DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Let's talk DEEE-Fense & Health Care :-)
Pages:  
Showing posts 251 - 275 of 283, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/03/2014 01:55:19 AM · #251
Originally posted by yanko:



According to Kaiser there are 397,130 active PCPs in the US and according to the DMDC we have 1,369,532 active military personnel. For what? Those two large bodies of water that flank this country does more to protect the US than the military and it's free.


You know, historically it was expected that the citizens would become soldiers in times of need, this whole professional soldier thing is just as new as the concept of 'insurance' is.
04/03/2014 02:25:11 AM · #252
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Cory:



Yes, the person who's putting in less is getting much more, and the person who's putting in more is getting far less.


That's how insurance has worked since the beginning of time. Why is it funny now? Do I think this is a fair system? No. Do I think it can be better? Yes. Is it better now for those who suffer the most? Hell fucking yeah. If you want to convince people then stories like yours need to be a bit more compelling. Right now yours is like complaining about a chipped nail.


But yanko, that's not at all how this has worked previously.

Previously you paid more and you got more, you payed less and you got less. That makes sense. To pay more and get less, or pay less and get more, that doesn't make sense to me, not in the least.

It LOOKS better now for those who suffer the most, however, given that what we currently have is so broken as to unsustainable, I don't think that this is going to help anyone long term.

My story doesn't need to be compelling, you're a communist, I am not, there's nothing I could say to compel you to see things my way. I'm very much a zero-sum believer - I don't believe that everyone should win, I believe in losers and have a very strong distaste for the entire soccer trophy mentality that pervades our society today. I always have been this way - I don't take help from others and don't take it well when others DEMAND that I help them. Screw em, I'll help if I want to, but forcing me to do so is VERY distasteful to me, and I can't foresee my position on this changing.


Not exactly true. I paid more and got less. I know many who couldn't even get the opportunity to pay more because they were automatically disqualified for having a preexisting condition.

Look, we definitely don't see eye to eye on a whole lot and if it makes you feel better and more "normal" to think of me as a communist in comparison than so be it. FWIW, I'm no fan of the soccer trophy mentality either. When it comes to sports I like to see a clear winner, but we are not talking about sports. Life is not a sport, but if you want to compare it like one, how does allowing those who were unable to even compete in the game of life given the opportunity to do so equivalent to handing them a trophy? Last I checked Obamacare didn't hand out reparations. Nobody poor is suddenly wealthy or in power. Last I checked the same rich white guys were still dominating the scoreboard so what's your point? The poor isn't losing by a greater margin?

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 02:26:13.
04/03/2014 02:37:31 AM · #253
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Cory:



Yes, the person who's putting in less is getting much more, and the person who's putting in more is getting far less.


That's how insurance has worked since the beginning of time. Why is it funny now? Do I think this is a fair system? No. Do I think it can be better? Yes. Is it better now for those who suffer the most? Hell fucking yeah. If you want to convince people then stories like yours need to be a bit more compelling. Right now yours is like complaining about a chipped nail.


But yanko, that's not at all how this has worked previously.

Previously you paid more and you got more, you payed less and you got less. That makes sense. To pay more and get less, or pay less and get more, that doesn't make sense to me, not in the least.

It LOOKS better now for those who suffer the most, however, given that what we currently have is so broken as to unsustainable, I don't think that this is going to help anyone long term.

My story doesn't need to be compelling, you're a communist, I am not, there's nothing I could say to compel you to see things my way. I'm very much a zero-sum believer - I don't believe that everyone should win, I believe in losers and have a very strong distaste for the entire soccer trophy mentality that pervades our society today. I always have been this way - I don't take help from others and don't take it well when others DEMAND that I help them. Screw em, I'll help if I want to, but forcing me to do so is VERY distasteful to me, and I can't foresee my position on this changing.


Not exactly true. I paid more and got less. I know many who couldn't even get the opportunity to pay more because they were automatically disqualified for having a preexisting condition.

