For money from the government.....

QUOTE(Chillers @ Jan 25 2008, 06:27 PM) [snapback]590278[/snapback]
Who decides what's elective? Technically, a gallbladder removal surgery is elective. The person who needs their gallbladder out may not think so, but it's not life or death so you can wait several months right? Or that tumor is fairly slow growing, you don't need to get in right away, we'll get it before it get too big, we'll get it out soon. Having had a family member with a benign brain tumor that wasn't immediately life threatening, it was still nice that she was able to have her surgery within a couple of weeks and not have to wait months.


Well, I can't say that I'm sure who makes the decisions but I would guess it's someone in the Minister of Health's office. But by elective I didn't mean gallbladders or slow growing tumors. I meant things like knee replacements, hip replacements, and even those are prioritized by how urgent they are. Everything has a priority. But isn't that the way it should be? If I needed my gallbladder removed & someone else needed a tumor removed from their lung, shouldn't they go first? It is basically a triage system, those who need help the most get it first. That being said, I haven't experienced any huge waits. I needed a D&C a couple of years ago, it really wasn't any kind of emergency, but it was scheduled within 2 - 3 weeks, not months. As for red tape, there isn't any. You show your health card & you get your care. Not forms to file or paperwork to worry about. Again, our system isn't perfect by any stretch, we have many problems that need fixing, too. I'm just saying that universal health care isn't the horrible thing so many make it out to be.

 

QUOTE(tinalb @ Jan 26 2008, 03:29 AM) [snapback]590379[/snapback]
Well, I can't say that I'm sure who makes the decisions but I would guess it's someone in the Minister of Health's office. But by elective I didn't mean gallbladders or slow growing tumors. I meant things like knee replacements, hip replacements, and even those are prioritized by how urgent they are. Everything has a priority. But isn't that the way it should be? If I needed my gallbladder removed & someone else needed a tumor removed from their lung, shouldn't they go first? It is basically a triage system, those who need help the most get it first. That being said, I haven't experienced any huge waits. I needed a D&C a couple of years ago, it really wasn't any kind of emergency, but it was scheduled within 2 - 3 weeks, not months. As for red tape, there isn't any. You show your health card & you get your care. Not forms to file or paperwork to worry about. Again, our system isn't perfect by any stretch, we have many problems that need fixing, too. I'm just saying that universal health care isn't the horrible thing so many make it out to be.


Not to go OT here but 2-3 weeks for a D&C.. I had mine the day after I found out I needed it, I dont know what i would have done if i had to wait even just a week to have that surgery. I was told that if I naturally M/c I ran the risk of bleeding to death. But i guess if you went in and were going to die from blood loss that you would have you surgery moved up.... Scary thought though.

Theres goods and bads to everything

 

QUOTE(tinalb @ Jan 25 2008, 09:29 PM) [snapback]590379[/snapback]
I'm just saying that universal health care isn't the horrible thing so many make it out to be.


I agree. I am thinking of the pain that its going to become as America makes the shift to a universal health care system. I can't see it ever happening though because of the power insurance companies seem to have. The healthcare system in America is severely broken and we do need change badly. But our government making the change -- I don't see it happening and it saddens me.

 

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 25 2008, 06:40 PM) [snapback]590002[/snapback]
Ok, had to respond. These are programs available to EVERYONE. Everyone can deduct mortgage payments, or get student loans or start an IRA. It's not a fair comparison. These are not programs that you qualify for depending on income.

But there are programs for people to go to college who come from low income families where they don't have to pay at all. And that IS NOT available to everyone. See the difference?

And if the PP was referring to me, I never said SAHM soak up resources. If you weren't, then I apologize for thinking you were.

So, there should not be programs for low income families to send their kids to college? But isn't that going to help them better themselves and get out of poverty?

Sorry if I took your statements the wrong way (re: SAHM's). I guess I took your rants against people who aren't working the wrong way. And no, we are not on any type of government assistance.

 

QUOTE(OneBoyOneGirl @ Jan 26 2008, 01:33 AM) [snapback]590189[/snapback]
Ok I can take it anymore....Can some of those ol lazy-good-for-nothing Canadians please tell me what you do all day just b/c you can go see a DR for free? I know that is that only reason I get up in the morning....... to pay for healthcare. Wait, we need to ask the Germans, the Brits, the French, the Swedish, ..........Wow, how are these countries NOT in ruins?????? With all the free the free DR visits? Who would want to work?

Society doesnt work without layers (like an onion ) There has to be a lower, middle and upper class. Everyone cant be rich. It just doesnt work that way. So there needs to be a way to take care of ALL those people. And BTW, whoever said the clean water analogy LOVE that! I am going to have to use that.


Ok, seriously, what are you reading? Did I ever say that Canadians were lazy? Did I say that all residents of countries with universal healthcare are lazy, sittng around seeing drs for free? I never said that. Not once. I think it's ok for me to be against universal healthcare. I think a lot of the SAHM on these boards are getting a little defensive. I can't count how many posts I read that said "Oh, so i'm not a contributing member of society because I don't work?" I NEVER said that. All I said was, I believe people should actively be trying to take care of their own families health insurance. That's it. And I stand behind that statement. I don't think it's really that outlandish. You may not get up in the morning and go to work for healthcare, but it's certainly part of the reason I do. For that, and a paycheck to have a house, and a car, and all those other unbelievable luxuries I have. Ya know, like formula and diapers.

I agree that there will always be a lower, middle and upper class. I'm ok with paying the taxes I pay, and having them go into the programs that are in place to help the underpriviledged. This all started with the rebate, and my point was, if it's about the taxes we paid, why should we be left out?? Just because we do well, doesn't mean I don't still have a mortgage that needs to get paid. I still have daycare full time for 2 babies. I have car payments, and student loans, and all sorts of bills, just like everyone else. I worry about money no different than everyone else does.

I just love the way people jump around and attack, like I said I didn't want libraries or clean drinking water for everyone. And most importantly, I never said I'm more DESERVING than others to have healthcare. That word was thrown around many times. Yes, all the lower income families should be shipped away so I don't have to see them (sarcasm). Everyone is deserving of good health care. I personally don't believe that universal healthcare is the answer. I think there are other ways it could be approached. Maybe provide provisional health coverage for people, and then help them find jobs that will offer them coverage for their families. But unless you are disabled or elderly or incapable of work (like a child), I'm not a big fan of the government just paying for your healthcare because you choose not to work. Because it's not the goverment paying. It's us. In our taxes.

