Man Uses $1m Win To Finally Visit Doctor, Gets Terminal Cancer Diagnosis, Dies

[John V]

Yeah, apparently the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, didn't make care affordable.

and he's trying to say he's not a far right hack

See my last post. The point was for you guys to see that the guy in the article could have had insurance if he really wanted it.

---

Yeah, apparently the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, didn't make care affordable.

What you need is a free at point of use healthcare paid for by a universal tax.

If you'd read the thread, you'd know I'm not against that.

---

Around here, anyone but a teenager can get ten bucks an hour (and good teens can as well).

Interesting.  Minimum wage, which most places pay its workers, is only $8.25/hour here in the U.S.

Every McD's and similar around here has a sign advertising higher starting wages than that.

[Amarok]

Whatever moron every sane person here has refuted your nonsense. Preserve what passes for dignity for a sad wretch like yourself and slink away .

[Shell B]

Firstly, if you're going to employ hyperbole, you can't be surprised when people take you at your word.

With the word "everything," I can be surprised, as it's obvious hyperbole.

Thirdly, there being a substantial amount of side discussion on work and wealth doesn't negate what I said.

It absolutely negates what you said.

(Whether "absolutely" is intended as hyperbole is left as an exercise for the reader.)

I must have missed where you said it, cocksucker. You certainly didn't say other factors being equal in the post I quoted. So, you're essentially saying that you agree with everyone here, then? Assuming you're the exact same person working the exact same job in the exact same environment with the exact same family dynamic, etc. ad infinitum, you will make more money if you work more hours. Well, no shit, Sherlock. However, hard work will make very little difference in the availability of cancer treatment between person A who is just lazy and barely works and person B who isn't lazy but works as a laborer for very little pay and shitty insurance.

Around here, anyone but a teenager can get ten bucks an hour (and good teens can as well). Working 40 hours a week that's $20,800 per year. The subsidized cost of an ACA silver plan is 8.05% of that, or $1,674. Or, in terms of hours, 3.2 hours per week going to health insurance.

So why does he have shitty insurance?

Because 20,800 a year before taxes is not enough for most people, especially those with families?

As for the rest of your claptrap, show how it negates what I said, since you made the claim. And, instead of employing hyperbole (which is indistinguishable from actual far right and left-wing opinions), why not say what you fucking mean and employ clarity of speech? My guess is that wouldn't leave you enough wiggle room to weasel out of retarded statements you make.

[John V]

Because 20,800 a year before taxes is not enough for most people,

You specified the "very little pay" scenario. I'm showing that a person with very little pay can have insurance by working another 3 hours a week. It's doable.

especially those with families?

Insurance for a family of 4 at this income level would either be free or cost 2% of income, depending on the state they're in. 2% of 40 hours is another 48 minutes per week.

As for the rest of your claptrap, show how it negates what I said, since you made the claim.

OK. You said "Since we're talking about medical problems and not "everything," your assessment that people here think everything comes down to luck and policy is unfounded." By pointing out the side discussion on work and wealth and noting the obvious hyperbole, I negated your point.

And, instead of employing hyperbole (which is indistinguishable from actual far right and left-wing opinions), why not say what you fucking mean and employ clarity of speech? My guess is that wouldn't leave you enough wiggle room to weasel out of retarded statements you make.

No, it's because I give people more credit for reading comprehension than they deserve.

Come on, everything? Seriously?

[LadyForCamus]

No, and neither would my boss.

So, then why would be okay for the government to do that to people who were too poor to afford their own health care?  

I've seen this many times before around, here, but this thread is amazing me in showing how some of oyu just feel like you have no control over your lives, and that everything comes down to luck or government policy.

That’s not my position at all.  It seems your position is that almost all people who are hard workers will end up with great jobs and affordable health care, and the people who don’t have these things, don’t have them because they simply aren’t trying hard enough.  What I’m saying is that so far, that’s an unsupported assertion. You’ve provided no relevant data to support that position, and as far as reasoning goes, it’s classic example of religious binary thinking.  

So, you’d rather just penalize them?

No, Id rather that they put down the cigarette or donut and go to the gym. Wouldn't you? Wasn't the point of the penalties in Obamacare that people buy insurance rather than be penalized?