Look, we definitely don't see eye to eye on a whole lot and if it makes you feel better and more "normal" to think of me as a communist in comparison than so be it. FWIW, I'm no fan of the soccer trophy mentality either. When it comes to sports I like to see a clear winner, but we are not talking about sports. Life is not a sport, but if you want to compare it like one, how does allowing those who were unable to even compete in the game of life given the opportunity to do so equivalent to handing them a trophy? Last I checked Obamacare didn't hand out reparations. Nobody poor is suddenly wealthy or in power. Last I checked the same rich white guys were still dominating the scoreboard so what's your point? The poor isn't losing by a greater margin?


I ain't rich yanko, and they're milking me for every dime they can every time they get a chance, between taxes, the variety of leeches I have to hire to take care of taxes and banking, the legal stuff, business paperwork and fees, etc, hell I'd almost certainly be better off financially if I just stopped trying to earn my way and tried to get a disability certification and just worked for cash.. God knows I was much more comfortable and happy on unemployment for the first few months of the year before I decided to get back off my ass and start a new business.. This is just another way to take more from me. Don't take the communist thing personally, it's just that you seem to think the people who've made good decisions should be required by law to help those who've made bad decisions, or were just screwed by chance. The thing is that this whole thing has really hurt me, I've lost my coverage, cannot stomach the new price and horrible coverage, and now I'm hanging out in the winds of chance myself while the 'poor' now enjoy far more security than I do. I'm extremely displeased by that.

Sure, the same rich white guys were still dominating the score last time I checked, and that's not going to change because of this legislation, do you really think insurance just became a charitable organization? This is just a new and exciting opportunity for them to figure out new and interesting ways to fuck us even harder, while using less lube.

You've noted that nobody poor is suddenly rich or in power, and you're right - but there is opportunity in this country, and with hard work and determination a person CAN pick themselves up by their bootstraps. I don't think giving them more security and comfort is likely to encourage them to work to change their situation, and I think that only further victimizes them in some ways.

-

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 02:45:18.
04/03/2014 10:13:22 AM · #254
Cory, you've repeatedly mentioned good decisions vs. bad decisions. Forgoing health insurance coverage out of some sort of personal protest is an extremely poor decision. With medical debt being the number one cause of bankruptcy in this country, you are essentially lined up now to become a statistic, particularly considering your proclivity to injure yourself. The only person that will be adversely impacted by this is you.

To be blunt, if you cannot afford health insurance while running your own business, you shouldn't be running your own business. Running your own business is a massive pain in the ass, with unpopular and unforeseen costs at every corner. Safeguarding your health and assets should be your top priority, or you're doing it wrong.
04/03/2014 11:28:24 AM · #255
Originally posted by yanko:

According to Kaiser there are 397,130 active PCPs in the US and according to the DMDC we have 1,369,532 active military personnel. For what? Those two large bodies of water that flank this country does more to protect the US than the military and it's free.


Muahaha! Complacency is our friend. One day the crusaders will flood down from the Fatherland to bring curling and a polite, indifferent attitude to the infidel!
04/03/2014 12:03:59 PM · #256
it is better to have a large Military presence and not need it, than to NEED a large Military presence and not have one.
04/03/2014 12:08:48 PM · #257
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:

According to Kaiser there are 397,130 active PCPs in the US and according to the DMDC we have 1,369,532 active military personnel. For what? Those two large bodies of water that flank this country does more to protect the US than the military and it's free.


Muahaha! Complacency is our friend. One day the crusaders will flood down from the Fatherland to bring curling and a polite, indifferent attitude to the infidel!


They already test our defenses every year with their attack/spy geese that "migrate" South.
04/03/2014 12:22:18 PM · #258
What-A-Sham.jpg

Message edited by Bear_Music - fixed link.
04/03/2014 12:40:22 PM · #259
Originally posted by jab119:

it is better to have a large Military presence and not need it, than to NEED a large Military presence and not have one.


We'd greatly reduce the chance that we'd need it if we'd quit running around invading other countries and blowing up the locals.
04/03/2014 12:56:11 PM · #260
Adam, when you're out grabbing a cold one and talking life with your friends, do they get impatient while you're googling for cartoons?
04/03/2014 01:20:54 PM · #261
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by jab119:

it is better to have a large Military presence and not need it, than to NEED a large Military presence and not have one.