In response to what someone else said. Anyone can get a mortgage. If you don't have enough money for one, I can't help that. Everyone can get student loans. It doesn't matter at all how much your parents make. Maybe the rates are different, that I don't know. But I know plenty of kids from wealthy parents who had to pay there way through college with loans. And anyone can get an IRA. If you don't have the money to do those things, that's not my problem. Those are not american rights, to own a home or have a 401K. That's like saying everyone should have the right to own a yacht. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it.

And as for the person whose husband is getting a new job, I can only speak for my state, but in NJ if you leave your job, your company is REQUIRED to offer cobra for 18 months. So if you do switch jobs and the new companies benefits don't start for a few months, you can still maintain your healthcare in the interim. Hopefully that will be available to you so you don't find yourself without benefits.

 

QUOTE(Snittens @ Jan 26 2008, 05:03 AM) [snapback]590508[/snapback]
So, there should not be programs for low income families to send their kids to college? But isn't that going to help them better themselves and get out of poverty?

Sorry if I took your statements the wrong way (re: SAHM's). I guess I took your rants against people who aren't working the wrong way. And no, we are not on any type of government assistance.


Well, why not student loans? That's what I had to do. My parents did well, but not enough for them to pay for college. So I had to pay for it in loans. We are all going to graduate with the same degree, and start out on the same page, except that because my parents were not poor, I now have $45K in student loans.

I have tons of friends with an unbelievable amount of student loans. It's tough to start out life with that much debt.

 

Here is my two cents. I don't see my rebate as a hand out as it is something I already EARNED. What I do have a problem with is those who didn't pay any taxes getting refunds. I mean I am all for helping the less fortunate ect....I think we all pay a lot already to subsidize these programs. But I mean getting a rebate on something you didn't even earn.

As far as universay healthcare I don't really know how I feel about that. What I do know is that my work nor my dh work provides insurance for our kids. My dh and I have spent the last 5 years cleaning my office so that we can make the money to pay for it. I think that you can find ways to make the money, you just have to have the desire!

 

QUOTE
Everyone can get student loans. It doesn't matter at all how much your parents make.


That isn't true. Neither my daughter nor I qualified for a student loan. Why? because she is a student dependent on me, so she couldn't even apply, and me because during my divorce, my ex ruined "our" credit. The only way I was able to qualify for a loan for her to go to school to be able to have a better life than I am able to give her right now, was to grovel to my own father to ask him to co sign the loan.

QUOTE
Anyone can get a mortgage

If you really believe that you live in a dream world. You can't just "get" a mortgage. I can give you many examples of people who can't "get" a mortgage, why because they don't qualify for one.


I am quite honestly sick of your condescending attitude towards anyone who isn't at your level of income, class or acheivement. You have in several posts here and in other topics made it pretty darn clear that you are better than the rest of us, and that because you have an education (which as a poor person I obviously don't have) you know everything. I have a college education. My parents had enough money so that we were comfortable growing up. However circumstances occured that have found me in my current situation.

I think you need to get out of your glass house and spend some time REALLY seeing the way the "other" half lives before you decide that anyone who is poor wants to be there, and if they didn't they can "get" loans and mortgages and pull themselves out of their despair and become productive members of YOUR society.

I actually understand that you don't agree with universal health care. Fine, I only agree with it in theory, I don't think a plan to put it into practice has been formulated. I am not sure it can be put into practice. BUT that said, something has to be done to fix the system that is in place now.

FYI, COBRA aint cheap, you not only have to pay your part, but the employers part as well. For most people, it is more than a paycheck a month, and depending on your new job, your wait could be 3-12 months to get that new insurance. Yes I have paid cobra payments, and nearly went broke doing it but because at the time we had newborn twins we couldn't go with out it.

 

QUOTE(nikki_0724 @ Jan 25 2008, 07:45 PM) [snapback]590412[/snapback]
Not to go OT here but 2-3 weeks for a D&C.. I had mine the day after I found out I needed it, I dont know what i would have done if i had to wait even just a week to have that surgery. I was told that if I naturally M/c I ran the risk of bleeding to death. But i guess if you went in and were going to die from blood loss that you would have you surgery moved up.... Scary thought though.

Theres goods and bads to everything


Sorry, I hate to get completely off-topic but I wasn't very clear, I guess. The D&C that I needed was absolutely a non-emergency. It had nothing to do with pregnancy or bleeding but because I had some questionable results on another test that needed verifying. Nothing that couldn't have waited longer than I did actually, the doctor was just really nice & wanted to get it done for me before Christmas so I didn't have to worry about it.

 

We have to turn around and claim these crappy rebates as income for the next tax year. Frankly I'd shove the check up the IRS's rear before opening the envelope if I could. That's an additional $1200 we have to claim as income next year. We'll likely be donating ours to charity so the government can't get their hands back on it and spend it on awesome projects like the study of cow flatulence or 25mil to help fund the economic development of Ireland -- for the Irish.. Did I mention our tax dollars are being used to revitalize Ireland's economy?

http://www.internationalfundforireland.com/

I'm against universal health care for the same reasons as previous posters. I don't want the federal government making my decisions for me. If they can't manage to keep our economy afloat without creating money out of thin air, I definitely don't want them in control of my health. If my kids get sick, I'd rather their treatment not be in the hands of the lowest bidder.

For more reading misery and a look at how your tax dollars are spent by the government:
http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagena...rts_pigbook2007

 

QUOTE
But there are many, many programs to help some low income families with little to no money down such as FHA. Your income would determine how much you qualify for. Now if someone can't qualify because of credit, well that's another story. So there are options for people that don't hold high income jobs or even middle class. So really it is available to anyone.


Buying a house is not available to everyone. But you make the assumption that those with a decent income can qualify for a mortgage. We have EXCELLENT credit, have saved tens of thousands of dollars for a down payment....but...we are priced out of the market. I also work for the federal govt and my career is only available in Washington DC (when we're in the US). Try $400,000 for a 2 bedroom condo. That's like $3,500/month for the mortgage, insurance and condo fee.

