Vicious Political Movement circa 2030

[TheDanold]

"I don’t know about you, but I think American children who need clothing should get it, period. Even if you think adults have made bad choices — a baseless smear in the case of the ____, but put that on one side — only a truly vicious political movement would respond by punishing their children."


This is what I picture lefties posting in about 2030 or sometime in the next generation.
A few points:

1. NOT doing something can not equate to punishing.

2. Heading down this road of taking over responsibility for things children get instead of relying on the parents and charity means a never ending demand for more funding for more things.

3. The parents could far more easily afford healthcare if their taxes were lower.

4. Charity would certainly exist for rare cases like this as people have more disposable income to be charitable with less government and they feel it is more their duty as they do not see government doing it.

5. We have already gone down this road in inner cities of having government as the provider, the result has been an abandonment of individual responsibility, a neverending growth for more government dependence and no way back.

6. Before Medicaid/Medicare, there was simply no record of kids or adults for that matter dying out in the streets in the 1950's from lack of healthcare. People saw it as their responsibility and there was charity for those who needed it and far more easy to pay for charity with less taxes on the middle and poorer classes.

 

[Cancel7]

Well, I warned you guys.

See, thread; incoming, alert.

 

[charver]

The new Nostrodamus?

 

[Cancel7]

The new Nostrodamus?

I don't know how I do it!

 

[Onceler]

"The parents could far more easily afford healthcare if their taxes were lower"

No, they couldn't. Most families in lower income groups pay very little in taxes, compared to what health insurance or healthcare costs are.


" there was simply no record of kids or adults for that matter dying out in the streets in the 1950's from lack of health"

Checked all of the books on that, have you?

Please stop trying to compare health costs & healthcare from the middle of the 20th century to 2007. It's embarassing.

 

[TheDanold]

"The parents could far more easily afford healthcare if their taxes were lower"

No, they couldn't. Most families in lower income groups pay very little in taxes, compared to what health insurance or healthcare costs are.

You are only looking at income tax. What about sales tax? Corporate tax and business taxes both are essentially expenses that jack up the cost of goods and services including healthcare, so healthcare would cost less with less taxes.

" there was simply no record of kids or adults for that matter dying out in the streets in the 1950's from lack of health"
Checked all of the books on that, have you?
Please stop trying to compare health costs & healthcare from the middle of the 20th century to 2007. It's embarassing.

I'm not comparing healthcare costs, yes it is more expensive now but incomes have also risen.
Healthcare would be cheaper with less regulation and repealing all the regulation that that sector has been strangled with.

And yes I have researched healthcare and lifestyle in those times. I suggest you read "The tragedy of American Compassion" by Marvin Olasky if you want details. Or you can talk to any senior who lived then.

 

[Onceler]

"You are only looking at income tax. What about sales tax? Corporate tax and business taxes both are essentially expenses that jack up the cost of goods and services including healthcare, so healthcare would cost less with less taxes."

You mean from all of those big purchases that lower income families make?

You're clueless. You have no idea what health insurance & healthcare costs for the average family. None.

 

[Onceler]

"yes it is more expensive now but incomes have also risen. "

Is it your contention that healthcare has stayed fairly constant as a percentage of income?

Please say yes.

 

[TheDanold]

"yes it is more expensive now but incomes have also risen. "

Is it your contention that healthcare has stayed fairly constant as a percentage of income?

Please say yes.

No but coupled with removing taxes and regulation and lawsuits and healthcare would be a lot more affordable.

Remember that it was capitalism that brought a lot of innovation in cures and treatment so that it is more expensive. Remove the profit element and you will reduce the incentive to do that more.

 

[Cancel7]

Right, because insurance companies made most of the 20th century's most startling medical cures.

 

[TheDanold]

Right, because insurance companies made most of the 20th century's most startling medical cures.

You miss the point, they facilitated it by giving people another option to pay for healthcare which in turn feeds the revenue and future R & D of healthcare providers.

One thing I don't get about lefties is that you guys seem to hate health insurance companies, yet Hillary's plan (and most of the Dems) FORCES people to pay for insurance whether they want to or not. Gone is the option to just pay for healthcare when you decide to get it.

 

[Cancel7]

You miss the point, they facilitated it by giving people another option to pay for healthcare which in turn feeds the revenue and future R & D of healthcare providers.

One thing I don't get about lefties is that you guys seem to hate health insurance companies, yet Hillary's plan (and most of the Dems) FORCES people to pay for insurance whether they want to or not. Gone is the option to just pay for healthcare when you decide to get it.

they facilitated it by giving people another option to pay for healthcare Completely meaningless.

Try again. This time, remember words have meaning and when you put them together they have to say something.

 

[Lao Tse]

One thing I don't get about lefties is that you guys seem to hate health insurance companies, yet Hillary's plan (and most of the Dems) FORCES people to pay for insurance whether they want to or not. Gone is the option to just pay for healthcare when you decide to get it.

This is why the fascist republicans will go right along with it. Hand in glove. Bend over.

 

[Cypress]

I think the republicans should make this their platform, and their solution to this nation's healthcare problems: more charity and lower taxes.

 

[ib1yysguy]

I think the republicans should make this their platform, and their solution to this nation's healthcare problems: more charity and lower taxes.

Remember when Dixie suggested we repeal child labor laws?

 

[TheDanold]

they facilitated it by giving people another option to pay for healthcare Completely meaningless.

Try again. This time, remember words have meaning and when you put them together they have to say something.

I'll clarify. Some people might choose to buy something more if they have different means of doing it, like installments, or a loan or (in this case) by insurance.

If healthcare insurance didn't exist, then when some got injured or sick (and I am not talking injuries or sickness that absolutely 100% require a hospital or doctor) then they may buy the healthcare or they may just treat it themselves. If they have insurance, then they will pretty much 100% go to the doctor or hospital because it is already paid to them.
So insurance provides more customers and thus more cash (for R & D) to healthcare providers.

 

[TheDanold]

Remember when Dixie suggested we repeal child labor laws?

Don't you work in the media, how do you feel about being the only industry that allows child labor in paperboys?
As a former paperboy, I can't say I thought it abusive work, but I sure would have loved to have other options and places to work where I could have got more cash without dealing with stuff like outside weather, dogs and other crap.

 

[ib1yysguy]

Don't you work in the media, how do you feel about being the only industry that allows child labor in paperboys?
As a former paperboy, I can't say I thought it abusive work, but I sure would have loved to have other options and places to work where I could have got more cash without dealing with stuff like outside weather, dogs and other crap.

I am also a former paperboy. And I doubt you were a paperboy because if you were, you'd understand the legal framework that allows paperboys to do their jobs. Here's a hint: child labor laws do not apply. They are not employees.

 

[TheDanold]

I am also a former paperboy. And I doubt you were a paperboy because if you were, you'd understand the legal framework that allows paperboys to do their jobs. Here's a hint: child labor laws do not apply. They are not employees.

Oh right, only REAL paperboys would know about the "legal framework", WTF do you actually think they explained any of that to us? Honestly when you say something like that I doubt that YOU are a former paperboy.

As to your point, so then is it ok for a child to be a "contractor" at other jobs? Also I never said they were employees did I? I just said they use child labor, which is true.

 

[Lao Tse]

I am also a former paperboy. And I doubt you were a paperboy because if you were, you'd understand the legal framework that allows paperboys to do their jobs. Here's a hint: child labor laws do not apply. They are not employees.

SO you probably had no problem with slavery, considering your "those people don't count" rhetoric.