G
gamewell45
Guest
Ok, so whats your solution to the problem?All the other paying customers that go to that same hospital.
Which is a problem in and of itself.
But should not be solved by transferring those costs.
Ok, so whats your solution to the problem?All the other paying customers that go to that same hospital.
Which is a problem in and of itself.
But should not be solved by transferring those costs.
Repealing the health care law would add ~140 billion to the deficit over 10 years.How much would we save just by repealing the really obvious waste like Obamacare and whatever portion still hasn’t been spent of that earlier Porkulus bill?
Using what numbers?Repealing the health care law would add ~140 billion to the deficit over 10 years.
You’re talking about deliveries into very remote places, which is very costly, but doable.Allow private companies to compete with the US Postal System for mail delivery.
Was thinking the same thing during the readings at mass yesterday.HOW in-then-thi-tive!Now let’s all sit back and watch 2nd Thessalonians get flamed for its lack of compassion and “social justice”…
Brothers and sisters:
You know how one must imitate us.
For we did not act in a disorderly way among you,
nor did we eat food received free from anyone.
On the contrary, in toil and drudgery, night and day
we worked, so as not to burden any of you.
Not that we do not have the right.
Rather, we wanted to present ourselves as a model for you,
so that you might imitate us.
In fact, when we were with you,
we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work,
neither should that one eat.
We hear that some are conducting themselves among you in a
disorderly way,
by not keeping busy but minding the business of others.
Such people we instruct and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to work quietly
and to eat their own food.
I pointed that out to my wife and told her I thought it might be the only section of the bible my father ever read and spent much of his life impressing it upon his children.Brothers and sisters:
You know how one must imitate us.
For we did not act in a disorderly way among you,
nor did we eat food received free from anyone.
On the contrary, in toil and drudgery, night and day
we worked, so as not to burden any of you.
Not that we do not have the right.
Rather, we wanted to present ourselves as a model for you,
so that you might imitate us.
In fact, when we were with you,
we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work,
neither should that one eat.
We hear that some are conducting themselves among you in a
disorderly way,
by not keeping busy but minding the business of others.
Such people we instruct and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to work quietly
and to eat their own food.
I worked in a hospital for almost 10 years. The programs in place right now require hospitals to take people who fall over in the street and yes, if they can’t pay, taxpayers pay.What happens to those unfortunate souls who either choose not to or cannot afford medical insurance and they drop over in the street of a heart attack, stroke or other serious condition and get taken to the hospital?? Who has to pay? What if the person is indigent? Who gets stuck with the bill?
Or they can pay for their own treatment. If they have pre-existing conditions, they don’t get cheaper rates.Those making a million dollars or more per year can get their own insurance.
So, either way the taxpayers have to pay.I worked in a hospital for almost 10 years. The programs in place right now require hospitals to take people who fall over in the street and yes, if they can’t pay, taxpayers pay.
Those making a million dollars or more per year can get their own insurance.
Peace,
Ed
I think there are many common sense changes that can be made. I’m sure you’ve heard them all and still support a public option, so I’ll save myself the trouble.Ok, so whats your solution to the problem?
Voice of common sense, reason, and in line with plain old Catholic principles.No, just the plain old Catholic notion of subsidiarity. Who is best able to provide for their health expenses in old age? The individual and their family. Once you go beyond that you create huge problems.
My solution would be to practice what you preach and lead through example. If caring for the sick and the infirm is truly what you believe in, further restrain yourself from the acquisition of material goods and increase your charity whether it be time or money.Ok, so whats your solution to the problem?
As well meaning as it appears, if a practice such as that were adopted, I fear many people would needlessly die because we come from a society where many people are not charitable IMHO.My solution would be to practice what you preach and lead through example. If caring for the sick and the infirm is truly what you believe in, further restrain yourself from the acquisition of material goods and increase your charity whether it be time or money.
Quit blaming others for not living up to your expectations of generousity or seeing yourself as too poor to help. Start up a private fund. But don’t you dare be charitible with my wallet. I will see fit to whom I will give to. I respect your earnings to be spent as how you deem worthy (provided they are not used to indulge in immorality), I only ask you to do the same in return.
I’m not sure if this is an overgeneralization, based off of which part of the country you live in. I don’t think people would needlessly die. I would think that the less wide the safety net is, people would have a better understanding of the risks by seeing the results and take better care of themselves.As well meaning as it appears, if a practice such as that were adopted, I fear many people would needlessly die because we come from a society where many people are not charitable IMHO.