 

Getting back to the original question in this thread (reprinted below again), my answer is that not enough attention is being made to the supposed impetus for this proposed stimulus package - something to boost the falling American economy. It's dangerous IMO to call it a tax rebate because that leads to the kind of open (and often heated) discussions along the lines of where this thread has jumped to.

The way I see it is that there are many signs out there that our economy is struggling. One way to try to boost the economy is to put more money in the hands of working Americans with the hope that they will either increase their spending, save the money to plan for future needs or even invest it or donate it in other manners to further boost our national economy. That's a Republican standard (cut taxes or provide economic stimulus to businesses to get more people employed) and the package is also at this point being modified so that it doesn't come across as being too top-heavy and detrimental for the lower class at the expense of the upper class. I think it may survive the Senate and House because you can reasonably make the argument that upper level incomes may already be spending in the American economy at a level higher than those being more directly affected by this proposed stimulus package (although I agree with many that there is a disparity of spending rates and cost of living rates based on where you live although I would counter that argument that your costs should be offset somewhat by the salary rates in those areas).

I think we're all missing the point if we turn this into a debate on why everyone should be entitled to a handout and isn't that just like socialized medicine. If we enter into a prolonged recession or heaven forbid something worse, you'll see many more Americans struggling to purchase basic necessities, more home foreclosures, job layoffs and other aspects that will continue to hurt a lot of people. I truly believe we need something to continue to stimulate the economy and I have no problems with the ideas I've heard thus far as part of this proposed package.

QUOTE(three_precious_girls @ Jan 25 2008, 12:03 PM) [snapback]589218[/snapback]
This has been bothering me since I saw the thread because it reminded me of the posts many made that universal healthcare meant having a "socialist government".
Lots of people here were against the government providing healthcare for all because it implied socialism and basically believed that insurance should stay privatized.
However, many of those same people are totally excited that the government could be sending them a monetary handout.
Isnt this hypocritical? How can you be against the lower middle class getting health assistance, but for monetary assistance? Depending on the government to give you money because you qualify in a certain bracket is basically depending on those in America that make over 75k individually or 150k as a couple to pay into the government and give it to you. And, this is on top of their taxes as well.
I myself am for universal healthcare, and I am all for assisting those that need help. I dont however see how you can be against one and for another simply because it "helps you out".
I would love to be enlightened to both sides especially someone's view opposite than mine because I am truly not looking for a fight I am just utterly confused...

 

We all pay for the health care crisis one way or another, and not necessarily in the form of taxes. It might be cheaper to pay for it with taxes than how we pay for it now, if we had truly universal health care. Most of the countries that do have universal health care allow people who can afford it to purchase additional coverage that allows them to be more "choosy" and "skip ahead" in the triage system. Yes, this means that wealthier people have better access (true here now anyway), and yes it means that wealthier people pay more (also true here now). However, there isn't a big chunk in the middle of people who make too much to qualify for help for the poor but not enough to pay for their own insurance.

That's the problem with American health care right now.

We pay for this one way or another. To take the example of my MIL's hand injury (which, again, they paid for out of pocket). Suppose they had not had $10,000 available to pay the medical bill after the insurance agent neglected to submit the paperwork. She would still have needed her hand repaired. A situation like this can easily become a case where the hospital fixes her hand, but the bill is never paid.

Well, the hospital has to recoup those expenses, which they do by raising the prices on all services. Insurance companies (as it stands in our system now) negotiate for lower group rates, sometimes on a percentage basis. That works out in such a way that drs will charge a certain percentage more per service than they actually need to cover expenses, and this will work out to the figure that the insurance company will reimburse.

Which is fine, unless you are a self-pay, because self-pays are charged the price that the insurance company is billed, which is higher than the insurance company pays. They have to be charged that much, though, or the insurance companies would claim they were being defrauded and want to pay less.

So we all pay higher insurance rates to cover these inflated expenses, and self-pays are charged so much they often don't go to the doctor until it's an emergency and then they can't pay their hospital bill, and we all pay for this. It can affect, for instance, interest rates on credit cards.

So, one way or another, we all pay for this health care mess. At least if we are paying for it with our taxes it's direct and we know how much it costs.

Now, I am not saying that the federal government is the best qualified to do this (although, in truth the military medical system works pretty well on the whole). It might be better to run it more like the highways, where the government provides financial backing, but individual states, which better know the specific income and needs of their constituencies, do the actual administration.

It's a complicated issue, and I would certainly want to know a great deal more about a proposed plan before I endorsed it.

However, I do believe we as a nation need to address this issue, and soon, because what we have now is not working for a large group of people, and there is another group of people who can currently afford the insurance, but would really be much better able to stimulate the economy if they had more discretionary income, which they would if so much weren't eaten up by health care costs.

 

QUOTE
Ok, seriously, what are you reading? Did I ever say that Canadians were lazy? Did I say that all residents of countries with universal healthcare are lazy, sittng around seeing drs for free? I never said that. Not once. I think it's ok for me to be against universal healthcare. I think a lot of the SAHM on these boards are getting a little defensive. I can't count how many posts I read that said "Oh, so i'm not a contributing member of society because I don't work?" I NEVER said that. All I said was, I believe people should actively be trying to take care of their own families health insurance. That's it. And I stand behind that statement. I don't think it's really that outlandish. You may not get up in the morning and go to work for healthcare, but it's certainly part of the reason I do. For that, and a paycheck to have a house, and a car, and all those other unbelievable luxuries I have. Ya know, like formula and diapers.


Yeah, you are just kind of exhausting. No, you never said Canadians were lazy. It was an analogy. To try to make you understand that countries that have universal healthcare have no less of a "drive to succeed" than we do. And no you never said poor people dont need clean water. We know that. These are analogies. Mine was sarcastic, so maybe it was lost in typed translation, but I doubt it. I think you are just trying to debate semantics now.

The reason alot of us are getting so defensive with you is because you continue to make these broad, hurtful generalizations(i.e. SAHMS) about alot of us and then keep trying to say that we are just misinterpreting you.

 

QUOTE
but i thought there was a program for people who made to much to qualify for medicaid where they had to pay a small fee ( $5.00) per month to get something called Healthy Kids?.. I think thats what its called here in Michigan, not sure about other states??


Yes, depeding on your salary there are different 'packages' of Medicaid. We have the plan where we pay a co-pay on Dr. Visits and Precriptions. It isn't very much, but we do pay some.

