Why exactly are you unwilling to pay for other people's medical care?

[Arianrhod]

Nothing will bring the cost down until the system stopes being raped.

All day you've been demanding that "the system" be murdered. Interesting change of heart.

Glad I could help

Oh, you have. I've started a whole new thread to explore your non-hypothesis.

 

[Arianrhod]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

 

[Pop23]

Or, we could just refuse to bail out the people who fall for it. People have a way of avoiding stupidity if it causes them pain. If it doesn't, if try to regulate away the results of their stupidity, we simply get more of it.

So do you have a Magic Plan to reduce medical costs after your government outlaws insurance?

Yes, be like me, discounting what I'm raped for that ponzie scheme called health insurance, I have paid for all but $20 of my adult health care.

That's 40 years.

Don't go to the friggin doctor every time you sneeze

 

[Arianrhod]

Yes, be like me, discounting what I'm raped for that ponzie scheme called health insurance, I have paid for all but $20 of my adult health care.

That's 40 years.

Don't go to the friggin doctor every time you sneeze

But he's got a Magic Plan to lower medical costs by doing away with insurance.

He's just too selfish to tell anyone what it is.

 

[Pop23]

Yes, be like me, discounting what I'm raped for that ponzie scheme called health insurance, I have paid for all but $20 of my adult health care.

That's 40 years.

Don't go to the friggin doctor every time you sneeze

But he's got a Magic Plan to lower medical costs by doing away with insurance.

He's just too selfish to tell anyone what it is.

Eliminating the Ponzie Scheme that allows the raping of the system is the plan Nancy.

Look into medical "coding" sometime and get back with us.

K?

 

[Arianrhod]

I have paid for all but $20 of my adult health care.

What a silly choice to make. As if that's not bad enough, you want to blame someone else for your own stupid decisions? You're from the party of "personal responsibility," amirite?

Eliminating the Ponzie Scheme that allows the raping of the system is the plan...

First of all, the term is "Ponzi":

Charles Ponzi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you're going to cite it constantly, at least learn to spell it and understand its origins. Secondly, you keep repeating that part, but you don't explain the part that begins "And the next morning, the Prince woke up and discovered he could pay his doctor with chickens just like his great-great-grandfather did."

Look into medical "coding" sometime and get back with us.

Which code specifically?

 

[Pop23]

I have paid for all but $20 of my adult health care.

What a silly choice to make. As if that's not bad enough, you want to blame someone else for your own stupid decisions? You're from the party of "personal responsibility," amirite?

Eliminating the Ponzie Scheme that allows the raping of the system is the plan...

First of all, the term is "Ponzi":

Charles Ponzi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you're going to cite it constantly, at least learn to spell it and understand its origins. Secondly, you keep repeating that part, but you don't explain the part that begins "And the next morning, the Prince woke up and discovered he could pay his doctor with chickens just like his great-great-grandfather did."

Look into medical "coding" sometime and get back with us.

Which code specifically?

Let's get something straight first. I have paid roughly $90,000.00 in health insurance in my lifetime. I have had $20.00 covered lifetime.

I am out $89,980.00. Yes I have been incredibly healthy, but whether that comes from my wallet, or out of my taxes, it's cash I do not have.

So back to your question, if that 89k was still in my pocket, and someone needed it to help with a medical bills, I might help, but it is my decision, not societies.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

 

[Arianrhod]

Let's get something straight first. I have paid roughly $90,000.00 in health insurance in my lifetime. I have had $20.00 covered lifetime.

I am out $89,980.00. Yes I have been incredibly healthy, but whether that comes from my wallet, or out of my taxes, it's cash I do not have.

Then you have indeed been ripped off, but I'd have to ask why you never changed insurers.

It might be of interest to you to know that effective January 2014, insurers are required to spend 80% of premiums on providing health coverage. Everything else - administrative costs, M&A, CEO salaries, payouts to stockholders, buying off Congresscritters - has to come from the remaining 20%. This is a first step.

If you don't think this will motivate them to take a hard look at their relationship with pharma companies and overpriced physicians, you don't know how the system works.

Costs will eventually be affected - and lowered - but not to where they were in your grandfather's day. If you can think of anything that's cheaper now than it was 50 years ago, please mention it, because I can't think of a thing.

That's not to mention the advances in medicine in just the past five years, much less 50.

In the meantime, however, I'd strongly recommend you find a better insurer. And look up "Pareto principle."

So back to your question, if that 89k was still in my pocket, and someone needed it to help with a medical bills, I might help, but it is my decision, not societies.

Clearly. But you and I strayed off the OP hours ago. This is actually a more interesting conversation.

 

[Arianrhod]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Redundant much?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Redundant much?

NOOooo No.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

...
It might be of interest to you to know that effective January 2014, insurers are required to spend 80% of premiums on providing health coverage. Everything else - administrative costs, M&A, CEO salaries, payouts to stockholders, buying off Congresscritters - has to come from the remaining 20%. This is a first step.

Oh, that's not the first step. The first step was the 14th Amendment, where the Government gave rights... then the Progressive Income Tax... Then came Old Folks Insurance, then the Civil Rights Act, where the Government gave money to those it gave rights... then came the judicial activism, wherein the government gave the right for women to murder their pre-born children...