We'd greatly reduce the chance that we'd need it if we'd quit running around invading other countries and blowing up the locals.


reducing the US Military presence only opens the door for more attacks. I say pull our Military out and let those guys blow themselves up and de-stabilize that region (whatever region it may be) and screw up the global economy. I'm sure that's what many people want anyway, right?
Its easier to drive the bus when you are not the one behind the wheel.
04/03/2014 01:27:10 PM · #262
Originally posted by jab119:

Its easier to drive the bus when you are not the one behind the wheel.

Can you please explain how that works -- it makes no sense to me ...
04/03/2014 01:43:38 PM · #263
Originally posted by bohemka:

Cory, you've repeatedly mentioned good decisions vs. bad decisions. Forgoing health insurance coverage out of some sort of personal protest is an extremely poor decision. With medical debt being the number one cause of bankruptcy in this country, you are essentially lined up now to become a statistic, particularly considering your proclivity to injure yourself. The only person that will be adversely impacted by this is you.

To be blunt, if you cannot afford health insurance while running your own business, you shouldn't be running your own business. Running your own business is a massive pain in the ass, with unpopular and unforeseen costs at every corner. Safeguarding your health and assets should be your top priority, or you're doing it wrong.


You are somewhat right - but I'm better off this way than unemployed and sucking funds out of the system. (even though it's pretty easy to do). The hope is that eventually I'm no longer busting my ass to just barely make it. (and brother are you EVER right about the costs)

The good news is that I'm only somewhat exposed - the rules do allow me to get coverage now with a preexisting condition, and I can do so at any time if I simply start a new business.

Still, I'm not happy about it since I am exposed in case of injury. So you're right, but I'm not ok with being robbed to have another level of security. FWIW, my entire life I've been uninsured, I'd only bought insurance for myself two years ago, so this is my 'normal'.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 13:46:02.
04/03/2014 01:53:57 PM · #264
Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by jab119:

it is better to have a large Military presence and not need it, than to NEED a large Military presence and not have one.


We'd greatly reduce the chance that we'd need it if we'd quit running around invading other countries and blowing up the locals.


reducing the US Military presence only opens the door for more attacks. I say pull our Military out and let those guys blow themselves up and de-stabilize that region (whatever region it may be) and screw up the global economy. I'm sure that's what many people want anyway, right?
Its easier to drive the bus when you are not the one behind the wheel.


And why do people want to attack the US? It's because for decades, the US policy has long been one of interfering with the affairs of other countries, overtly or covertly and playing the role of "world cop" whether our presence was wanted or not. Usually with the justification that we were "protecting US interests", usually meaning oil.

04/03/2014 03:30:44 PM · #265
Originally posted by Spork99:

Usually with the justification that we were "protecting US interests", usually meaning oil.


everything you touch required oil to manufacture it or deliver it to you. Protecting that is vitally important to the world, not just the US.

this is an age old argument/debate between people that will never be solved until one side is proved wrong by the actions/results of the situation at hand, both the health care and the Military debate in this topic.
We will just have to agree to disagree.

04/03/2014 03:35:36 PM · #266
Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Usually with the justification that we were "protecting US interests", usually meaning oil.


everything you touch required oil to manufacture it or deliver it to you. Protecting that is vitally important to the world, not just the US.

Perhaps our 5% of the world's population continuing to hog 30-40% of the world's oil/energy resources has something to do with the attitude so many have toward the US.
04/03/2014 05:26:58 PM · #267
Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by jab119:

it is better to have a large Military presence and not need it, than to NEED a large Military presence and not have one.


We'd greatly reduce the chance that we'd need it if we'd quit running around invading other countries and blowing up the locals.


reducing the US Military presence only opens the door for more attacks. I say pull our Military out and let those guys blow themselves up and de-stabilize that region (whatever region it may be) and screw up the global economy. I'm sure that's what many people want anyway, right?
Its easier to drive the bus when you are not the one behind the wheel.