 

QUOTE
Yeah, you are just kind of exhausting. No, you never said Canadians were lazy. It was an analogy. To try to make you understand that countries that have universal healthcare have no less of a "drive to succeed" than we do. And no you never said poor people dont need clean water. We know that. These are analogies. Mine was sarcastic, so maybe it was lost in typed translation, but I doubt it. I think you are just trying to debate semantics now.

The reason alot of us are getting so defensive with you is because you continue to make these broad, hurtful generalizations(i.e. SAHMS) about alot of us and then keep trying to say that we are just misinterpreting you.


Well Said! I have been reading but trying not to respond someone just needs to help her off her VERY HIGH HORSE!

 

QUOTE(angelsmom2001 @ Jan 26 2008, 06:12 AM) [snapback]590548[/snapback]
That isn't true. Neither my daughter nor I qualified for a student loan. Why? because she is a student dependent on me, so she couldn't even apply, and me because during my divorce, my ex ruined "our" credit. The only way I was able to qualify for a loan for her to go to school to be able to have a better life than I am able to give her right now, was to grovel to my own father to ask him to co sign the loan.
If you really believe that you live in a dream world. You can't just "get" a mortgage. I can give you many examples of people who can't "get" a mortgage, why because they don't qualify for one.
I am quite honestly sick of your condescending attitude towards anyone who isn't at your level of income, class or acheivement. You have in several posts here and in other topics made it pretty darn clear that you are better than the rest of us, and that because you have an education (which as a poor person I obviously don't have) you know everything. I have a college education. My parents had enough money so that we were comfortable growing up. However circumstances occured that have found me in my current situation.

I think you need to get out of your glass house and spend some time REALLY seeing the way the "other" half lives before you decide that anyone who is poor wants to be there, and if they didn't they can "get" loans and mortgages and pull themselves out of their despair and become productive members of YOUR society.

I actually understand that you don't agree with universal health care. Fine, I only agree with it in theory, I don't think a plan to put it into practice has been formulated. I am not sure it can be put into practice. BUT that said, something has to be done to fix the system that is in place now.

FYI, COBRA aint cheap, you not only have to pay your part, but the employers part as well. For most people, it is more than a paycheck a month, and depending on your new job, your wait could be 3-12 months to get that new insurance. Yes I have paid cobra payments, and nearly went broke doing it but because at the time we had newborn twins we couldn't go with out it.


Wow, ok, I'm done after this. I know I said that before. But I wasn't trying to be condescending. In response, like someone previously said, getting a mortgage is open to anyway, unless it is a credit or money issue. My point being, there are many many policies in play to allow anyone to buy a home. First time homebuyers and things like that. Now if your credit is bad, or if you live in an area where housing is unaffordable, that has nothing to do with it. If you lived somewhere with more affordable housing, you could apply get a mortgage. It's not like only people that make over 200K are allowed to buy homes. That was my point. Anyone can, its just a make of what you can afford or whether you qualify with credit. Rich people can be turned down just as easy as lower incomes.

And with the loans, that was a credit issue. No fault of your own, but FOR THE MOST PART, you aren't denied student loans based on income. Although I don't get the student dependent on me. I was still a dependent of my parents when I got my student loans, and they were mine, not my parents. I think my mom may have had to co-sign (i can't remember), but I'm not sure.

I have no issue with people who make more or less than me, or live with different means. I don't know what you mean about my "attitiude" in several posts, but feel free to explain. Maybe you didn't understand what I meant. I don't even know what your "current situation" as you mentioned is. So if something I said set you off, I'm sorry. But I thought this was a place we could all debate what we were talking about. I have no idea why you think I think I'm smarter because I have a college degree.

Like you said, you don't truly know how anyone else lives untill you walk in their shoes. For that you are right. But that goes for both sides. You have no idea anything about me, what I think, or what I've been through. I have not personally attacked anyone here, and I've never made ONE disparaging comment about SAHMs. NEVER. Go back and read all my previous comments. I'm sick of defending that too. I would appreciate you telling me what these broad generalizations are that I made about SAHMs. All I ever said was that people that choose not to work and have the government take care of their healthcare. If you read that as SAHMs I'm sorry. But every single SAHM that I know has insurance via her husband. So that wasn't my intention. I wasn't even thinking about them. I believe it was some of you all that started that, and no matter how much I say that wasn't what I meant, are having a hard time letting go of it.

And I've paid cobra. I was out of work for 9 months after 9/11. I know how expensive it is. Like I said, don't feel like you have idea of what I know or what I've been through.

I'm not on a high horse. I'm sorry I'm so exhausting. I'm sorry I don't share your opinions. It's funny though how you can make these dramatic analogies to make your point, but I can't. Obviously I was oversimplifying when I made comments like "take from the rich to give to the poor". But it was an analogy. I didn't realize that the rules, you should explain better who can and can't make analogies or over-dramatic statements.

I will make a point of not commenting again on anything but my twins in the First Year forum.

 

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 25 2008, 04:55 PM) [snapback]589846[/snapback]
My point was as someone stated, if it should be the job of the rich to pay for the poor, why would choose to be among the rich? I might as well just choose to be poor, and reap the benefits.

Couldn't have said that better myself. There is no tax advantage in this country to making more money. The more you make, the more they take. It should be flat rate tax for everyone. That's fair. It's not fair to someone who makes more than average money, to have to pay more. It gives them no incentive to make that money in the first place. I just recently saw a quote from Ron Paul and it really makes sense.
QUOTE
The Founding Fathers realized that “the power to tax is the power to destroy,” which is why they did not give the federal government the power to impose an income tax. Needless to say, the Founders would be horrified to know that Americans today give more than a third of their income to the federal government.

Oh, and government run programs have seemed to have worked so well before. Why would we want a government run health care system too? God only knows how THAT would turn out.

 

I think that most people would agree that the healthcare system is broken and ALSO that we are in a recession.
Even if you do disagree with universal healthcare what are some ideas to fix it? If we need an economic stimulus what would help if 600-3000 wont work? Many people say that the government should take a step back and let small/big business take care of things. How will that work? I know that I am trying to put my house up on the market (again) soon and frankly Im concerned because there are less people in the pool that can get a loan to buy my house and there are less people that are even buying home in general due to foreclosures, people doubling up, etc. Everything is in a real slump right now.

