Re: Best comment from Judge Vinson's decision
- From: Tony <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 23:25:19 -0500
On 2/10/2011 11:29 AM, btorvik2 wrote:
Carbon wrote:On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 19:08:21 -0800, Miss Elaine Eos wrote:On 2011-02-08 17:14:21 -0800, Mickey<Mickey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Maybe you can think of some other better choices for me on how to
spend my money, Carbon.
To be fair, he's been fairly consistent about just *NOT* wanting you
to (a) not spend money on insurance and then (b) default on your
medical bills, sticking him with the tab.
His articulation of this idea sometimes strays into other areas that
push our anti-sociallism buttons, but I'm getting that this really
his his root thing -- the rest is just shiny distractions.
From that angle, it seems that he's stuck with either (a) tax you
(iconic, not you, Mickey, since I assume you have health insurance)
into paying for health insurance or (b) denying you (again, iconic)
health care if you can't pay.
So *really* (Carbon, tell me if I'm not relating this correctly),
he's just advocating that everyone must have some some base level of
health insurance, very similar to how every driver must have a base
level of liability insurance. (We assume that people who walk the
planet will get sick, just like we assume that folks who drive will
incur liability there.)
That I'm starting to gather, his plan is: get your insurance from
wherever you want, use all the discounts you want, etc. but, if you
try to not-have insurance, we'll just dunn your paycheck and buy you
(Have I got that right, Carbon?)
I'm not quite sure what we're doing with all the folks who don't get
paychecks, yet -- but I've not yet gotten to the part where we
quibble about the details -- I'm still trying to get Carbon to tell
me how we go about implementing his brilliant idea.<G>
Yes, that is basically it. Like car insurance. Those who don't arrange
for their own insurance are required to pay for universal healthcare,
which is cheap and crappy compared to what most are used to. At least
that way their expensive hospital bills would not get passed on to us.
The millions of unemployed, those working under the table, both
Americans and illegal immigrants, would obviously escape the dragnet.
But it would still catch millions of uninsured people who are
currently enjoying having us pay for their healthcare.
But isn't that basically what the medicare tax is designed to do?
Maybe if the Dems (Like many have suggested) ..had just introduced a bill to
expand medicare coverage to resemble a very basic Universal Health Insurance
plan and raise the medicare taxes accordingly, the plan wouldn't have caused
quite as much of a commotion.
Plus, think of all the money that would be saved by modifying an existing
plan rather than implementing an entirely new one.
But then those megalomaniacs in Washington wouldn't have been able to make us do this, that and the other thing.
The Cigar Diary: http://www.cigardiary.com
ASC Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=138059489225
- Prev by Date: Re: Best comment from Judge Vinson's decision
- Next by Date: Re: Best comment from Judge Vinson's decision
- Previous by thread: Re: Best comment from Judge Vinson's decision
- Next by thread: Re: Best comment from Judge Vinson's decision