Re: BUSH IN ISREAL

Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:kOW3k.118$Jx.47@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:9LA3k.20039$gc5.6779@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:k4n3k.17136$js6.9382@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:PTX2k.14215$js6.14092@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:mbO2k.14527$gc5.10178@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
In fact, with the system in the US, once a working person descends below a certain income level, Medicaid provides a powerful disincentive for them to go on working. That's not the case in Canada, if a person works, no matter what job, their health is not a negative incentive.
This is not an insignificant factor.
That's why you never responded to the point.
I ignored it, because health care in the US will be a function of work.
When? As long as low income working folks are left out of the loop there will be a huge incentive for them to stop working if they have serious health issues in their family.

No, they'll simply isolate the sick person.
Great

That's the system.
A system is broken if it incentives people to stop working in order to get medical care.
They don't, except the sick person.
Not only the sick person, also the immediate family. Some of the anecdotes I cited said that, as well as the RGP poster who's friend had the problem.

Not once they isolate the sick person.

Meaning what?

Mostly, they're too sick to work anyway.
If they had a job that provided health insurance they would have been covered.
IFF they chose to pay for it.

Right, which is an option they should not have.

and mostly they aren't working, if they're too poor to have heath insurance.
Catch 22

No, idiot boy. Health insurance IS generally available and affordable.'

Not true, head-in-sand ***-for-brains. Health insurance in the US is generally out of the reach of a whole segment of the population, and getting worse. I've already pasted numerous cites to support this fact.

]
They also place assets in trusts to get the government to pay for nursing home care.
Personally, I think that's theft. You probably think people should keep everything they have and get a free nursing home room, too.
And the health care fairy will pay for it all.
Caring for each other is something Canadians do with pride.
And with other people's money.
Everybody pays into it, according to their income.

So MOSTLY with other people's money, while fucking the rich.

The rich don't need your sympathy, they're rich. In Canada they're quite happy to pay, and there is a cap, so it's not an outrageous amount.


If nursing
home care is available to everyone and nobody has to pay for it, then who is harmed?
Everyone who's healthy enough not to need it and forced through taxation to pay for it anyway.
People healthy enough to be independent right up until they die are very fortunate.

And very numerous.

If they get good care in their life, lucky them. I hope to be one.


At the time those people were working and paying taxes they
did not know if that was going to be the case. Nursing home care was going to be available if they needed it. And there is still a thriving private nursing home industry.

Because there ISN'T national nursing home care.

There is both. Nursing home care is provided in several ways, by private for-profit providers, by government, by religious groups, by charitable foundations. They are all work to solve the same problem, care of the aged.



Here there are a lot of private and charitable
organization nursing care options that people can use if they decide to. The most problematic ones are the privately run ones with the profit motive, they often tend to care more about the bottom line than the residents.
And the ones run by the government care about that government pension more than the patients.
There are good and bad apples everywhere. People who are paid decent wages and have good working conditions tend to stay and become valuable assets.

No, they tend to soak up the money and retire, doing as little as possible.

That's a common fallacy.




People divorce to get someone stricken on Medicaid.
Wonderful

However, it's their choice not to insure.
What you refuse to acknowledge is that decent health insurance is simply out of reach for many working families. You're engaging in a very shabby game of blame the victim.
When you get your idiot head out of your fucking idiot ass and accept that, NO IT ISN'T, they simply CHOOSE not to buy it, you might gain a little credibility.
That's simply a false generalization, SOME people choose voluntarily not to buy insurance, and THEY become a burden on the public system, on emergency wards. Many people choose to eat and pay rent rather than have medical insurance, or the insurance they can afford to have is very low quality.
A guy I work with has chosen not to get health insurance. He's giving up his personal exemption to do so. Of course, he doesn't speak english, so for all I know he's working illegally on a fake worker ID.
Figures you'd assume the worst about him.
I didn't assume anything.
However, I've worked with several other Brazilian employees who've done that.
It's a distinct possibility.

I DO know he buys at least $50 a week in lotto tickets.

Health insurance would cost him $30.

Don't, shithead, tell me he can't 'afford' insurance.
He isn't everyone.
He's typical of the uninsured.
And you fluff it off.
That is actually a good argument for universal coverage. People here are not allowed to opt out of the system then fall back on government aid if things go bad. Everybody is potentially in need of care, none of us is invulnerable, so everybody pays into it. That way, everybody is covered, like it or not. If they want lotto tickets they can buy them with disposable income.


So you now admit there are people who can afford insurance and yet choose not to get it?

I never denied it. It's just another shortcoming in the US system.

.

Loading