My whole issue with this thread went back to basic political beliefs... republicans generally believe in business and individuals running the economy, providing jobs, with little government intervention. Democrats usually have more government involvement and balance out the economy through intervention when necessary.
Both of these theories would work IF: we didnt switch back and forth every 4-8 years, people didnt take advantage of the system, and people didnt pick and choose pieces of each theory as it worked for them. Political theory doesnt work when Americans are self-serving. There has to be someone looking out for other members of society be it through jobs or social services.

I personally believe that there are fallbacks to Universal Healthcare, but that the solution to our crisis is something along those lines. As someone posted before, we are basically doing it right now. Many people that are uninsured are taken care of and the cost is passed on to insured people via premiums, copays, etc. I would like to see a system where it is fair for everyone. There will never be a system in place where we tell someone illegal or uninsured "Im sorry no insurance no service" its anti-American and morally wrong.

 

WOW! There are SO many posts that I wanted to quote in my response but after reading thru this ENTIRE thread, I don't have the energy to quote all of them and respond individually. So...I'll just give my opinion and story. We (including the boys) do NOT have health insurance at the moment. Why? It goes all the way back to 2006, I lost my job (where I had good insurance for the whole family), we then switched and took ins thru DH's job. It was summertime so I stayed home with the kids for most of the summer, then DH lost his job so I went back to work but it ended up only being part time and ins would've cost my whole paycheck so, we put the kids on Medicaid. Then DH & I separated, then we lost our house. The boys and I moved to KS to stay with my Dad, I got a good job and had insurance again (WOOHOO!). After 9 months of separation, DH & I are back together but that meant us all moving back to where we were happy down here in FL. So, I was offered COBRA, we couldn't afford it b/c I was not working at the time (on COBRA, you pay 102% of the premiums plus whatever out of pocket expenses you have with that plan). DH is working and so am I, but I am working thru a temp agency and the ins is just too much per month to cover us. I did apply for Medicaid for the boys but we make too much so they offered us "Share of Cost" but we have to pay $1600 in one month before it actually kicks in and pays anything. Why am I working thru a temp agency? Because after applying for jobs that I am very well qualified for for several months, it was the only job I was offered where I made enough money for it to be worth it for me to actually go to work. I've worked as a temp before at this company and should be offered a permanent position within the next month or two (*knock on wood*) and they have GREAT health ins. They are actually in the health insurance business (they administer benefits for MANY, MANY great companies across our country). So, all day long, I talk to people about their own health insurance and costs yet, I don't have any for myself or my children...how wrong is that?!?! I sit and talk with retirees all day who are being charged astronomical amounts for their SUPPLEMENTAL health care and I wonder how they can even afford to pay for these plans! I wanted to tell this story for those of you who've said "Why wouldn't you go find a different job that offered health insurance, etc?" Before I got this job, I applied to so many jobs and went on so many interviews...when there's one position open and there's 200plus people applying for the same job, it's hard to get one that has everything you want and need to take care of your family without getting some sort of help from the government!

Now, I have to respond to the post about anyone can apply for/get a mortgage. We had a mortgage, things were going great for us financially until I lost my job. Then the housing market in FL went downhill...homes were so expensive and people stopped buying. I had my home on the market for months and tried to sell it before they foreclosed on it but it just didn't happen so the bank took it. So, now I can't get a mortgage with a foreclosure on my credit. I went to college, I have student loans to pay back as well.

 

QUOTE(rubyturquoise @ Jan 26 2008, 01:36 PM) [snapback]590621[/snapback]
We all pay for the health care crisis one way or another, and not necessarily in the form of taxes. It might be cheaper to pay for it with taxes than how we pay for it now, if we had truly universal health care. Most of the countries that do have universal health care allow people who can afford it to purchase additional coverage that allows them to be more "choosy" and "skip ahead" in the triage system. Yes, this means that wealthier people have better access (true here now anyway), and yes it means that wealthier people pay more (also true here now). However, there isn't a big chunk in the middle of people who make too much to qualify for help for the poor but not enough to pay for their own insurance.

etc....


Amen, sista! It kills me how much more non-insured people pay for services than the insurance companies. Literally, one hospitalization would bankrupt most people. We have a seriously flawed system, which, I believe is rooted in the for-profit structure of insurance cos. They will do whatever it takes to rake in the big bucks. If this makes me a socialist, so be it.

I work in the medical field and am appalled at the amount of $ the health care industry flat-out wastes. If I have one more pharmaceutical rep buy our whole clinic lunch one more time, I'll puke. Our MD's don't even prescribe their drug (yeah, I know that's why they're laying it on, but come on, it's ridiculous). Guess who pays for all of that in the end?

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 26 2008, 03:10 PM) [snapback]590695[/snapback]
I'm not on a high horse. I'm sorry I'm so exhausting. I'm sorry I don't share your opinions. It's funny though how you can make these dramatic analogies to make your point, but I can't. Obviously I was oversimplifying when I made comments like "take from the rich to give to the poor". But it was an analogy. I didn't realize that the rules, you should explain better who can and can't make analogies or over-dramatic statements.

I will make a point of not commenting again on anything but my twins in the First Year forum.


I'm sorry you feel so ganged up on. Although we may not agree on everything, I respect your right to feel the way you do and think it takes a lot of guts to present a view so opposed by many people. Personally, I love a great debate, b/c even if my position isn't swayed, it's important to understand how other people view situations. I hope you will reconsider commenting on non-twin related topics in the future.

 

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 25 2008, 07:00 PM) [snapback]589464[/snapback]
I am against universal healthcare. But I am also in that 150K per couple range. I can't help but agree with you. To feel like I pay the most taxes, and then the people that don't make as much get the money back but I don't, just doesn't seem fair. That's why I was saying that because SAHM don't pay taxes, the household should be treated as 1 person working. And by working I mean getting a paycheck that gets taxes taken out of it. Lord knows that no one works as hard as a SAHM.

I went to college, got a good job, and work hard so that I can have good health benefits. Explain to me where the drive to succeed in life comes from if the government is going to pick up the slack for the people who don't do that. Really, I might as well quit my job and working part time somewhere and make less money so that i can keep the money I make, and the government can take care of me.

That was sarcasm.


