Free Healthcare

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zosimus41
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
seekerz said:
The same way millions of Catholics justify paying private insurance: by not sacrificing the health care access of themselves and their families in the (likely vain) hope that this will stop their insurance company from offering abortion coverage.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between getting health insurance which covers certain immoral services you would never use and *which you do not have the authority to decide on, *and offering and paying for those services, which is what the HHS mandate is all about.

People say, oh, it covers abc, no big deal, doesn’t cost much. But the HHS is mandating coverage of abortifacient drugs as well as abortifacient abc, *and *sterilization, which is not cheap. They want Catholic institutions to pay insurance to cover this for people–whether the cost shows up officially or not, and it will have to show up for those Catholic institutions which are self-insured.
 
One more question. And if someone can give a sensible answer I’ll be satisfied. Why does the congress have their own Cadillac plan? Why don’t they and jump in the boat with us?
The thing that aggravates me about rationing is the framers of government healthcare deny there will be rationing.
 
St. Francis wrote:

**"**There is a difference between getting health insurance which covers certain immoral services you would never use and *which you do not have the authority to decide on, *and offering and paying for those services, which is what the HHS mandate is all about. "

People say, oh, it covers abc, no big deal, doesn’t cost much. But the HHS is mandating coverage of abortifacient drugs as well as abortifacient abc, *and *sterilization, which is not cheap. They want Catholic institutions to pay insurance to cover this for people–whether the cost shows up officially or not, and it will have to show up for those Catholic institutions which are self-insured.

Nimzovik Responds:

Thankyou! I was beginning to think that this was incomprehensible to some! No duh! There is no moral/practical equivalency between Obama Care and Private Health Insurance.

Private insurance I pay for. Obama Care is a tax -oops! er…uh*…penalty* -right Ms. Pelosi? -for all! 😉

If my Private Insurance Provider does not do what I ask - guess what- I find another one! Try ***that ***with Govt.:rolleyes:

Now watch for it- here it comes! If my private Helath Insurance Provider violates my conscience via the 5 (yes, I said 5) Non - negotiables, why gee! I go find another one!:cool:
 
I don’t understan how this is all going to work. We spent $2.6 TRILLION in 2010 on health care, and that’s $8,000 per man, woman, and child in the US.

And these costs are going to go UP, because of the increase in retirees over the next couple of decades.

Now, I happen to be in that cohort, so don’t get me wrong: I do not see how this is going to work. We are already in debt over $50K per man, woman, and child, and tht debt is growing every day.

I understand the Church says we have a right to health care, but… to me it looks like we were already running everything into the ground, and now we’re adding to that?
 
Nimzovik said:
Health Care: Eliminate the middle man - government - and give the Helathcare tax dollar back to the citizen so he can shop for the Health care he/she wants!
Click to expand...
Exactly! However, it isn’t really about providing options it is all about gov’t control. I have mentioned before,why not tax credits towards purchasing insurance,would work much like vouchers for schools…we all know that idea went over like a lead balloon:rolleyes:
 
Rdunbar123 said:
One more question. And if someone can give a sensible answer I’ll be satisfied. Why does the congress have their own Cadillac plan? Why don’t they and jump in the boat with us?
The thing that aggravates me about rationing is the framers of government healthcare deny there will be rationing.
Click to expand...
Precisely. 👍 What does that tell you. If Obama Care is sooooooo great then why does not Obama himself just have Obama Care only eh?:D;)

And! When funds are allocated to states for Helath Care - gee! Do ya think that just maybe those states that oppose Obama in certain policies will get their fair share?;):rolleyes:

Did the Obama administration abandon Arizona because that state opposed his policies? Ahmmmmmmmmm?:cool: Methinks so, IMHO.
 
Seeker1961 said:
I have good friends who live in MA and love it. It was implemented in 2 years and they saw their out of pocket expenses and premiums drop right away. 100% of children in MA and 98% of everyone in MA have health insurance coverage. It works, the sky hasn’t fallen and capitalism is still working quite well there.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the biggest difference between MA healthcare and Obamacare the fact that one it is an individual state and two,citizens were not compelled to sign on? This is huge in my opinion.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Exactly! However, it isn’t really about providing options it is all about gov’t control. I have mentioned before,why not tax credits towards purchasing insurance,would work much like vouchers for schools…we all know that idea went over like a lead balloon:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Of course that makes sense.

However! Why should Govt’. let you control **your **money? Why? When Govt can have all that money/power for itself! Wheeeeeeeeeee!:rolleyes:

And! Just look at what they are doing with that power that they do have! Hello? Conscience clause? Hello? Abortion on demand? Supplied by who? Why yes! Possibly** Planned Parenthood!** Do ya think that is possible? :rolleyes:
 
Jeanne_S said:
Isn’t the biggest difference between MA healthcare and Obamacare the fact that one it is an individual state and two,citizens were not compelled to sign on? This is huge in my opinion.
Click to expand...
This is true. If ‘MA’ is Private Insurance. I am unsure of the term.
 
seekerz said:
If you consider the indicators of health care such as life expectancy at birth, then the level of success is pretty much the same for all developed countries.
Click to expand...
Caution. Different developed countries figure their statistics differently. For example, some western european countries don’t count the death of an infant towards the life expectancy or child mortality rates if they die in the first week. There are differences in figuring cancer survival rates and other ‘public health’ measures. There is not an apples to apples standardized methodology across countries.

The US counts the death of an infant from the moment of birth (even if premature) towards life expectancy and infant mortality. Which skews the US reported rate higher.
 
