be redistributed to the poor consumer. Well... the world has witnessed this ideology being attempted in various places, with various rulers or forms of democratic government, but the same problem always arises... the system becomes corrupt from within, and the 'wealth redistribution' doesn't really ever happen. Wealth is transferred from the capitalists to the 'ruling class' who control the government. You still have the Evil 1% ...they just control all political power now.

But because you thought it was cool to listen to some geek pontificate about the wonders and glory of socialism, you think we can try it here in America and somehow, it is going to work for sure this time!


because you brought it up..

. what you want, is for people who make over a certain income,
Click to expand...

I brought up YOUR example of Bill Gates vs. broken arm kid? No no.. that was YOU, I am quite sure.

addressed already.. everyone, I don't care who they are or where they came from, succeeded off the backs of others before them.. it's just to fucking bad if they can't be bothered to pay for that kind of safety,dependability,and security.. there is a price for civilization.. if there wasn't, we'd be Somalia, and just how 'well' would that immigrant be doing then?
Click to expand...

We're going to be Somalia if you succeed in turning America into a corrupt socialist regime.

Why can't you address my absurd ridiculous hyperbolic examples like you demanded I do for yours? We don't live in a monolith. Every person who earns income over $200k is not RICH! Every person who earns less, isn't a hungry homeless orphan with giant brown eyes. People who earn over $200k don't have some special GREED gene that makes them disregard humanity, and people who make less, aren't blessed with some kind of virtue that makes them flawlessly ethical people. We have a WIDE range in America, it runs the gamut.

it's not enough..
Click to expand...

AND IT NEVER IS WITH LIBERALS!

when there are still MILLIONS of people dying because they can't see a doctor to get their asthma from the coal mine they work for under control, it's not enough..
Click to expand...

Why can't they go to the local health clinic? Even West Virginian's have free health clinics, I am sure of it! People are not dying because they CAN'T see a doctor... that's not happening. There are doctors in health clinics all across America, right now... ready to see patients. FREE to people who can't pay! Spread the word!!

quit being so damn fatalistic, the country will not turn communist if your deepest fear of Shaniqua getting her food stamps AND her baby daddy gets a shot for his diabetes..
Click to expand...

Oh, I know... we've had free public health clinics since I was a little boy, and we've not turned into a Communist country yet. Of course, no guarantees on that if Obama get's re-elected... it might be in the plans!

I have faith that we're just as smart as the rest of the civilized world when it comes to providing healthcare to it's citizens.. why you can't believe in your country enough is beyond me..
Click to expand...

I think we are greatly smarter than the rest of the world, and need not worry about following their example. I think in November, most of us smart people are going to the polls to put an end to this nightmare. And it hasn't been proposed, but I would favor a plan to send the people who are just as smart as the rest of the world, to some nice European socialist nation, so they can help them work out the problems of their current financial collapses. Us greatly smarter people can handle things just fine here, thank you very much!!
 
Dixie said:
Exactly... so why aren't they using the free health clinic to do this now?
Click to expand...

I know it's a waste of time...


and I hate to yell...but...DICKSEE! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE HEALTH CLINICS! YOU PAY FOR THEM!
Cutting Medicaid does not make anyone’s health care needs go away: The people with
heart disease and diabetes who lose Medicaid coverage will still need to fill the same
prescriptions, those with cancer will still need treatment, and those with chronic lung
disease will still need medication so that they can breathe more easily. Cutting Medicaid
just shifts the cost of care to the people who had depended on the program and who
suddenly find themselves uninsured. Without insurance, they will not be able to afford
much of the care they need. Critical cancer treatments may be delayed. Manageable health
problems may deteriorate and ultimately lead to hospitalizations and emergency room
visits that could have been prevented. 21 And treatment costs will be higher when those
who’ve lost coverage finally do get care. Often, a portion of those costs goes unpaid.
Even at public hospitals and other safety net providers, the uninsured may receive
substantial bills for their medical care.22 For the low-income uninsured, paying those
bills can be impossible. To make up for the cost of this uncompensated care, hospitals
and doctors charge insurers more for services that are provided to patients with health
coverage. Insurers then pass those costs on by charging higher premiums to consumers
and to businesses that purchase health insurance. It is estimated that, in 2008, family
coverage cost $1,017 more because of higher premium charges that resulted from insurers
passing along the costs of uncompensated care.
Click to expand...
 
Howey said:
I know it's a waste of time...


and I hate to yell...but...DICKSEE! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE HEALTH CLINICS! YOU PAY FOR THEM!
Click to expand...

Um... yes... I am aware that we already pay for this... I think that is the point.

We are already paying for free health care, but you want us to pay for free health care, but we're already paying for free health care.

Is something not computing in your brain with this argument, Howey?
 