I don't think you were necessarily bashing SAHM's...that is not what I got out of your posts. You even clarifyed that you think this is one of the hardest jobs...and I am glad...because I worked a "career" job and was gone 50-60 hours per week and traveled for my company...and I tell ya..staying home with my kids is harder and more exhausting than any job I have ever had.

The thing that got me with the above post, which I stated in my last post..is that there is too much generalization that the gov't would only be helping people that sit on their butts and don't do anything to better themselves. I have gone to college, (do have student loans and so does my husband)...we have a house etc. but the year after the twins were born when I was home...we needed help with healthcare for them..and thank god we got it. Like I said...people forget that the majority of people that would benefit would be seniors, children, regular working class that do go to work, but don't have healthcare...there is actually a small minority that abuse the system. Yes, there will be people that do abuse it still...but that will be with any sort of program.

I hate to think that we live in a country that more and more people are only for themselves and think that just because they work and pay higher taxes, they don't want to help anybody else since they think they work hard for themselves. If that were the case with everyone, there would be no Salvation Army, Red Cross, various cancer society's, homeless shelters, food banks...etc. Thank god there are still people that want to give some of their money to help those less fortunate. And less fortunate does not always mean that they sat around and "let the government take care of them" their entire lives. I know many many hard working people that would greatly benefit from universal healthcare. Yes, it will be hard to come up with a really good plan that works...but I think in the long run...to have children be able to go to the Dr's and have a healthy life..that would be worth all the hard work...and I would be willing to help.

P.s. I too like a great debate and I think this is a good one..don't feel like you can't debate ever again on TS...I am just stating my opinion on what I disagree with in various posts.

 

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 26 2008, 03:10 PM) [snapback]590695[/snapback]
every single SAHM that I know has insurance via her husband.


I'm a SAHM and I dont have INS through my husband. ( and I realize that you said that you know but thats just simply no the case for everyone) In 2006 my DH worked for a company that offered ins but to get the whole family covered it was more then he made a month so we could not do it. He got a new job that offered ins after so many months we thought great finally ins. Well the company went under and we went weeks with out even getting a paycheck. Now theres another new job and we have to wait 120 days to get ins and I have yet to see anything to see if its even anything worth paying for. So in the mean time I get my medical care through a free clinic run by the hospital should I need it and my kids are on Medicaid.

I'v looked into getting a job and my entire paycheck would get handed over to daycare with nothing left over to cover what little medical ins. most companies offer.

Lets just leave it as the Economy sucks right now and until things turn around not to much is going to change. But lets hope that things start to turn around for all of us!

 

I do not have ins through my husband's job. He is self-employed. We have private insurance for me and the girls that we pay for out of pocket. My boys have Tricare through my XH. DH has VA insurance because he is a veteran.

So, we have a patchwork. The reason we can afford insurance for me is that DH is a veteran and the boys have Tricare. If we had to pay for private insurance for all 6 of us only the kids would be covered.

There were at least 5 years when I did not have medical coverage. I was young and relatively healthy and it was just too expensive to cover me.

Small businesses find offering medical coverage prohibitively expensive.

 

I just wanted to say that I think this is an interesting discussion, but I think Craig's post above explains the issue the best. Thanks, Craig! :wavey:

 

This is from a political sight with some numbers


"Health care is at the center of almost every public policy issue – from veterans’ affairs to small business to personal finances (nearly half of all bankruptcies are caused by a medical crisis in the family). Access to affordable health care should come with living in the world’s richest, most advanced nation.

But during the Bush administration, the number of Americans living without health insurance has grown from 39.8 million in 2000 to 46.6 million as of the most recent Census Bureau data (2005). That includes 21.5 million people who work full time.

Especially disturbing is that the number of children without health insurance actually grew to 8.3 million in 2005. Children who lack health insurance are more likely to miss school and 70% less likely to get treated for an ear infection.

Overall, we spend 16% of our GDP on health care – nobody else spends more than 11%. Yet every other industrialized country insures 100% of its people, while we leave tens of millions without coverage. We spend 34% of our health care dollars on administrative costs – nobody else spends more than 19%. And in the most recent ranking by the World Health Organization, the U.S. ranked 37th, right between Costa Rica and Slovenia."



Us personally we paid 17,000.00 dollars on health care premiums in 2006 and the years before and that does not cover the $25 copays that we would pay to see the doctor or drug copays or the 75 dollar copay to go to ER. We fall into the 80,000 a year income own our house have IRA's but when I got sick of forking out so much for medical care I decided to switch health insurance to get it privately from the company directly, well everything was almost complete but then I found out I was pregnant they would not cover me I was a risk so yes the only option I had was medicaid and we fell under the 90,000.00 to qualify so yes I did apply and get it and honestly I am so glad cause I would have been uninsured if I did not. I called a lot of insurance companies they all said no they could not cover me.

If we could take out the CEO's who are making a HUGE profit off us paying insurance and I am talking a lot of money

Michael B McAllister earned $3.33 million in compensation as CEO of Humana. "Forbes 2006 Executive Pay list," April 20, 2006.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/12/AG0Q.html.
John W Rowe earned $22.2 million in compensation as CEO of Aetna. Rowe has since left Aetna. "Forbes 2004 Executive Pay list," April 21, 2005.
http://www.forbes.com/static/execpay2005/L...l?passListId=12
&passYear=2005&passListType=Person&uniqueId=S5NI&datatype=Person
Bill McGuire has stock options worth $1.6 billion at the end of 2005, as CEO of UnitedHealth Group. Robert Simison, "SEC Investigates UnitedHealth Over Stock-Options Practices," Bloomberg News, December 27, 2006; Michael Regan, "Business 2006: Who Won, Who Lost," Associated Press,December 26, 2006.

I do believe we need a universal health system like the ones in Europe and Canada. We have fireman, policeman and public schools and we do not pay insurance premiums for those. So health care should fall into that catagory also.
Insurance companies deny people who are paying a lot for insurance the care they do need, they are playing god.
I have been denied a surgery on a pinched nerve and herniated disc by our insurance company and that is when we payed 17 grand for our premuims. But I payed a lot in drug copays and physical therapy copays trying to get better interesting how that works.