Rdunbar123 said:
One more question. And if someone can give a sensible answer I’ll be satisfied. Why does the congress have their own Cadillac plan? Why don’t they and jump in the boat with us?
The thing that aggravates me about rationing is the framers of government healthcare deny there will be rationing.
Click to expand...
I’d rather jump in the boat with them! They get a choice of several competing plans and can pick the one best for their family. The premiums are taken out of their paycheck and paid to the company they choose.

Think of how that would work-still capitalist, private companies competing for buyers. If you want a plan without options that are against your faith and there are enough of you, there will be a company or maybe a couple companies to meet your needs. The employer is out of it entirely because it is the employee’s choice, all the employer does is put in the deduction-like taxes or anything else. And when you change jobs, all your new company has to do is set up the payroll deduction and things go on without interruption.

Why can’t we all have that plan?
 
Seeker1961 said:
I’d rather jump in the boat with them! They get a choice of several competing plans and can pick the one best for their family. The premiums are taken out of their paycheck and paid to the company they choose.

Think of how that would work-still capitalist, private companies competing for buyers. If you want a plan without options that are against your faith and there are enough of you, there will be a company or maybe a couple companies to meet your needs. The employer is out of it entirely because it is the employee’s choice, all the employer does is put in the deduction-like taxes or anything else. And when you change jobs, all your new company has to do is set up the payroll deduction and things go on without interruption.

Why can’t we all have that plan?
Click to expand...
I thought that members of Congress and Senators were all on the Federal HI plan? This doesn’t sound like what I heard about.

Also, are they paying their own premiums, or is their employer (you and ma) paying the premiums?

Anyway, the plan you describe is nice, for those who can afford a reduction in income of several hundred dollars/month.
 
St_Francis said:
I thought that members of Congress and Senators were all on the Federal HI plan? This doesn’t sound like what I heard about.

Also, are they paying their own premiums, or is their employer (you and ma) paying the premiums?

Anyway, the plan you describe is nice, for those who can afford a reduction in income of several hundred dollars/month.
Click to expand...
I worked for the federal govt and that’s the plan we had. It cost me $20 a week, not “several hundred dollars” a month. The money came out of my salary and since I worked for the government technically that salary did come from tax payers. Of course, I made far less than a senator or representative so it was a bigger piece of my income. I don’t know for a fact that they pay premiums the same way I did, but since we were on the same plan I would guess that they do.
 
Precisely.

And just where did the money to pay for the rest (other than your premiums) of the said plan come from -eh? The** tax payer** - that is who. Great plan was it? Do you really think every Joe Citizen (and ultimately - illegal resident) will get just such a spectacular plan from Obama Care? :rolleyes: 😃 :rotfl:Do you *really *think that such a plan is economically viable for the Nation to pay for everyone?:rotfl: :cool:

Now… back to the unavoidably** anti - Catholic**, “5 Non- negotiables” in Obama care already…:onpatrol:

See here: catholicforum.com/forums/showthread.php?27978-VOTING-5-Non-Negotiables

Ahemmmmmmmm?:cool:
 
Seeker1961 said:
I worked for the federal govt and that’s the plan we had. It cost me $20 a week, not “several hundred dollars” a month. The money came out of my salary and since I worked for the government technically that salary did come from tax payers. Of course, I made far less than a senator or representative so it was a bigger piece of my income. I don’t know for a fact that they pay premiums the same way I did, but since we were on the same plan I would guess that they do.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, I see. You do understand, unless you were single and it wasseveral decades ago, that the $20 you paid a week was only a small part of the premium?

For the pirposes of discussion, I recently looked up what would be the least expensive plan available to a family in my state: $540/month with a $10,000 (yes, ten thousand dollar) deductible. So a family would have to pay $16,600 dollars *in one year * to get any benefit from buying the insurance, and there was no coverage of eyes or dental (nor would they be included in the deducttible).

That is approximately what someone making $2/hour over minimum wage would bring home. Heaven forbid that a member of the family would get sick towards the end of the year…

If you are wondering, a family could reduce the deductible by $5,000–by paying $3,000 more eaxh year.
 
St_Francis said:
Ahhh, I see. You do understand, unless you were single and it wasseveral decades ago, that the $20 you paid a week was only a small part of the premium?

For the pirposes of discussion, I recently looked up what would be the least expensive plan available to a family in my state: $540/month with a $10,000 (yes, ten thousand dollar) deductible. So a family would have to pay $16,600 dollars *in one year * to get any benefit from buying the insurance, and there was no coverage of eyes or dental (nor would they be included in the deducttible).

That is approximately what someone making $2/hour over minimum wage would bring home. Heaven forbid that a member of the family would get sick towards the end of the year…

If you are wondering, a family could reduce the deductible by $5,000–by paying $3,000 more eaxh year.
Click to expand...
So if you bought private insurance by yourself that’s what it would cost. Of course when you add more people to the mix, the cost gets spread out. The company I work for now is extremely large so our health care costs less per person. The federal government also had a LOT of employees so insurance companies could charge less per person and still make a fortune off of them.

Put everyone on the Federal system and the costs would be lower per person, that’s just how it works.
 
Nimzovik said:
Precisely.

And just where did the money to pay for the rest (other than your premiums) of the said plan come from -eh? The** tax payer** - that is who. Great plan was it? Do you really think every Joe Citizen (and ultimately - illegal resident) will get just such a spectacular plan from Obama Care? :rolleyes: 😃 :rotfl:Do you *really *think that such a plan is economically viable for the Nation to pay for everyone?:rotfl: :cool:

Now… back to the unavoidably** anti - Catholic**, “5 Non- negotiables” in Obama care already…:onpatrol:

See here: catholicforum.com/forums/showthread.php?27978-VOTING-5-Non-Negotiables

Ahemmmmmmmm?:cool:
Click to expand...
clearly there’s no room for rational discussion here…so have a Happy Fourth!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top