Wow. I’m not surprised though.
Well, if you think that’s unfair, it’s something to take up with the insurance company, not me. I pay for that benefit and I’m not going to feel guilty for using it just because you want to cry about it. If you don’t like any of the policies offered, don’t willingly buy into them and then whine about what you’re subsidizing.
Wow, way to avoid the point. I asked you what you expect people to do - wait and save up the $20,000, or just not ever have kids? Because god knows they shouldn’t use their insurance for that.
So everything else is okay, but having kids is right out. Okay, I see.
Whether you like it or not, people having children is an ordinary part of life, and good luck to you in getting them to stop (or in acquiring a special insurance plan that doesn’t cover childbirth). I will also point out that it is those kids who will be paying the taxes that will support you as you suckle at the government teat long into your crabby dotage.
C’mon folks, quit being so hard on curlcoat. Can you begin to imagine what sort of deal life has dished out to her that she has turned out so bitter, selfish and twisted? What level of miserableness has she sunk into that she feels ripped off by other people having babies? She is so paranoid and insecure that the mere notion of any other person taking a ride on ‘her dime’ leaves her with a sense of personal violation that would normally be experienced by victims of sexual or violent crime.
Must suck to be her. It sucks even more to have to read her vomitous diatribes but.
So now it is someone else’s responsibility to offer you a policy that meets your ethical criteria? What happen to you vaunted self-reliance and accountability? Waah! No one handed it to me on a silver platter, so it doesn’t exist!
curlcoat is correct that group insurance policies rarely if ever specifically exclude maternity and birth coverage, so it’s almost impossible to purchase health insurance that doesn’t involve a subsidy of those things.
Of course, since SSDI and other pay-as-you-go programs are adversely affected by aging populations, one would have thought that she’d be all for people popping out kids - after all, they’re the ones who will be subsidizing everyone else in 20 years.
Some welfare queen drove up in her 1950 Escalade-analog and stole her lunch money?
You must have missed cc’s massive incomprehension of how programs actually work. See, the gummint took all that money she paid in and put it in a super special savings account and reserved it for her. The interest was so good it’ll never run out, even when she exceeds what she put in…
-Joe
curlcoat is too stupid to realize that the babies she’s bitching about are the ones that will be paying her continued welfare check long into her old age.
Not all of them, though. Some greater-than-zero percentage of them will inevitably be net consumers of publicly-funded benefits. And it is those precise individuals she is bitching about, not the other ones. Get rid of those, and she won’t let out a peep.
Me too. Positively gaping. But more to the point Curlcoat - your are malignant, evil and stupid. There have been some positive sociopaths on this board but you really do take the prize.
Please just go.
You mean such as herself?
Get rid of all the “deadbeats” except herself, of course, because SHE is a precious, special snowflake … and no one else could have possibly paid into the system more then her, or be more deserving than her.
:rolleyes:
What it comes down to is that she screams and cries about anyone using any tax-funded benefits but still expects to receive HER check every month! Look in the dictionary under hypocrite and it has a picture of her.
And, in an attempt to not repeat myself, I said to read the post above. However, since you apparently can’t do that, my personal feelings about most people having kids aside, I never said that people shouldn’t use insurance to pay their childbirth bills. I said that I wish that those of us who never had/don’t ever intend to have children didn’t have to pay higher premiums to support others’ choices to reproduce. It seems to me that if a woman wants to chose to have a child, she should have to pay for a rider on her policy, just as is done with any other self inflicted or elective procedure.
I am pointing out that group insurance (generally) doesn’t cover self inflicted illnesses or injuries, nor elective surgeries except in the case of pregnancy. Because the child bearing lobby is so strong, insurance companies have been forced to view pregnancy the same as an actual illness or injury and cover it.
We’ve been over this before. No child born now is going to be paying taxes before I die, unless I go over my span expectancy. And even if I do, I am unselfish enough to realize that it would be better for everyone if there weren’t so many people here, instead of playing this pyramid game with the population. Shoot, you are supposed to be the ones loving children, and yet you all seem to be happy to produce them just so there will be someone around to pay for you in your old age??
Boy, are you ever off base.
:rolleyes: My ethical criteria? No, I am merely tired of supporting your lifestyle choices while at the same time paying more and more to support mine.
You know, even with your bias it is still amazing how much you can throw that around and still think you yourself aren’t a hypocrite. How can you look yourself in the face when you have not only lied about me, but caused others to believe that I am really this person you have created? For example, from just this post:
-
When have I ever said anything about “no one else could have possibly paid into the system more then her, or be more deserving than her”?
-
When have I ever screamed and/or cried?
-
When have I said anything about “anyone using any tax-funded benefits”? As a matter of fact, I have been very clear that I have no problem with most of the tax-funded things we have/get. The only issue I have is the continued support of full time, life long leaches, and the proposal to give them more.
-
Yes, I did and do expect to get my Social Security payments back, just as everyone else does, except for those that fear that the government will do away with it before they are eligible. And essentially everyone does apply for it. You begrudge me my 50% Social Security payments simply because I don’t agree with you that it is a good idea to have the government create yet another money sucking handout, even tho one doesn’t have anything to do with the other. Everyone continuing to try to pretend that they do is just showing their ignorance.
Got it, me me me. fuck society, fuck the continuation of humanity, fuck reproduction. No possible greater good should in any way interfere with Curcoat’s pocketbook. Those that choose to have children should be fined in the way of higher health care costs. If anything doesn’t meet Curcoat’s ideals of whats best for Curcoat it should be banned
I’m sure your also the same type of shriveled bitch that fights every penny going into a school system then turns around and bitches because the kids with no programs left end up hanging out on the street.
We’ve certainly have some repulsive human beings on this board but your rapidly climbing to the top among current posters.
