Unless you can show me a formula that identifies those who are happy to always live on the taxpayer and those who don’t and will give a lot back in the future*, it is not complicated. I rather run the risk to get some abusers in the system in exchange of having families free from the fear of losing more than just a few sick days.
*Do you still have a problem with time-lines? I was talking about JK when she was not a well-to-do writer.
You do get that mswas is not only agreeing with you, he is openly mocking those here who don’t support universal health insurance, right? :dubious:
I was just in Zanesville earlier today. Not on the Y-bridge though.
I live in Somerset, home of the not precisely world-famous statue of Little Phil right smack dab in the middle of the square so that unwary passersby nearly plow into other drivers, pedestrians, and the occasional Amish buggy.
I’m not sure now :), You never know what to get from mswas. But I suspected he was mocking and that is why I put a smilie in the first reply.
I depends upon what the whole amount is. 47% going on 57% of what?
Eleanor is harsh but fair.
Now that you have barfed your snarkiness out for all to see, would you like to try answering the question?
Only covers a sub-set of the poor. You can be below the poverty line in income and still not qualify.
Only covers the disabled and those over 65.
Only covers those under 18
Don’t exist everywhere, and are currently suffering budget cuts even as demand for their services rise.
I’m OK with you being skeptical. Me, I don’t trust politicians of any stripe. But I do know we’ve got a bunch of adults in this country who aren’t covered by health insurance with no access to the system outside an ER. That’s a social problem and a potential public health problem and we need to find a better way to deal with the problem. I don’t have a problem with people disagreeing about the way to go about it, what is making my gorge rise is the way certain people on this board are dismissing the needs of those people and dismissing them as some sort of human scum or lazy bums. THAT is not productive.
Just because we are forced to pay for it now doesn’t make it right.
That’s why I buy insurance for my family. That’s my area of responsibility. I don’t buy that socialist pie-in-the-sky crap for a moment. Taking money out of my paycheck does NOT enable me to go out and spend more, drive more business, be more productive and help us as a nation.
Egads, I just heard the echo of my long-dead mother’s voice: “So if everyone else decides to be stupid and jump off the roof and break their necks, you gotta do it too?”.
Um, isn’t that kind of what we’re doing already? :rolleyes:
And we should believe this because you speak from such ample experience, yes?
As I said to someone else, just because the money is being stolen from me now doesn’t make it right. And expect government to spend money more wisely? It is to laugh.
Nice socialist diatribe there.
Actually, I do have the right to stand around and watch the poor die if I so desire. I don’t, which is why I donate to charity. And that is the key, right there: I donate. I make the decision about where my money goes and what is done with it - NOT the government. If money were piss in a boot, the government couldn’t pour it out even if the directions were printed on the heel. The only thing government does well is grow and waste money.
Of course not, the USA is almost paying twice what other developed nations are and the USA system still does not cover all.
The most astonishing thing is that people like you ignore that changes are needed to reduce that burden and to allow more companies and start-ups to set shop in America.
Everyone else decided to jump off the roof to escape a bear (because they don’t have to outrun the bear they just have to outrun you). You just want to stand on a roof and quote your dead mama as if that’s going to help you against a bear.
You keep crying that people are breaking their necks by jumping off the roof. But it’s absolutely demonstrable that they aren’t. You think they should break their necks that way, but they don’t.
Y’all qualify as a religion, don’t you?
So what do you suggest needs to be done with the system as it stands now, if anything? How would your solution be better than UHC in tangible ways?
To take your metaphor, I think the point (s)he was making was “Well, a bunch of people have jumped off the roof, but they were careful to jump into the pit filled with pillows. When they came out, they brought with them a bunch of hundred dollar bills that the pillows were resting on. Whereas we are just sitting there on the rooftop closing our eyes and refusing to acknowledge that anything good came out of jumping anywhere off that roof ever.”
Geez, that IS a tortuous metaphor, isn’t it? I guess some things just weren’t designed for extrapolation?
ETA: And others did a much better job than I did. Which is why I wouldn’t have dared make the metaphor in the first place. 
Now you did it…
^ so says the woman dependent on social security disability. You know, a taxpayer funded government entitlement program. Also dependent on Medicare for HER medical needs, you know, a government health care program. Uh, yeah, right.
“But it’s not FAAAAIR that the bear is going to eat me and everyone else got away! It’s not FAIR and it doesn’t fit my worldview!” nom
There’s federal money in a faith-based initiative fund somewhere with this thread’s name on it.
Wait! That would boot **curlcoat **out in the cold too! Oh, wait… nevermind. For a minute there I thought there would be a bad consequence to the idea