Dixie said:
Um... yes... I am aware that we already pay for this... I think that is the point.

We are already paying for free health care, but you want us to pay for free health care, but we're already paying for free health care.

Is something not computing in your brain with this argument, Howey?
Click to expand...

Christ on a stick!

You're makiing the argument that people should go to free health clinics because they're free! THEY'RE NOT!

Read the pdf.

Oy...I'm done with you.
 
Good explanation below.

"The majority, aware that it was describing the penalty as not a tax for the Anti-Injunction Act but a tax for the Taxing Clause, noted that this is not the first time that the Court has reached seemingly contradictory results construing these laws. In 1922, it decided that the Child Labor Tax was a tax under the Anti-Injunction Act in Bailey v. George but not under the Taxing Clause in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture. The majority also ran through a line of cases showing that the function, rather than the label, of the collection determined whether it was allowable under the Taxing Clause, including the apparently slam-dunk quote from United States v. Sotelo, “That the funds due are referred to as a ‘penalty’ . . . does not alter their essential character as taxes.”" link below

"Ultimately, all nine Justices disagreed with the Fourth Circuit and denied that the individual mandate was a tax under the Anti-Injunction Act." http://hlpronline.com/2012/06/affordable-care-act-introduction/

"Roberts and the four liberals upheld the individual mandate as valid under the Taxing Clause. The majority noted, “The exaction the Affordable Care Act imposes on those without health insurance looks like a tax in many respects.” It pointed out that the “penalty” (a) “does not apply to individuals who do not pay federal income taxes because their household income is less than the filing threshold in the Internal Revenue Code,” (b) has an amount “determined by such familiar factors as taxable income, number of dependents, and joint filing status,” and (c) is described “in the Internal Revenue Code and enforced by the IRS.”" http://hlpronline.com/2012/06/affordable-care-act-individual-mandate/

"Without the individual mandate, virtually all of the issuance requirements on insurance companies would be economically infeasible, and this was neither what Congress intended nor something that Congress would have passed." http://hlpronline.com/2012/06/aca-severability-and-the-medicaid-expansion/


"In essence, the disagreement between the majority and the dissent was whether to focus on the effect of the Act or the wording of the Act. This is not an easy issue to decide, but if the goal is to find any plausible interpretation that would render a statute constitutional, the majority seems to have done so." link above
 
Howey said:
Christ on a stick!

You're makiing the argument that people should go to free health clinics because they're free! THEY'RE NOT!

Read the pdf.

Oy...I'm done with you.
Click to expand...

No, I am using the word "free" to appeal to dumbass liberals who believe that things are FREE in life.

I fully understand we already fund nationalized health care... you are the one who doesn't apparently understand this.
 
apple0154 said:
Let's run through this again. Let's say Medicare pays for a check-up. If that was dropped from Medicare and ObamaCare started to pay for check-ups then the cost of Medicare would drop and the tax that paid for that specific service would no longer be necessary to be collected for Medicare. Now, the tax would be collected and applied to ObamaCare. The bottom line being no tax increase has occurred. However, the savings come from having people diagnosed earlier for possible illnesses. For example, high blood pressure. Rather than wait until 65 and find out ones kidneys have been partially destroyed a person at, say, 55 may be diagnosed with high blood pressure and starting medication. When they reach 65 their kidneys are OK. At the cost of 50 cents a day for 10 years that would be less than $2,000.00. Compare $2,000.00 to the cost of paying for medical care for someone who has kidney damage.

Or diabetes and blindness. Compare the cost of insulin to that of looking after a blind person. Or osteoporoses. Consider the cost for periodic check-ups and medication compared to the cost involved in looking after a person with a broken hip.

Is this so difficult to understand?



It's not propaganda. The pictures are there. You're just too ashamed to admit the current medical system is a scam, through and through.
Click to expand...

It is a waste of time trying to explain it, they just will not listen to logic.
 
Dixie said:
No, this is where you are wrong. If the tax is collected for Medicare, it can't be used to fund Obamacare. Even if they make cuts in Medicare, they still can't use the savings for Obamacare. They would have to return the money to the taxpayer, or find another part of Medicare to fund.
Click to expand...
You have documentation for this? You've typed this about 100 times this week.
 
It's fascinating to see the mental meltdown of our local neocon/teabagger flunkies....no matter how many valid documented facts produced that contradicts and disproves their beliefs, supposition and conjectures, they just stubbornly bray on like jackasses.

What I find most interesting is that the ones screaming the loudest WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY THE PENALTY TAX! This is why I call them flunkies, because they are merely carrying the water for the 1 to 3% who are financially capable of whethering this or are just to stubborn/short sighted/selfish to deal with reality.

And the band played on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top