We get it nothings more important then you. Your message has been loud and clear again and again. Can you do us all a favor and just go the fuck away.
I’m not the one calling everyone taking government government money a leech, but still taking a government check every month.
You ARE that person - I call them like I see them. And if other people believe it, it’s not because of what I say it’s because they see it, too.
And you assume everyone but yourself is a leech. You’re disabled, right? You’re getting life-long, continued support now. HOW are you any different now than the people you so openly despise?
Or maybe you’re just wrong.
I don’t “begrudge” you your payments - it’s your attitude I find revolting.
I can read just fine, thank you. Nowhere in any of your other diatribes did you bring up the idea of an insurance rider to cover childbirth - you just said it was selfish for people to use their insurance to cover such things. Do you see where there is a difference?
There is no child-bearing lobby. This is a fantasy created solely in your tiny addled brain. Like it or not, child-bearing is what we do. It’s what we were designed for. It’s basically the whole point of any species on Earth. You’re right that overpopulation of the planet is a problem, but for people to have no children at all is not the solution (particularly in North America). In fact, the birth rate in the USA and Canada has hovered at around 2.1 children per couple for years, a rate which is consistent with population maintainance and not growth. Exponential growth still occurs in other, particularly poorer, countries, but surely even you see how that is beyond our purview at the moment.
And before you spaz out about this (although you’re sure to misread this or twist it in some way), please note that I personally have no children and do not plan on ever having children, so this is coming from a position of logic only.
How long have you had health insurance (or should I say how long has your husband supported you on his health insurance)? If I recall correctly, you are in your 50s, so I’m going to guess 20 years? 30? Do you really think not a single child that was born during that time (and thus covered by your insurance company) is now paying the taxes that keep your checks coming? And what if you do go over your life span expectancy? You know that’s an average, right - so about half of people do go over. Will you refuse any more SS payments? If not, guess who is paying for those?
So don’t do it. No one is forcing you to buy insurance that makes you feel cheated. It is your choice, and now you are blaming others for choosing poorly.
Look, dude, this is where you lose. Describing any group as “the child bearing lobby” is automatically going to result in people dismissing any rational point you might make.
I don’t want kids either, but like they say, the children are our future. The fact that you don’t want any is irrelevant; the continuation of the species is slightly more important.
I guess in some dimly imagined future Americans could stop breeding completely, and we’d maintain our population solely through immigration. Would you prefer that? I doubt it, somehow.
I have never said that - this is just another example of your trying to paint me as something I’m not.
No, all they do is repeat things you have said, which are not true. Such as my saying that “everyone taking government money is a leech”. You know damn well I never said anything of the sort - if nothing else, that would include people like mailmen.
Well, for one thing that “despise” business is all in your head. I guess it is because you are unable to feel anything but that for those that you don’t agree with. For another, the people that I am tired of supporting are those who have made very little, if any, contribution to society. They haven’t worked much, if at all; they tend to be involved in some sort of illegal activity; they feel entitled to support and see nothing wrong with spending their lives doing whatever they want without working for it. The people who drop out of high school and go to work in McDonalds or a gas station, have a couple of kids and then whine because they can’t afford a house and/or insurance.
Of course, I’ve said these things over and over, but you just ignore it and make up what you’d rather see. Such as you purposefully misunderstanding the terms life-long and support. I am not getting life-long payments from the government, since I didn’t get any until I was 52. Neither am I supported by the government - I doubt anyone could live on Social Security by itself, and I am only getting half that.
My “attitude” is that it is rapidly becoming difficult to understand why anyone works hard to earn a decent living, when people like you seem to think nothing of just taking that hard earned money away and handing it to someone else. And not expecting those other people to even justify their need.
No, I didn’t.
Wow. That’s sad. All I can say is if the only reason we are here is to reproduce, what are we doing with all the things we have that have nothing to do with having children?
I didn’t say anything about no children.
Immaterial in a population that is already too big. And in some areas, such as California, population continues to grow, with more than half a million babies born each year for the last 17 years. Washington is also growing, tho at a slower rate.
Another thing - 2.1 children per couple is no long a population maintenance figure. People live too long these days, so by the time the average couple dies, they have created 2 kids, 4 grandkids and probably 16 great grand kids. Plus, it should be considered as per woman, not per couple, since divorce and remarriage with a new set of kids is so common.
Actually, until I quit working in 2007, we were always covered under my insurance. Which I had had for 25+ years.
We were talking about babies born now, not 30 years ago. However, I also said that I would be willing to give up my SSDI if people would quit having so many children.
Snort. As I said, there simply aren’t any group policies that don’t cover pregnancy and childbirth, and group policies are far cheaper than private ones. If I am to do the responsible thing and buy health insurance, my best choice is to buy it thru the employers group. However, it would be nice if I didn’t have to pay so much to cover all of these elective injury/illnesses.
Uh, not a dude. And, I never said anything about not continuing the species - we are very far from any worry about that. We could go a generation in the US with no babies at all and it would be a drop in the bucket WRT the human population. But for some reason, most everyone has to have those babies, and they have to be their babies, not adopted ones. So on one hand we have all these kids no one wants and on the other we have people spending thousands of dollars on infertility treatments on the chance they might have a baby with their DNA.
I don’t have any problem with legal immigration - I’m surrounded by it.
Look, you are a giant tool. But, in such a free country you are entitled to your own toolish opinion. Therefore you can argue about semantics, the government, the welfare state, etc, etc all you would like.
But you cannot argue with biology. Humans are for reproduction. So is every other speices on the planet. The fact that we’ve found other things to do with our time is immaterial - a few thousands of years of culture is nothing compared to millenia of hard-wired instinct. You can howl into the wind all you want, but that’s a fact, and is not up for discussion.