19 Aug 19
@patzering saidIn my country, we have a system in place to help with that. Which I paid into for over 45 years and am still paying into.
And it's our personal responsibility to prepare for that.
Not tax payers.
You have a system in your country which is similar.
19 Aug 19
@patzering saidMore ignorant right wing ranting .
At the end of the day it comes to this...
We don't live in a health based society.
Old people aren't dying of healthy old age.
We have millions dying from smoking or drinking or eating bad food.
They don't stop.
So instead of a universal health care system taking care of people who took care of themselves we have a health care system taking care of people who DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES.
Why should I have to pay for fat slobs?
19 Aug 19
@quackquack saidThat might be true if the US model was efficient .... but it isn't.
If everyone were covered at the Medicaid level or below then nothing would change. If people are covered at a higher level those who contribute would have to pay even more for those who don't.
But even if it were true you could use that same argument
against public roads, public schools or even law & order.
Do you want only toll roads, private schools and private police forces?
19 Aug 19
@patzering saidI've been paying house insurance for years and I'm still waiting for it to burn down.
Who has paid for it my whole life and never been to the hospital.
Can I have my money back or do I have to pay for old people who didn't take care of themselves?
19 Aug 19
@kazetnagorra saidIf the government expands healthcare coverage then those paying into the system will undoubtable pay more. I'm certainly not interested in another system where I pay for myself and then am asked to pay even more for others.
Pay even more... by paying a lot less. Genius!
19 Aug 19
@wolfgang59 saidNothing is more efficient when the government runs it. Whether its road work, the military, the subways, bridges.... ever the government is over budget.
That might be true if the US model was efficient .... but it isn't.
But even if it were true you could use that same argument
against public roads, public schools or even law & order.
Do you want only toll roads, private schools and private police forces?
19 Aug 19
@earl-of-trumps saidMore right wing ranting.
If euros had the military expenditure that the US had you'd think twice about jumping into medicare for all
19 Aug 19
@quackquack saidThe government is indeed over budget, but the Republicans are the Party of Debt.
Nothing is more efficient when the government runs it. Whether its road work, the military, the subways, bridges.... ever the government is over budget.
Take it up with Trump.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
19 Aug 19
@quackquack saidIt depends on how the tax is computed. It could be structured to mimic the various revenue streams that exist today, adjusting for such things as being nonprofit.
If everyone were covered at the Medicaid level or below then nothing would change. If people are covered at a higher level those who contribute would have to pay even more for those who don't.
My Medicare has a monthly fee that I pay, and adjustable copays and deductables per event, and fees for drugs, that I pay out of pocket. This array of income streams allows for flexibility in constructing a template for developing fair and efficient cost sharing.
If we want to do it.
20 Aug 19
@fireagate saidWaiting lines where people with painful, life debilitating conditions are literally tortured into going private so that state worshippers can produce some dodgy stats and say what a great thing state healthcare is.
Many of you chess players live in countries that has this type of healthcare system. Please tell us pros or cons of your personal experiences with your healthcare system. I believe that the United States should have a universal healthcare system, ie.. Medicare for All (M4A).
@js357 saidThe fairest system is you get what you pay for. When you make coverage Universal you are forcing some people to pay for others coverage. Right now in the US we have Medicaid for poor people and others pay for themselves (thus everyone is covered). The only people who object are people who really are using healthcare as a guise for economic redistribution.
It depends on how the tax is computed. It could be structured to mimic the various revenue streams that exist today, adjusting for such things as being nonprofit.
My Medicare has a monthly fee that I pay, and adjustable copays and deductables per event, and fees for drugs, that I pay out of pocket. This array of income streams allows for flexibility in constructing a template for developing fair and efficient cost sharing.
If we want to do it.
20 Aug 19
@fireagate saidPeople who put time, effort and money into maintaining their health are forced to contribute to a system that is drained by folk who are reckless and careless with their health, so that if something does happen their own health care is reduced for what they've put in.
Many of you chess players live in countries that has this type of healthcare system. Please tell us pros or cons of your personal experiences with your healthcare system. I believe that the United States should have a universal healthcare system, ie.. Medicare for All (M4A).
i.e. state worshippers are prepared to sacrifice others to see their own dream feelings realised.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
20 Aug 19
@quackquack saidOf course if you underfund a govt program and sabotage it in other ways, you can use its failings to argue against govt projects in general.
Nothing is more efficient when the government runs it. Whether its road work, the military, the subways, bridges.... ever the government is over budget.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
@quackquack saidSo everything is rosy?
The fairest system is you get what you pay for. When you make coverage Universal you are forcing some people to pay for others coverage. Right now in the US we have Medicaid for poor people and others pay for themselves (thus everyone is covered). The only people who object are people who really are using healthcare as a guise for economic redistribution.