Good news: With Obamacare, you can have a new nose for free! Bad news: A lot of voters would rather live maimed than risk not getting their Sky Cake.
Well those people are idiots and should not have a vote.
So you're saying I shouldn't vote.
Well, you should vote. I just feel like you're just poorly educated on this topic, and I want to help you see why an Obamacare repeal will hurt you in the long run.
Under-educated people, rural people, and religious people often vote against their own best self-interest out of ignorance, fear, and/or traditionalism.
Good news: With Obamacare, you can have a new nose for free! Bad news: A lot of voters would rather live maimed than risk not getting their Sky Cake.
Well those people are idiots and should not have a vote.
So you're saying I shouldn't vote.
If you would deny a basic right to someone then yes. If you can not think of anyone other than yourself and are so wrapped up in party bollocks then no you don't get a vote.
Under-educated people, rural people, and religious people often vote against their own best self-interest out of ignorance, fear, and/or traditionalism.
Also, a lot of people use medicine as a political weapon, which is horrible. The biggest obstacles to universal healthcare in the US right now aren't even the education aspects, but the fact that the religious right is juking the argument towards "Free Abortions! Free OC!" which blinds people who are probably living very unhealthy lifestyles to the fact that they are actually voting against something that will likely save them due to a miniscule and purely optional aspect of the healthcare bill.
Thats fucking crazy man, just crazy. Its like cutting your nose off to spite your face.
In the mind of many, many folks anything that is "pro-abortion" is directly supporting the murder of children. As long as those two things are equivalent in someones mind then no action is going too far.
If I thought that someone was going to go and murder a bunch of kid's I would sure as hell try to stop them.
I don't care if you're religious and vote. I care if you're ignorant, don't care that you're ignorant, and vote. And no, religious and ignorant are not the same thing, so fuck the people chomping at the bit to say they are.
Also, a lot of people use medicine as a political weapon, which is horrible. The biggest obstacles to universal healthcare in the US right now aren't even the education aspects, but the fact that the religious right is juking the argument towards "Free Abortions! Free OC!" which blinds people who are probably living very unhealthy lifestyles to the fact that they are actually voting against something that will likely save them due to a miniscule and purely optional aspect of the healthcare bill.
Thats fucking crazy man, just crazy. Its like cutting your nose off to spite your face.
In the mind of many, many folks anything that is "pro-abortion" is directly supporting the murder of children. As long as those two things are equivalent in someones mind then no action is going too far.
If I thought that someone was going to go and murder a bunch of kid's we would sure as hell try to stop them.
I once got into an argument on abortion on Facebook with a woman who insisted that abortions are evil and never necessary. I provided numerous posts with data, anecdotes, what have you. The two responses I got were the woman's fiance who said, I quote, "having a baby is an act of love, aborting that baby is hate. It's as simple as love vs. hate." That, and the woman dismissing all of my thoughts as "random and uninformed," then summarized her argument by saying "I have no interest in hearing someone's thoughts on the matter who, frankly, doesn't have a say." That is, she's not interested in my thoughts because I'm a guy.
Seriously, I was seconds away from shanking a bitch.
Then, I think you see the logical choice, hopefully. Ask more questions if you need to, I'm seriously glad to see some informative and stimulating debate on this topic.
If a health problem is not lifestyle related then it gets paid for via the basic health insurance tax.
You tax lifestyle shit to stop people from ruining their health and to pay for it when they do.
When did this forum go monochrome ?
You implied that only lifestyle shit should be taxed and didn't say anything about there being a basic insurance tax. Also, sometimes you can get lifestyle-linked diseases without partaking of that negative lifestyle. It's possible for a non-smoker to get lung cancer, for example.
If a health problem is not lifestyle related then it gets paid for via the basic health insurance tax.
You tax lifestyle shit to stop people from ruining their health and to pay for it when they do.
When did this forum go monochrome ?
Linking vice taxes to universal healthcare is probably the single best way second only to abortion to keep Midwesterners and Southerners from ever voting for universal healthcare. It's a poison pill, and it's also fairly unnecessary given a risk pool the size of the whole country, as you'd have with universal care.
If a health problem is not lifestyle related then it gets paid for via the basic health insurance tax.
You tax lifestyle shit to stop people from ruining their health and to pay for it when they do.
When did this forum go monochrome ?
We have that problem in the UK, I personally dislike it when tax payers have to fork out to cut someone out of their house and give them surgery. But I would rather pay and bitch and whine, then not pay and have nothing.