Socialism has taken many MANY steps up to it's providing 'free healthcare, by increasing insurance premiums by 4-5 times their actual value and simultaneously reducing the contracted values and services, specifically mandating private business... and in so doing, doing to the Insurance industry what it recently did for the Mortgage Industry.

 

[Arianrhod]

...
It might be of interest to you to know that effective January 2014, insurers are required to spend 80% of premiums on providing health coverage. Everything else - administrative costs, M&A, CEO salaries, payouts to stockholders, buying off Congresscritters - has to come from the remaining 20%. This is a first step.

Oh, that's not the first step. The first step was the 14th Amendment, where the Government gave rights... then the Progressive Income Tax... Then came Old Folks Insurance, then the Civil Rights Act, where the Government gave money to those it gave rights... then came the judicial activism, wherein the government gave the right for women to murder their pre-born children...

Socialism has taken many MANY steps up to it's providing 'free healthcare, by increasing insurance premiums by 4-5 times their actual value and simultaneously reducing the contracted values and services, specifically mandating private business... and in so doing, doing to the Insurance industry what it recently did for the Mortgage Industry.

Word salad.

 

[Conservative65]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us. Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

 

[Arianrhod]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

 

[Conservative65]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

You failed to mention that 4 of 5 of those now getting coverage SUBSIDIZED by someone else. In case you were unaware, subsidized means someone else is still paying for their healthcare costs. What a bunch of ******* leeches.

 

[Arianrhod]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

You failed to mention that 4 of 5 of those now getting coverage SUBSIDIZED by someone else. In case you were unaware, subsidized means someone else is still paying for their healthcare costs. What a bunch of ******* leeches.

So you'd rather pay more for hospital and clinic services. Okay.

Out of curiosity, do you drive on interstates?

 

[Conservative65]

Right now there are plenty of bleeding heart Liberals who say that people are morally obligated to do it. How many of them are willing to back up those words? I'm guessing none. However, there are plenty, despite their claims on other issues that one person's morals shouldn't be dictated toward another, that will say we are morally bound to do so.

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

You failed to mention that 4 of 5 of those now getting coverage SUBSIDIZED by someone else. In case you were unaware, subsidized means someone else is still paying for their healthcare costs. What a bunch of ******* leeches.

So you'd rather pay more for hospital and clinic services. Okay.

Out of curiosity, do you drive on interstates?

English isn't your strong point either. It's not my responsibility to pay for either on anyone's part.

The social welfare leeches aren't paying the taxes that fund the programs from which they benefit. I pay the taxes that fund the interstates. Next weak argument?

 

[Arianrhod]

Name one.

We adults are pleased that more Americans having access to affordable health insurance so that hospitals will no longer be forced to pass the costs of unpaid medical bills on to the rest of us.

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

You failed to mention that 4 of 5 of those now getting coverage SUBSIDIZED by someone else. In case you were unaware, subsidized means someone else is still paying for their healthcare costs. What a bunch of ******* leeches.

So you'd rather pay more for hospital and clinic services. Okay.

Out of curiosity, do you drive on interstates?

English isn't your strong point either. It's not my responsibility to pay for either on anyone's part.

The social welfare leeches aren't paying the taxes that fund the programs from which they benefit. I pay the taxes that fund the interstates. Next weak argument?

Blah-blah-blah, and you haven't answered the question.

Yes, you drive on the freeways your parents and grandparents paid for. Leech.

You probably went to public schools, schools that your parents and grandparents and total strangers who didn't even have children paid for. Leech.

You're probably leeching off other "free stuff," too.

 

[Conservative65]

You.

No.

Hospitals shouldn't pass along the costs to the rest of us.

And now that more people have insurance, there will be fewer such instances. You're not paying attention. Or math is not your friend.

Those who get medical care should pay for it. If they can't, it gives you bleeding hearts a chance to prove what you say about how much you care.

You can either link to any post in which that last sentence is true, or accept what I've actually said, which is that the more people with access to health insurance, the better it is.

You need to learn some new talking points. Yours are so 2010.

You failed to mention that 4 of 5 of those now getting coverage SUBSIDIZED by someone else. In case you were unaware, subsidized means someone else is still paying for their healthcare costs. What a bunch of ******* leeches.

So you'd rather pay more for hospital and clinic services. Okay.

Out of curiosity, do you drive on interstates?

English isn't your strong point either. It's not my responsibility to pay for either on anyone's part.

The social welfare leeches aren't paying the taxes that fund the programs from which they benefit. I pay the taxes that fund the interstates. Next weak argument?

Blah-blah-blah, and you haven't answered the question.

Yes, you drive on the freeways your parents and grandparents paid for. Leech.

You probably went to public schools, schools that your parents and grandparents and total strangers who didn't even have children paid for. Leech.

You're probably leeching off other "free stuff," too.

I do drive on them and pay for them. How much is that food stamp recipient paying in the taxes that fund social welfare. NONE.

You simply don't get the difference between someone that contributes to society and someone that exists because of people like me. I can do without them any day of the week. They can't do without people like me. They won't fend for themselves.