Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 7:26 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Uni Health Care
#11
RE: Uni Health Care
(July 21, 2009 at 4:23 pm)bozo Wrote: Rich people can afford to pay more for essential services than poorer people can.
The gap between rich and poor is too great. Raising the level of tax on the very rich can help redress this and put more into the public purse for essentials like healthcare.

These positions you hold are commonly held by many but are unsupported by any reason other than a childish notion that people with more money should support those with less.

People who are overweight should pay more for healthcare as should people who smoke. This makes sense because they will use the system more due to their personal choices.

I assert that people should be able to use their money the way they see fit with a portion going to the government.

Rich people already pay more because they are in a higher tax bracket and are quite often the ones that provide jobs for those that make less. It is not equitable to create special taxes aimed at the rich to support healthcare.

Rhizo
#12
RE: Uni Health Care
Actually Rhizo, it isn't childish notion...it's called socialism.
It's a belief that we should work towards abolishing both the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor.
Every rich person got rich by the sweat of others.
It is in the interests of the very wealthy to moderate their wealth, through paying taxes at a higher level, if for no other reason than to avert revolution.
HuhA man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
#13
RE: Uni Health Care
(July 21, 2009 at 3:57 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: You go to buy a car, you pay them an amount that covers their cost, commision, and overhead. You get a car. Win/win.

That's not win/win ... that's an equitable deal (and, in the real world, more than likely the buyer gets stung by the seller). As I said I do not accept the win/win scenario ... for someone to "win", someone else has to lose. If there re no apparent losers then all the affected parts have not been taken into account. The implication of the win/win scenario is that you get something for nothing and, let's be brutally honest here, that just doesn't happen ... not in science not in the real world, someone always loses.

Kyu
(July 21, 2009 at 4:23 pm)bozo Wrote:
(July 21, 2009 at 2:57 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: So why should rich people have to pay more? Is being rich correlated to increased use of healthcare services?

Rich people can afford to pay more for essential services than poorer people can.
The gap between rich and poor is too great. Raising the level of tax on the very rich can help redress this and put more into the public purse for essentials like healthcare.

I'll go further and ask the question, why should rich people get paid as much as they do? I mean I'm all for some differentiation to reward those with brains, vision, skill (I'm not a communist, I'm a socialist but, as I said earlier, not the nuLabour type) and so on but there is something offensive about a guy getting several million a year compared to someone getting maybe 20 grand ... TBH brutally honest I don't give a flying [expletive deleted] what Mr/Ms Wealthy does for a job, there is no why this side of hell that he/she is worth THAT much more than the guys at the bottom of the pile.

Kyu
(July 21, 2009 at 4:44 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: These positions you hold are commonly held by many but are unsupported by any reason other than a childish notion that people with more money should support those with less.

Personally I think it rather more childish to pay those who do maybe twice (how do you measure how much effort someone puts in?) as much as those at the bottom perhaps hundreds of times more. And that doesn't even begin to deal with those people who by sheer accident of birth are born into billions of pounds/dollars ... who the [expletive deleted] gives them the right to be parasites on society for their entire lives?

(July 21, 2009 at 4:44 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: People who are overweight should pay more for healthcare as should people who smoke. This makes sense because they will use the system more due to their personal choices.

Ah! The sympathetic approach! Has it occurred to you that those people might be genetically unable to control their weight, or perhaps they are depressed because they were thrown out a job by some dick who has more money than a thousand of these people will see in their lives all together, or perhaps that the food they are eating is deliberately designed to be unhealthy or .. or ... or ...

(July 21, 2009 at 4:44 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I assert that people should be able to use their money the way they see fit with a portion going to the government.

And I assert that we all live in the same society, that we all have responsibility for each other, that each of us benefits from the work, the effort that each of us puts in and that society is inherently unfair because of people with opinions like yours.

(July 21, 2009 at 4:44 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Rich people already pay more because they are in a higher tax bracket and are quite often the ones that provide jobs for those that make less. It is not equitable to create special taxes aimed at the rich to support healthcare.

Rich people should pay more because they get paid too [expletive deleted] much in the first place.

Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!

Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
#14
RE: Uni Health Care
Bozo,

That is all fairy tale nonsense, socialism is a flop, capitalism won and is even making inroads into China through a growing middle class that is adopting American ideals about wealth generation and storage. Socialism isn't childish but your assertion that it is a viable economic model is childish and uninformed.

The government needs to control social programs that meet the needs of the people. The government also needs to regulate externalities and create laws that balance the market.

You wrote, "Every rich person got rich by the sweat of others." So, what magical force is stopping you from doing the same? Keep in mind that most jobs are created by the vision of these "rich people" you seem to scorn.