With universal health care we would all be treated equally and would more likely get preventitive care before problems got worse so people would be more healthy.
If you take out the middle man Insurance companies, doctor can give better care cause he or she will not have to listen to the insurance company say yes or no to what he or she can do, in other words he or she can treat you and not just give you another pill that the pharmaceutical companies dropped off to experiment on you. But I will not go there cause that is another topic.
Also with medicaid programs even if you make over their qualifying income limits you can still qualify for their program it is a program where they pay some and you pay some. At least that is in this state.
I am sorry if I offend anyone, I am just trying to give my experience with all this. I have been screwed by insurance companies and I do believe we do need a change.

 

Wow! I didn't realize that so many people on here are on so many different pages! There are many posts that I'd like to reply to but there isn't enough time to do that since it took me 3 hours and 20 minutes to read all of the posts in this thread. So, I will start with saying the following:

My family and I are not able to get insurance through my husband's job. His boss is a cheating jerk that could care less about abyone but himself and he doesn't have any kids nor does he have a wife. But yet he manages to own a business and still suck up any government assistance he can get. Don't ask me how, because I have no clue! This makes me mad as a bull in heat! My husband and I cannot afford to pay out of pocket for insurance and we have had to resort to getting medicaid for our children. I am so thankful for this insurance! I can't tell you how many times that I have gotten a job and was paying for daycare to loose it within a month because my kid got sick and wasted the money that we worked so hard for just to pay $100 per week per child and to have more money going out of our household than our paychecks coming in. I AM NOW A SAHM! I love being a SAHM! And I am happy that we as a family were able to make this decision even if it meant that we would have to get government assistance.

Since becoming a SAHM we have paid off loans that we couldn't afford to begin with. We now have only our mortgage and 3 hospital bills left and we will be debt free. We would not have been able to do this if we didn't ask for help from the government! I have to say thank you to those of you on here that do pay your 33% and think that you shouldn't have to pay for anyone but yourselves and your own. I am truly sorry that you feel this way! If it wasn't for your help we wouldn't have made it this far. I have also been able to get student loans to be able to attend college.

And here is what I have to say:
YES, I RECEIVED STUDENT LOANS TO BETTER MY EDUCATION IN HOPES OF MAKING A BETTER FUTURE FOR MY CHILDREN! I ALSO HAVE A 4.0
YES, MY CHILDREN (THE 3 THAT LIVE WITH ME) ARE GETTING MEDICAID!
YES, WE RECEIVE FOODSTAMPS!
YES, WE PAY OUR TAXES JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE!
YES, WE HAVE TO PAY A MORTGAGE!
YES, WE LIVE OFF OF HAND ME DOWNS!
NO, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY COMING IN TO AFFORD OUT OF POCKET INSURANCE! WE CAN BARELY AFFORD FOOD!
YES, WE ALSO LIVE IN GULFPORT MISSISSIPPI! OUR HOME WAS DESTROYED BY HURRICANE KATRINA! SO, AGAIN THE GOVERNMENT HELPED REBUILD OUR HOME!

Our economy has been going down hill for years. Regardless of what the government does with healthcare or the rebated check, there will be a recession. That is very clear! As someone already said on here, "not everyone can be rich". If that is the case then we need to close down every store and open up trading posts again to trade for same value items!

Now I am extremely upset that there are some people on here that think that you have to live the highest standards with the most money and not have to pay more taxes than anyone else. You have a spirit of PRIDE over your life. Pride is not what our country needs right now. Our country needs compassion! Our country was founded by values that support hlelping those that are not able to live those lifestyles. not for "Big Business" to take over our households, our schools, and now our health care. People are crazy if they think that everything will get better after this next president is elected. I do plan on using my 2 Bachelor's Degrees when I get out of school! My kids will be in school by then and I will be able to find a good job. So what that I have to pay all of that money back! That is my choice. My husband and I work very hard to make sure that our kids don't go without, and I have to say that we are absolutely blessed! No matter if our kids needed clothes or we didn't have gas to get somewhere we have always been provided for. When my husband and I found out that we were having twins, we didn't have to buy one thing for our girls. It was all given to us! And in turn we are giving it away to those that need it just like we did. Now that is why I get so mad that some people think that just because we look like we have paid for it, they think that we are cheating the government! I would gladly give to those that go without, EVEN IF I GOT BURNED (SPEAKING OF THOSE THAT CHEAT THE GOVERNMENT). That is just my nature, that is my calling!

I am for the universal health care TO AN EXTENT! I don't know of how many of you are on medicaid, but if you read the policies for medicaid there are some things that medicaid will NOT cover! If there is to be a universal health care system for our country it should cover everything! Not just some things. There is no reason for the government to pay for some things and not all if they intend on universalizing our health care. Medicaid is ok, but I have noticed that those with medicaid actually get treated worse than those with a better paying insurnace. I have experienced this for 10 years! Not only for myself but from friends telling me their stories. If the universal healthcare is anything like medicaid then I wouldn't be supprised.

I am ok with the rebate, but I'm not sure what the point is. If people are getting the rebate check (which the government is hoping we will all spend it on junk) and no one uses this money wisely then people and this country are still going to be in trouble financially anyway. If we get a check we have decided that whatever debt we have left will be paid and then we will put the rest away for our children. And go figure that the government will give money away but you have to be taxed on that too. So, it's not really free after all. Hmmm nice government we have.

I am happy that I live in a country that is willing to set up programs that help others, but I don't think that it is only one level of income that should be taxed more or less. The way the taxes are set up are fine the way they are.

Lots of love!
Meshell

 

QUOTE
One way to try to boost the economy is to put more money in the hands of working Americans


I understand the stimulus idea, but we are WORKING AMERICANS too, but don't qualify because we are in the 150K+ catagory. We paid those taxes, and more so than the people who will be getting the REBATE. I think it's unfair to call it a rebate when it's just a handout to whomever they choose to give it to.

QUOTE
Here is my two cents. I don't see my rebate as a hand out as it is something I already EARNED. What I do have a problem with is those who didn't pay any taxes getting refunds.


I agree with having a problem giving a REBATE to those who never paid into the system in the first place. Also, how can anyone say we didn't EARN our rebate as well? Because we EARNED too much?

Oregon gave out a tax kicker a few weeks ago where they gave a straight percentage back to EVERYONE who PAID IN last year. THAT, was fair.