The point of the penalties, if I’m not mistaken, was to ensure there would be enough money in the system  to cover the older, and sicker of our population.  It wasn’t ever about threatening people into being healthier.

It's a general rule. It obviously doesn't apply in every single instance. I thought that was obvious but if not - there you go.

So, you’re just going to restate your unevidenced assertion, but this time, declare it, “obvious” by fiat.  Cool.

---

With the word "everything," I can be surprised, as it's obvious hyperbole.


It absolutely negates what you said.

(Whether "absolutely" is intended as hyperbole is left as an exercise for the reader.)


Around here, anyone but a teenager can get ten bucks an hour (and good teens can as well). Working 40 hours a week that's $20,800 per year. The subsidized cost of an ACA silver plan is 8.05% of that, or $1,674. Or, in terms of hours, 3.2 hours per week going to health insurance.

So why does he have shitty insurance?

Because 20,800 a year before taxes is not enough for most people, especially those with families?

As for the rest of your claptrap, show how it negates what I said, since you made the claim. And, instead of employing hyperbole (which is indistinguishable from actual far right and left-wing opinions), why not say what you fucking mean and employ clarity of speech? My guess is that wouldn't leave you enough wiggle room to weasel out of retarded statements you make.

Lol, Alpha must have forgotten about things like car payments, car insurance, rent/mortgage, food, student loans, child care, ect., when he did his, “it’s totally affordable” healthcare math.

[John V]

So, then why would be okay for the government to do that to people who were too poor to afford their own health care?  
...
That’s not my position at all.  It seems your position is that almost all people who are hard workers will end up with great jobs and affordable health care, and the people who don’t have these things, don’t have them because they simply aren’t trying hard enough.  What I’m saying is that so far, that’s an unsupported assertion.  You’ve provided no relevant data to support that position, and as far as reasoning goes, it’s classic example of religious binary thinking.

See above - it's supported now. It doesn't take much extra effort to afford insurance.  

The point of the penalties, if I’m not mistaken, was to ensure there would be enough money in the system  to cover the older, and sicker of our population.  It wasn’t ever about threatening people into being healthier.

The point of the penalties is to make people buy the insurance. They'd rather have that than collect the penalties, which were too small to do much anyway.

So, you’re just going to restate your unevidenced assertion, but this time, declare it, “obvious” by fiat.  Cool.

Fiat? I explained my thought process and offered clarification. That's just discussion.

[Shell B]

Oh, sweetie. It's not my reading comprehension that's the problem. If it were, I wouldn't be able to afford my own insurance, either.

[John V]

Lol, Alpha must have forgotten about thinks like car payments, car insurance, rent/mortgage, food, student loans, child care, ect., when he did his, “it’s totally affordable” healthcare math.

It's free or 2% if your income is under 138% of the poverty level. It's 8.05% from 139% - 250%. It's 9.5% from 251% - 400% (that's $97,200 for a family of 4).

In 2016, total spending on health care was 17.9% of GDP.

Seems reasonable to me.

---

Oh, sweetie. It's not my reading comprehension that's the problem. If it were, I wouldn't be able to afford my own insurance, either.

If you cut your hours to 10% of the current level, would you be able to afford insurance?

[Shell B]

Lol, Alpha must have forgotten about thinks like car payments, car insurance, rent/mortgage, food, student loans, child care, ect., when he did his, “it’s totally affordable” healthcare math.

It's free or 2% if your income is under 138% of the poverty level. It's 8.05% from 139% - 250%. It's 9.5% from 251% - 400% (that's $97,200 for a family of 4).

In 2016, total spending on health care was 17.9% of GDP.

Seems reasonable to me.

---

Oh, sweetie. It's not my reading comprehension that's the problem. If it were, I wouldn't be able to afford my own insurance, either.

If you cut your hours to 10% of the current level, would you be able to afford insurance?

Probably. I live in Massachusetts.

[John V]

It's free or 2% if your income is under 138% of the poverty level. It's 8.05% from 139% - 250%. It's 9.5% from 251% - 400% (that's $97,200 for a family of 4).

In 2016, total spending on health care was 17.9% of GDP.

Seems reasonable to me.

---

If you cut your hours to 10% of the current level, would you be able to afford insurance?

Probably. I live in Massachusetts.

What about car payments, car insurance, rent, food, school loans, etc? How would you pay for those?