The "downside" of our current healthcare system

FredHayek wrote: Most health insurance policies before ACA had million dollar limits.

Exactly...Which is why I don't want the Neo-Fascists repealing the ACA, and applaud the ACA's removal of those limits.

Democracy4Sale wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Most health insurance policies before ACA had million dollar limits.

Exactly...Which is why I don't want the Neo-Fascists repealing the ACA, and applaud the ACA's removal of those limits.

And who is going to pay for the sick to have these no-limit health insurance poliicies? The people who now are forced by threat of jail and fines to have health insurance.

FredHayek wrote:

Democracy4Sale wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Most health insurance policies before ACA had million dollar limits.

Exactly...Which is why I don't want the Neo-Fascists repealing the ACA, and applaud the ACA's removal of those limits.

And who is going to pay for the sick to have these no-limit health insurance poliicies? The people who now are forced by threat of jail and fines to have health insurance.

Good point. If you go over your limit we just shoot you. Problem solved.

There is no "threat of jail"...but thanks for playing...

And, yes, mandating that all carry some minimal coverage, or self-indemnify would do it.

Insert standard irrelevant garbage about "socialized medicine" here: ____________________________

archer wrote: I wasn't really looking for comments. I just thought it was important for people to know that their vote has consequences, and those consequences can mean the difference between life and death for some of our fellow citizens. I know that means squat to several of the posters here. I just hoped it might make them think about someone other than themselves for a change.

If people are truly thinking of others and not themselves, they wouldn't seek to take the fruits of their efforts for their own needs. If people were truly thinking of others and not themselves, they wouldn't dream of burdening their children with debt that comes with programs that take money from the current investors to pay the benefits for earlier ones. It is selfish self preservation which leads one to a place where they can justify taking from future generations for their own benefit, not thinking of others.

Elections do indeed have consequences, we can see that quite clearly. Every time the party of Democrats has a large majority in both houses of Congress and a member of their party residing in the White House they enact an enormously expensive social experiment which ends up costing the posterity of the union more of their liberty and more of the fruits of their efforts. When my father was raising his family, he was required to give up 4.2% of his income on the first $40K of income (adjusted to reflect 2010 dollars). The people attempting to raise their families today are taxed at 7.65%, nearly double the rate, on approximately $110K of income, nearly triple the amount subjected to taxation when the middle class was vibrant, and the revenue from that taking is still insufficient to sustain the programs. Both of them are now paying more out than they are taking in every year. Not only has the tax rate and rise in the amount of income subjected to taxation taken more of the funds necessary for today's middle class to raise their families, it has also resulted in fewer businesses contributing to pension plans for those middle class workers. The money that they used to contribute is today used to pay their share of the tax rate increase and rise in the amount of income subjected to being taxed. The total tax paid on every dollar of wages earned by the middle class is in excess of 15%. That is not the cost of funding the entire operation of the federal government mind you, that is the cost they pay solely for Social Security and MediCare - they pay additional income taxes to fund the rest of the federal government on top of the first 15% of their income.

The person who risks it all and opens up their own business? For them the tax increase has been higher than that levied on the rest of the union. Those who were self employed were taxed at roughly 140% of the taxes levied on other workers until 1984, at which point they started being taxed at double the rate that other workers pay. They always had to match the taxes that those they hired paid, but they got a break on the taxes that they were actually paying on themselves. That disappeared the last time these budget breaking individual welfare programs needed to saved from bankruptcy.

30 years later, roughly the span of time we were told the last "rescue" would last, the budget crisis we were told 30 years ago these programs would create is upon us. For 3 decades the politicians have kicked the can down the road to the next Congress, the next generation and we are now, once again, at a point in time where those programs are looking at mandatory cutbacks in benefits or taking more from the labor of others to "fix" the problem that has been created by the programs themselves as politicians continue to pander to those who vote for their living hoping to hold onto their seat at the table of power for another term.

Elections do have consequences and you should carefully consider all of the consequences, not just the ones that you might face during the course of your life. Do you want your children and grandchildren to see their tax burden rise over 500% as the Baby Boomers have seen theirs rise? Do you want a federal government which by itself consumes 25% of every dollar the economy generates in perpetuity? Are you willing to burden yourself rather than burdening your children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren with the cost of providing benefits from the government for you? The taxes you paid into Social Security and MediCare are gone - they have been spent providing benefits to those who were retired while you worked and "borrowed" by the federal government to fund its desire to be the central collection and distribution hub of the union's charity while the infrastructure of the union deteriorates and crumbles. The taxes your children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will pay during their working years, taken from their labor to support their families, will be consumed to provide benefits to you. They will be paying higher insurance "taxes" so that you are paying lower ones. Is that really what the collectivists are trying to sell as being more concerned about others than they are about themselves?

Well, Printsmith, since you like to spout off about your beliefs, what do you BELIEVE Jesus says about helping others?

I would venture that He wouldn't view using Caesar to take from others as fulfilling your Christian duty to be charitable 2.

2wlady wrote: Well, Printsmith, since you like to spout off about your beliefs, what do you BELIEVE Jesus says about helping others?

Forcing people to give with threats of prison doesn't seem very Christian to me.

Where is this threat of prison Fred? Do you have a credible source for that, or is that just something you heard. My understanding is there is NO threat of jail/prison for failure to comply.