Sorry for the long copy past but the article is not available without membership

The development of market orientation: a consideration of institutional influence in China Wrote:Mao's “theory of continuous revolution” viewed the market as an “embodiment of capitalism” (Dittmer and Gore, 2001, p. 17). He chose a central plan-based economic system. National production was thus driven by the central plan (Borgonjon and Vanhonacker, 1992), which hindered Chinese firms’ market orientation. In the post-Mao Era following the 1978 economic and political reforms, market track of the dual-track approach, however, allowed economic agents to participate in the market but they were required to fulfill social obligations (Lau et al., 2001). Many Chinese still expect social obligations from private firms. For instance, in an ethnographic study, Hsu (2006) found some entrepreneurs were understood as cadres and were judged by their ability to provide socialist benefits.

Chinese firms gradually started importing western management techniques. Traditionally, the import, however, was concentrated on the tangible and quantitative approach. Soft concepts of management, such as marketing and consumer behavior, are relatively less integrated into Chinese thinking (Borgonjon and Vanhonacker, 1992). Such concepts were perceived by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a threat to the communist ideology. It is important to note that the empowerment of employees (Harris, 1996) and customers (Ramani and Kumar, 2008) are important components of market orientation. Political as well as corporate power holders in socialist economies, on the other hand, prefer unilateral control of power and decision making and thus oppose empowerment (Lynn et al. 2002).

So, basically we are moving toward a happy middle where social needs are met through planned effort while industry is motivated through market forces. The only force that reliably guides people is self-interest and that is the prime motivator in a free market economy.

Thanks for your time,
Rhizo
#15
RE: Uni Health Care
Rhizo, just guessing but I take it you are not in favour of Obama's attempt at providing healthcare for the 45 million of your fellow Americans who currently have none?
HuhA man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
#16
RE: Uni Health Care
(July 21, 2009 at 6:13 pm)bozo Wrote: Rhizo, just guessing but I take it you are not in favour of Obama's attempt at providing healthcare for the 45 million of your fellow Americans who currently have none?

Bozo,

I support what he is doing; a single payer, federal, healthcare option HAS to be better than COBRA or any other option we currently have. Like I said, the government needs to create social programs to address the needs of the people. I am a moderate leaning towards Republican beliefs but I refuse to tow any party line.

I also liked the idea behind McCain's plan although it did sound a bit coo coo bird to me. Giving people some tax money is not the same as providing healthcare. Moot point though 'cause he lost.

Rhizo
(July 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: That's not win/win ... that's an equitable deal (and, in the real world, more than likely the buyer gets stung by the seller). As I said I do not accept the win/win scenario ... for someone to "win", someone else has to lose. If there re no apparent losers then all the affected parts have not been taken into account. The implication of the win/win scenario is that you get something for nothing and, let's be brutally honest here, that just doesn't happen ... not in science not in the real world, someone always loses.

Kyu

Win/win means that both parties win something, not that anyone gets something for nothing. Not everything is a zero sum game.

(July 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I'll go further and ask the question, why should rich people get paid as much as they do? I mean I'm all for some differentiation to reward those with brains, vision, skill (I'm not a communist, I'm a socialist but, as I said earlier, not the nuLabour type) and so on but there is something offensive about a guy getting several million a year compared to someone getting maybe 20 grand ... TBH brutally honest I don't give a flying [expletive deleted] what Mr/Ms Wealthy does for a job, there is no why this side of hell that he/she is worth THAT much more than the guys at the bottom of the pile.

Kyu

I hear what you are saying on this one, but you have the answers in your paragraph. The fact remains that they positioned themselves to achieve great wealth. The problem I have with some of the extremly wealthy, would be the unethical ways some of them made their money. They should be handled on a case by case basis by the court system.

The system is not perfect, and I ponder ways to more equitably distribute wealth. Free market is the way to go, with social programs and laws created by the governement to level the playing field.

(July 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Personally I think it rather more childish to pay those who do maybe twice (how do you measure how much effort someone puts in?) as much as those at the bottom perhaps hundreds of times more. And that doesn't even begin to deal with those people who by sheer accident of birth are born into billions of pounds/dollars ... who the [expletive deleted] gives them the right to be parasites on society for their entire lives?

Ahh, "old money" yeah, that sucks, but people who have no ability to aquire wealth have proven to be amazingly good at losing it. I love the idea of some rich kid with too much money; they will buy what I sell them Smile. It is by organic processes that rich people have gotten rich and there are plenty of examples of lobby groups being used to prevent entry into an industry by raising the standards far above what a start up company can afford. Change is necessary to move toward a better solution.