 

QUOTE(DinaJ @ Jan 26 2008, 02:46 PM) [snapback]590904[/snapback]
I understand the stimulus idea, but we are WORKING AMERICANS too, but don't qualify because we are in the 150K+ catagory. We paid those taxes, and more so than the people who will be getting the REBATE. I think it's unfair to call it a rebate when it's just a handout to whomever they choose to give it to.
I agree with having a problem giving a REBATE to those who never paid into the system in the first place. Also, how can anyone say we didn't EARN our rebate as well? Because we EARNED too much?


I think the whole point of the rebate was to put money in the hands of people who aren't currently spending money (because they don't have it) to spend or pay down debt- to boost the economy. Those of us in the $150+ category ARE spending money. I think the idea is that your economic bracket does not need the incentive to spend.

 

QUOTE(Jersey_Girls @ Jan 26 2008, 04:49 PM) [snapback]590979[/snapback]
I think the whole point of the rebate was to put money in the hands of people who aren't currently spending money (because they don't have it) to spend or pay down debt- to boost the economy. Those of us in the $150+ category ARE spending money. I think the idea is that your economic bracket does not need the incentive to spend.

Right, but we are paying our taxes too, but not receiving the rebate. No, we do not need the incentive to spend, but we also shouldn't have to pay for someone else to spend. If one tax bracket receives the rebate, than all should. Anyone who puts in, should be getting back.

 

QUOTE(momotwinsmom @ Jan 26 2008, 05:11 PM) [snapback]590998[/snapback]
Right, but we are paying our taxes too, but not receiving the rebate. No, we do not need the incentive to spend, but we also shouldn't have to pay for someone else to spend. If one tax bracket receives the rebate, than all should. Anyone who puts in, should be getting back.


How will your plan help boost the economy?

 

QUOTE(caba @ Jan 25 2008, 04:07 PM) [snapback]589765[/snapback]
But where is the incentive to better yourself? I'm so glad I work full time and pay for day care so I can live in a nice town and have my kids in a good school so that my money goes to those less fortunate? Why not just become one of the lower incomes? I could quit my job and get a job that doesn't offer benefits where I only work 1 day a week, and then I'd be with my kids. Then I could let all the rich people take care of me so I don't need to pay for my own healthcare? Is that the mentality?


Do you think healthcare is the only thing that separates the rich from the poor? You only work hard and earn a reasonable salary so that you can have healthcare, and people who don't work hard shouldn't get handout healthcare?

You work hard and earn your salary so you can provide your family with a decent standard of living, yes. But if you earn more than needed for that, you can choose more freely where you live, what type of house you live in, and what you do with your dispoable income - you can buy nice things, take vacations, save for your children's education, etc., and that is entirely your choice. Having those options is the incentive that makes people work and try to earn money (or play the lottery . . .)

I do NOT believe that because someone doesn't work (either because they can't work, can't find a job, or chooses not to work) that they and their families should be denied healthcare.

Yes, you could quit your job and work one day a week and be with your kids, but it would probably affect your standard of living in many ways other than healthcare.

I think healthcare ESPECIALLY for children who have no say in the matter should be a right, and should be universal.

This is not even getting into the statistics about how offering preventitive health care at an affordable cost actually DECREASES the total spent on healthcare overall, so it would increase the greater good, which I am all for.

Rachel

 

QUOTE(angelsmom2001 @ Jan 26 2008, 06:12 AM) [snapback]590548[/snapback]
I am quite honestly sick of your condescending attitude towards anyone who isn't at your level of income, class or acheivement. You have in several posts here and in other topics made it pretty darn clear that you are better than the rest of us, and that because you have an education (which as a poor person I obviously don't have) you know everything.


I'm sorry to jump in, but I don't think that Caba is trying to make that statement that she is better. She is simply stating that there are resources available to everyone across the board that help people to climb the economic ladder. She even said that she is in debt for her student loans. This was just a conversation not an attack... I think she even said that she falls in the $150,000 category. It's not condescending, it's her opinion. She hasn't made any derogatory comments regarding low income families other than she doesn't want to have to support the services that they are provided with her tax dollars. I agree....I work, I have insurance, and I still have copays and deductables to meet, and I have medical collections because some were too huigh for me to pay (shall we talk Synergy shots?), but if I didn't work or earn even enough to pay taxes, my kids would be able to get free healthcare. It just doesn't seem fair....and I understand where she is coming from.

Maybe step back and read what she is saying without being defensive or looking at social class...

 

So I just don't have time to read through the millions of posts, but I thought I would give my two cents (which probably isn't worth even that). There are always going to be people that take advantage of the system, just like now. However, even though my husband and I both work, both pay taxes, both do our share, I would have NO PROBLEM taking money out of my paycheck in order for ALL people to have insurance. From the wealthy to the very poor. From those who deserve it, just like SAHMs who I very much envy for being in the position to be able to that, to those who don't deserve it. Yes, it sucks that there will always be those people who get away with doing nothing while I work my butt off and only see my kids three hours a day during the week because of my job, but should the rest suffer because of those? I don't think so.

 

Here is my 2 cents....
I think that everyone is entitled to health care. That being said I am NOT supporting universal health care. I think our system needs to be overhauled. When looking over a recent hospital bill I noticed that the cost per dose of my DD's medication was more then I pay for the entire bottle ( It is not a covered medication). i was in L&D for 23 hours a few weeks ago and my insurance was billed over $19, 000.00 This is a huge part of the problem.
Medicaid should be there for people who qualify for it. But Medicaid benefits are at times better then the benefits most hard working people get. for example my DD was born with a congenital birth defect and needed a great deal of medical and nursing care. if I had medicaid she would have been eligible to attend Medical day Care ( 8am -5pm 5 days a week) with skilled nurses to care for her until she was 3. My private insurance which is very good only allowed her to attend for 8 weeks following a surgical complication. In my opinion that is unfair. Programs like that target kids with "skilled nursing needs" which can include something as basic as Asthma on daily treatments. Medical day care can run close to $400.00 per day and no one is reviewing these cases and making sure the services are warranted like they are with private insurance.

I think that there should be available basic health care to everyone, this can be done by expanding the Federally Qualified health Care programs (FQHC'S) for the uninsured and state kids insurance programs that are currently stalled due to Bush's refusal to discuss this. As a society we need to get rid of fraud, get rid of frivoulous law suits, address the booming pharmaceutical business and cut costs on making medication. The govt needs to look where great deals of money is being spent and make sure it is needed as well as have case managers/reviews on all insured just like private insurannce companies do.