1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Only 32% Would Pay Higher Taxes to Provide Health Insurance for All

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, May 16, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Auto & health insurance are apples & oranges. The costs are much lower for auto insurance. Most of the time, the claims are comparatively small. And furthermore, a 70 year-old who has neglected his car might end up causing a loss...but a 70 year-old who has neglected his health will cause a huge one. Also...there are huge groups of people that are extremely expensive to medically insure. Although parents of 16 year-olds might complain otherwise...that group for auto insurance is much smaller. Finally...auto body folk tend to make a decent living...but the healthcare field pays people--lots of them--a whole lot of money (I'm not begrudging them; just stating a fact).

    Nope.

    The argument against government-mandated insurance is that the people who brought us FEMA, the Walter Reed Army Medical Hospital, the IRS, your local DMV office, and Congress would be in charge of maintaining our health. I don't hear the "price" issue. People are scared that our government will do what it normally does--offer a substandard product for a ridiculous price. Oh, the patient may not pay the whole bill...but the taxpayer will. Not to mention...this will become a vote-buying scheme the likes of which we've never seen before.

    I'll be the first to admit that there are significant problems in our healthcare system.

    But I'll also remind the court that there are lots of us out there who sacrifice so that our families and ourselves will have coverage. I feel sorry for those in category #1...who simply cannot afford it. I don't feel sorry for category #2 grown-ups (using term loosely) who for whatever reason don't work hard enough to get coverage, or who give up on finding it. The first category has many people in it...but there are also lots of folks under the "can't afford it" banner that do have options...they just don't have the initiative, work ethic, or sense of responsibility to go after it.

    I'll help their children, but I'm not at all interested in helping those in category #2.
     
  2. BigBossman

    BigBossman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,009
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I think everyone should be responsible for their own heathcare. I don't want to pay for anyone else's healtcare & I don't want anyone to pay for mine.
     
  3. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    BB I agree with you 100%
    for those of you who thought I really believe that the govt should pay for all of our needs - well, I do have a bridge in Brooklin for sale....

    while talking about car insurance, years ago there was an insurance company that would only insure 100% non-drinkers. That would help keep my rates down, as I am not paying for those who drink.

    I think it was called Prefered Risk - they were not licensed to sell in NY, beacuse of the no-drinking policy.

    Salty
     
  4. Jon-Marc

    Jon-Marc New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not everyone can afford it; I can't although I've got it. Unfortunately, it's not very good coverage since I owe many thousands of dollars in medical bills that my insurance didn't pay.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...