Not if it will derail this thread. I just want a yes or no to my above question.
How about that yes or no, sport?
Ok. My answer to your question is generally speaking, yes.
And?
Newsflash - none of what you say here is in response to my post, it is just more handwringing about people without health care and how the middle class should be happy to pay for it. Go right ahead, just leave me out of it.
Interesting… wasn’t it you who posted this a couple pages ago?
I want a system that everyone pays into, not just the responsible citizens.
Don’t know, don’t care since it is immaterial.
Why?
Another reason not to assume that simply because something is X in one place, it must be X in another. Or that X would even work there.
Snort. Gee I’m sorry I don’t have that kind of time - why do you?
As is responding with something that has nothing to do with what I said.
OK, you think you are so above me here - explain in simple terms exactly why it is in my best interests to pay more for less. Do not attempt to divert by “showing” that I wouldn’t because you simply cannot prove that since there is no UHC in the US. Come up with facts that actually prove that extending a Medicaid/Medicare type system to all citizens would make it cheaper for the average middle class person and not result in a drop in quality of care.
And that is because…?
Yeah . . . so what?
I guess, then, people here are lying as they are saying the only way we could have a working UHC would be if everyone participated. Also, from what you say, anyone that is not self-employed must pay a tax into the UHC?
Where does this money come from?
Meaning they are getting far more (potential) care for the same amount of money that a couple without children would be getting?
But not for singles, people without pre-existing conditions, couples without children. Also, under HIPAA here, group health policies can no longer arbitrarily deny pre-existing conditions, and in some states/cases, they can’t at all.
Interesting. Here dental insurance tends to be cheaper than health insurance because dentistry tends to cost less.
DING-DING-DING! We have a racist!
Exceptionalism looks so bizarre when laid bare, it really does.
It depends how you define “racist,” but sure . . if you define “racist” to include people who believe that general differences in behavior and abilities among different racial groups are in part because of genetic differences, then yeah, I’m a racist. So what?
Let’s run through this, shall we?
- I don’t believe that I should share my quality of health care, live around, or even share the same public services (schools, etc) with “underclass types.”
—> - “Underclass types” are primarily composed of people of other races.
—> - People of these races are predisposed to being members of “the underclass.”
—> - People of these races are naturally inferior.
—> - I am a racist, and apparently also a white supremacist (see #1).
—> - I am a piece of shit.
I’m glad we had this talk, brazil84. I really am.
It is pretty much how everyone defines racist.
Lol. It’s a lot easier to invent positions to attack than to respond to peoples’ actual statements, hey? Anyway, I’m not surprised given your self-deception and hypocricy.
Enjoy that neighborhood you live in and keep telling yourself that you live there only because it’s convenient. Taking a stand against what you refer to as “NIMBY” is for other people, not for you. If it involves personal cost, anyway.
Yes. Yes you are.
See, here’s the thing. I’d be perfectly happy to try once more to explain how retarded your accusation of hypocrisy is. However, as we’ve apparently ascertained that you’re a white supremacist, it’s pretty unlikely that we’re gonna see eye-to-eye about smaller sub-issues. 'Cause you’re a racist. In a sick sort of way, you’ve successfully defended your stance on universal health care. Of course you don’t want to give the lesser races equal health care! Bless your heart.
ROTFLMAO. Instead, you rather keep throwing up strawmen, hey? I don’t blame you.