(July 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Ah! The sympathetic approach! Has it occurred to you that those people might be genetically unable to control their weight, or perhaps they are depressed because they were thrown out a job by some dick who has more money than a thousand of these people will see in their lives all together, or perhaps that the food they are eating is deliberately designed to be unhealthy or .. or ... or ...

Yeah, well, I am overweight so it was more about me taking responsibility for my burden on the healthcare system.

(July 21, 2009 at 5:32 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Rich people should pay more because they get paid too [expletive deleted] much in the first place.

Kyu

Lol, take that you greedy fat cats!

Kyu,

I am not delusional enough to think that "the system" is perfect as it is, but I just hate it when people go after the rich with such fervor simply based on the fact that they have more money.

Rhizo
#17
RE: Uni Health Care
Rich people in the UK pay for private health care to get a better service. This way they still win.

1. What do you believe are the pros/cons?
Lots of people opt for a private alternative for better care.
It's taken for granted and there's the temptation to abuse it.
People feel aggrieved about perceived abuse.
Listening to some US people discuss it I found it amazing that they felt so strongly against providing health care to those in need and down on their luck, like these people were by default scroungers.
There are the disadvantages of any government run system.
In the UK the health service has been forced to go along the lines of a profit making company with all the assiciated evils of that.

2. If you could change something about it, what would it be?
It's a difficult balance between state run bloat and commercial uncaring. In the UK the balance is too commercial at the moment IMO.
#18
RE: Uni Health Care
(July 21, 2009 at 3:23 pm)Eilonnwy Wrote:
(July 21, 2009 at 2:27 pm)Samson Wrote: This was brought up on the other section of "American Presidents" and I thought it would be a great discussion by itself.

I of course live in the U.S. where we do not have a Universal Health Care. However, like I mentioned on the other topic, I lived in Norway for a long time and honestly never heard a single person there bitch or complain about their system.

Actually your wrong. Universal health care exists in the best state, MA Tongue

When the bill was passed for universal care in our state I was automatically put on a state plan. It came just in the nick of time because I had an ovarian cyst the size of a grapefruit and I needed it removed. The state paid for it. I'm also an asthmatic and health care meant I could go on a preventive medication that costs $300 a month and will help me live longer because fast acting inhalers destroy your heart over time, with the preventive medication keeping me from using it a lot.

Now I'm on insurance through my job because when I got a better job I didn't qualify anymore, but it didn't matter.

I fully support universal health care. I'm not certain how I specifically think it should be done, but it's something I think the state should help with. The system is obviously broken, and while I don't think the state should carry every person, health care is one of those things I think should be a basic human right. Especially when the uninsured tax the system because they go to emergency rooms and then don't pay because they can't. We pay more that way.

What you are talking about is not the same as what I've seen in Norway, Sweden, France etc. Close, but not the same... But at least it's a good start...




Rhiz...

Cobra is a joke, and you would be better off just walking into a clinic or Medicaid covered hospital than pay out the yen/yang for that crap.


Also, I do not believe someone should be paying more because they smoke, weight, adrenaline junkie, etc. etc. etc.
Just as someone else mentioned before...Free Health care should be a "RIGHT", not a damn privilege. What the hell makes someone else better than the next person, other than owning more shit.
Intelligence is the only true moral guide...
#19
RE: Uni Health Care
Samson,

At no point did I say that people with more money are "better" than anyone else. They have more money, and I am just saying that they shouldn't be targeted to pay extra healthcare costs simply because they make more money.

One way to have a successful healthcare system is to control costs through preventitive care and another is to have people that engage in risky behavior pay a small tax on the things they do that are risky. It should not be a punative cost just a small cost associated with risky behavior. This will bite me on the ass if they start taxing climbing equipment but such is life.

My solution would be to legalize pot and tax the hell out of it Smile. It would still be way more affordable than it is now and would let a bunch of people out of jail so they could be productive and pay taxes instead of burning them up while sitting in a small room.

Rhizo
#20
RE: Uni Health Care
It's still universal health care, and while it's not perfect, somewhere around 97% of the people of MA have health insurance and that's a good thing.
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin

::Blogs:: Boston Atheism Examiner - Boston Atheists Blog | :Tongueodcast:: Boston Atheists Report



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Atheists and health GGG 26 2118 February 12, 2021 at 10:49 am
Last Post: onlinebiker
  Belief in God can improve mental health outcomes. Mystic 19 6419 May 5, 2013 at 1:41 am
Last Post: Ryantology
  Why Atheists Care About YOUR Religion!!! Gooders1002 32 9974 November 18, 2012 at 11:56 pm
Last Post: festive1
  Creationist books in uni Gooders1002 17 5772 March 14, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)