I see no reason to link vice taxes to universal healthcare. They can be their own thing. They already are.
Down here, things that cause health effects - like alcohol and tobacco, for two examples - have a portion of the tax revenue from them allocated to go straight into the healthcare system. Nearly all the Retail tax on cigarettes goes into Hospitals and medicare, for example.
It works out pretty well, but I don't know how well it would work in the US.
I see no reason to link vice taxes to universal healthcare. They can be their own thing. They already are.
Yeah, I'm already uncomfortable enough with vice taxes. Let's not expand that mentality into literal life-and-death situations. I mean, there can be a lot of gray area in calling something a "vice."
I see no reason to link vice taxes to universal healthcare. They can be their own thing. They already are.
Down here, things that cause health effects - like alcohol and tobacco, for two examples - have a portion of the tax revenue from them allocated to go straight into the healthcare system. Nearly all the Retail tax on cigarettes goes into Hospitals and medicare, for example.
Then, I think you see the logical choice, hopefully. Ask more questions if you need to, I'm seriously glad to see some informative and stimulating debate on this topic.
Of course not to say I don't believe there is cake out there somewhere, just I don't think the sky man is most likely to give me said cake. However, I would still prefer to have a fixed nose. Not that I think that precludes me from cake.
Of course not to say I don't believe there is cake out there somewhere, just I don't think the sky man is most likely to give me said cake. However, I would still prefer to have a fixed nose. Not that I think that precludes me from cake.
So how do you propose we guarantee that everyone can get a fixed nose?
As I asked before, what's the line above which your proposed government-run universal basic health care stops paying?
I see no reason to link vice taxes to universal healthcare. They can be their own thing. They already are.
Down here, things that cause health effects - like alcohol and tobacco, for two examples - have a portion of the tax revenue from them allocated to go straight into the healthcare system. Nearly all the Retail tax on cigarettes goes into Hospitals and medicare, for example.
This
I think the majority of tax revenue collected from the higher taxes on these items should go to healthcare for the effects. I just don't think we need universal healthcare to do that, and I don't think a universal healthcare system must have a vice tax system. The tax revenue CAN go to healthcare, but those taxes are not NECESSARY for universal healthcare. Vice taxes and universal healthcare can be separate functional legal units. One does not need the other. However, they can work in tandem should we have both.
I think the majority of tax revenue collected from the higher taxes on these items should go to healthcare for the effects. I just don't think we need universal healthcare to do that, and I don't think a universal healthcare system must have a vice tax system. The tax revenue CAN go to healthcare, but those taxes are not NECESSARY for universal healthcare. Vice taxes and universal healthcare can be separate functional legal units. One does not need the other. However, they can work in tandem should we have both.
That's certainly fair - our vice taxes alone do not pay for universal healthcare by themselves, we also have an individual levy specifically for our universal healthcare system, medicare, as well as money from other taxes going into the larger pool of government money used to pay for all sorts of public works and services, including Universal healthcare.
Why I'm saying it works well, is because those taxes are sufficient to eliminate EXTRA burden on the healthcare system that might be caused by those products. For example, your average smoker here will pay more into the system than it would cost the system to treat any of their complications that may arise from smoking - it's not something you'd necessarily need without universal healthcare, but it wouldn't hurt, I don't think. It's really there as a measure to level the field, rather than being a huge source of income that makes universal healthcare possible, we had it before these measures were in place, too.
Lets start with what Medicaid covers already. Anything after that needs an extra policy.
But an extra policy doesn't work because Medicaid already doesn't cover radically expensive (though incredibly basic) operations. It'd be the exact same system we have now.
Comments
Under-educated people, rural people, and religious people often vote against their own best self-interest out of ignorance, fear, and/or traditionalism.
Gawd!
If I thought that someone was going to go and murder a bunch of kid's I would sure as hell try to stop them.
Seriously, I was seconds away from shanking a bitch.
You tax lifestyle shit to stop people from ruining their health and to pay for it when they do.
When did this forum go monochrome ?
It works out pretty well, but I don't know how well it would work in the US.
As I asked before, what's the line above which your proposed government-run universal basic health care stops paying?
Why I'm saying it works well, is because those taxes are sufficient to eliminate EXTRA burden on the healthcare system that might be caused by those products. For example, your average smoker here will pay more into the system than it would cost the system to treat any of their complications that may arise from smoking - it's not something you'd necessarily need without universal healthcare, but it wouldn't hurt, I don't think. It's really there as a measure to level the field, rather than being a huge source of income that makes universal healthcare possible, we had it before these measures were in place, too.