Good grief... the last military attack on USA based installations occured when?... When you consider the existing military might of the USA and the capability it has to completely obliterate the globe several times over, one has to wonder just how much more materials you need.

I am most certainly not advocating a complete dismantling of the military, but I doubt that you would overrun by the hordes if you trimmed it a bit.

Ray
04/03/2014 05:42:31 PM · #268
Originally posted by RayEthier:

Good grief... the last military attack on USA based installations occured when?...

Actually, yesterday, at Fort Hood, Texas ... but it was an inside job ... :-(

I think the previous eney attempt was sometime around 1942, when a Japanese submarine shelled the beach near San Diego.
04/03/2014 07:49:13 PM · #269
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:

According to Kaiser there are 397,130 active PCPs in the US and according to the DMDC we have 1,369,532 active military personnel. For what? Those two large bodies of water that flank this country does more to protect the US than the military and it's free.


Muahaha! Complacency is our friend. One day the crusaders will flood down from the Fatherland to bring curling and a polite, indifferent attitude to the infidel!


We started that years ago with Hockey, now we have strategically penetrated into all areas of your country. Hell, we even managed to convince you to put teams in locations where no one has ever seen ice ;-)

Curling is next!

Then maybe universal health care, although I think curling will be an easier sell.

Message edited by author 2014-04-03 19:50:44.
04/03/2014 08:58:35 PM · #270
Has anyone heard of CAWEM? At my hospital, we commonly write off charges over $50K for one or another patient who has it, even if they are employed. What do you think that does to the healthcare equation?
04/03/2014 11:16:49 PM · #271
Originally posted by AbeSapien2:

Has anyone heard of CAWEM? At my hospital, we commonly write off charges over $50K for one or another patient who has it, even if they are employed. What do you think that does to the healthcare equation?

I'm familiar with it.
04/04/2014 07:22:45 AM · #272
Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Usually with the justification that we were "protecting US interests", usually meaning oil.


everything you touch required oil to manufacture it or deliver it to you. Protecting that is vitally important to the world, not just the US.

this is an age old argument/debate between people that will never be solved until one side is proved wrong by the actions/results of the situation at hand, both the health care and the Military debate in this topic.
We will just have to agree to disagree.


Yet we'll justify our actions by citing it as a "humanitarian crisis" while we pretend millions aren't being slaughtered in non-oil rich areas.

04/04/2014 07:24:53 AM · #273
Originally posted by AbeSapien2:

Has anyone heard of CAWEM? At my hospital, we commonly write off charges over $50K for one or another patient who has it, even if they are employed. What do you think that does to the healthcare equation?


Then how do you explain the fact that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy in the US is medical debt?
04/04/2014 10:18:57 AM · #274
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by AbeSapien2:

Has anyone heard of CAWEM? At my hospital, we commonly write off charges over $50K for one or another patient who has it, even if they are employed. What do you think that does to the healthcare equation?

Then how do you explain the fact that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy in the US is medical debt?

CAWEM is for non-citizens, legal or otherwise:

"Eligibility Requirements. To qualify for CAWEM, a person must meet all the nonfinancial and financial eligibility requirements for another medical assistance program, except the citizen/alien status and Social Security Number requirements. CAWEM applicants who are not documented (do not have a legal immigration status) are not required to declare or provide proof of their citizenship or immigration status."
04/04/2014 12:38:05 PM · #275
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by AbeSapien2:

Has anyone heard of CAWEM? At my hospital, we commonly write off charges over $50K for one or another patient who has it, even if they are employed. What do you think that does to the healthcare equation?

Then how do you explain the fact that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy in the US is medical debt?

CAWEM is for non-citizens, legal or otherwise:

"Eligibility Requirements. To qualify for CAWEM, a person must meet all the nonfinancial and financial eligibility requirements for another medical assistance program, except the citizen/alien status and Social Security Number requirements. CAWEM applicants who are not documented (do not have a legal immigration status) are not required to declare or provide proof of their citizenship or immigration status."


AWESOME. So if I get really sick, my best bet for not going bankrupt is to relinquish my citizenship.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/26/2019 03:27:53 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/26/2019 03:27:53 PM EDT.