What in the world doe’s this have to do with with is thread!!! Are you saying then, that I shouldn’t seek a law banning abortion? After all it WILL take plotics to do that!!! You also recall Jesus saying “you shall not tempt the Lord your God” also. well by not trying to correct a wrong and leaving it up to God that is what you are doing sir!
So even the money that goes to pay health care bills is surplus. So no one needs money for health care. So why should the government be taking money for health care. This must be your position if anything more than food to eat and a roof is surplus.
I think he meant it figurtively more than literally. Sad state of intellegence in our nation when people don’t know how to read on context or between the lines, so so so sad.
It’s figure time because if he named every basic need it would on forever. A roof and a full belly is enough to get the point. A bathtub, heat, and lights in your home are assumed and need not beining mentioned. As for intellegence. I know a 10 yearold next door to me who can read between the lines with no trouble, it’s very sad when an adult can’t do that. The statement wasn’t as explicit as it was just out of frustration. I know what he is saying. I just lost my home to foreclosure partly due to my wife’s health problems, But hey don’t let that interupt you counting your money.
It is. “Health care” isn’t a form of wealth. It isn’t something that you own. It is, as its name implies, care that humans give each other. Having savings that will allow you to pay a doctor to take care of you if you get sick *is, *strictly speaking, surplus. If I give my surplus to you when you are sick, and you give yours to me when I am sick, then we all get along fine. I don’t mean of course that society should function like that. There is nothing wrong with having a surplus. What is wrong is treating your surplus as if it belongs to you absolutely and as if having some of it taken to pay the people who take care of the sick is some kind of horrific wrong.
Then you sentence people in my situation to death.
Because, despite what you say, you will still have to pay for your food, your rent, and other living costs. Subsidizing health care doesn’t change that. If what you were implying were true everyone would be happy with a bog standard bare subsistence standard of living. But they 'aint.
I don’t understand why anyone would want their health care to be put in the hands of government bureaucrats who have to refer to giant manuals on who gets what and when and when they take months and months to respond.
She happens to be near death becuase our health system is not taking care of herm she is homeless because it has drained her of money. So she is supposed to embraced the very thing that has made her homeless and days numbered? How illogical! Our current health care system is a failure, and something different needs to be given a try. It hasnt been totally hammered out what national healthcare will be. REmber there are blue Dog Democrats who arent thrilled with some parts of the package. By way the way Pathia’s condition is treatable, but for money no one can afford yet someone who is homeless… Since all you "conservatives can’t come uo with a solution to her problem your self, don’t deny her ,her solutons, dont expect her imagaination to comeup with the solution yours can’t comeup with.
The proposed system eliminates pre-existing condition exclusions and also eliminates jacking up the price for them. I should actually be able to get insurance very soon.
As opposed to multiple tiers of corporate bureacrats who refer to giant manuals, on who gets what and who’s primary responsibility isn’t to get you well, but to pay less money to you? I hope that isn’t your stand.
Actually it explicitly forbids annual or lifetime coverage limits.
You’re right, it does include her. Pathia will no longer be denied coverage for her condition and she can’t be knocked out of the policy because of its costs.
Pathia is not the one arguing that its better for people to die, than for others to pay taxes.
Under the proposed system Pathia wouldn’t have to.
Pathia’s condition is totally treatable. But the greed of her insurances keeps her from getting that treatment.
I think you need to clarify your position here. I really hope you’re not saying it is immoral to make money in the medical field. I don’t think you can possibly say that it is immoral to make a profit from someone’s misfortune. The auto repair industry makes money off of people’s misfortune in their car being broken. Is that immoral? What about the appliance repair men? If you can’t make a profit, no one is going to do it. Then you’ll be stuck.
My story has been told over and over again, just do a search with over my posts to find out.
For you, not for me. No amount of free marketeering is going to change the fact that insurance companies either 1.) Refuse to cover me at all 2.) Charge me so much it becomes pointless to have the insurance in the first place 3.) Toss me around and challenge everything that ever happens to me as being related to my uncovered conditions without any medical science to back it up.
Its my mispelling of profet maybe. fainancial gain on some’s misfortune is a sin.
Interesting what your understanding is – that profit is a financial gain on someone else’s misfortune.