What a travisty - Page 7 - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: Please Spam Us
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > Political Debate Forum

 
Click here to go to the first VIP post in this thread.  
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2012-06-29, 11:35 PM   [Ignore Me] #91
Warborn
Contributor
Major General
 
Warborn's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by CutterJohn View Post
What do you people imagine life is like in Canada, Britain, western europe, australia, new zealand, etc?
People live longer, fewer babies die, and less money is wasted lining the pockets of insurance companies. That's what life is like in those places.
Warborn is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 03:13 AM   [Ignore Me] #92
ChargerCarl
Corporal
 
ChargerCarl's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by Warborn View Post
People live longer, fewer babies die, and less money is wasted lining the pockets of insurance companies. That's what life is like in those places.
also, everyone is insured.
ChargerCarl is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:25 AM   [Ignore Me] #93
Figment
Lieutenant General
 
Re: What a travisty


Not entirely true Elcyco. If you have your MRI done in Germany or the Netherlands, there can be differences in waiting lists and price.

Maybe you want the deluxe version and skip waiting lists and go to a private hospital. Maybe you want a different out of town hospital that's further away, but cheaper or with different waiting lists because they have more or less patients, personel, etc.

Maybe you want to get surgery by that one guy who's really good at it, but that costs more, or alternatively by an intern if it's not a big deal. Also, how often can you make use of it? Etc.

There's also differences in conditions under which the health threat occured, on which they do or do not pay. There's also limits to how much they will cover. For instance, new glasses fall under health care. With my insurance up to 300 euro is covered per year, but it's not lenses AND glasses, just one or the other and the remainder is up to me. So if you get cheap frames for your glasses, you can get two. Meaning it also depends with whom you are insured where you can get your glasses and what companies provide the frames.

Another thing is that I don't need to be insured the same way as someone else. Being a male, I don't think I'll get pregnant, so I won't need any care in relation to pregnancy. If you're working in construction, maybe it's more interesting for you to insure injuries out of fall risk and other accidents (very important because people often get screwed over here and there are many fall accidents each year that lead to uninsured injury! A lot of people work without ropes and then the insurance company can say: own fault - meaning it can also stimulate people to use safety gear by making them aware and prevent needing care at all).

There's a lot of things health insurance companies can compete on. The main thing is, how much risk are they willing to take that you need health care each year, meaning how much premium will they demand?


If you're not insured, it may well be that you're off worse in the end. If you never need medical care but suddenly get hit by a truck in a car crash and it costs $100.000,- to get your back patched up... Then I don't think you can easily afford it and at that point your life is ruined, you can forget about being a productive member of society and instead you'll be draining money from the state, friends and family. If only you could have afforded or were willing to get health care insurance then...



Another thing is, when everyone has health care insurance, the costs per person go down. Insurance companies fund health care by the collective premiums they get - costs, wages, new BMWs and office chairs for the board, etc. Either way, not everyone needs health care each year so they leave a surplus. Meaning if less people have to pay for the insurance of all the sick, they have to pay more surplus to get the same insurance coverage. However, if more people pay, then more can make use of it too, however, the surplus as a whole will be greater and it's easier for an insurance company to provide the care people need.

What does this mean for us? If you need medicine from the pharmacist and have a doctors receipt, most if not all the costs for the medicine will be paid by the insurance company and you only need to go and collect it. You don't have to think about whether or not you can afford it, which is what a lot of Americans do right now.

Health is a first need. It's not a luxury commodity as someone here described it. Health is also vital to an economy. An healthy workforce is a happy workforce is a productive workforce. It's in the interest of companies to have healthy, well-fed, happy and thus productive workers.




Still, the main problem with insurance companies is that they always try to get out of having to pay your bills. And that's also of course because there's always people trying to take advantage of them as well. This is where there should be heavy checks from doctor and consumer organisations to ensure quality and fair competition and practice. The second thing is that people should have the ability to compare health care packages in a really neutral fashion and tailor made to their needs. Lastly, one company might be a lot more clear than another, or have more small print.



So yeah, there's a lot you can compete with between insurance companies by offering different packages and care. And I do think it's a good thing as many people as possible are insured to lower overall costs (including to society). Just because they're too pigheaded to realise this enables them to do more with their lives and as a country, doesn't mean it's taking away their freedoms. In fact, insurance can ensure the freedom to continue living the way you want to live your life because you've got a healthy or healthier body or the accessories to make up for handicaps or ill-ness without crippling your relatives into debt and stress.

But hey.. BOOHOO DAY GOFERMEND R TAKEZORING YER FREEDUMBS.

Last edited by Figment; 2012-06-30 at 04:28 AM.
Figment is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 05:59 AM   [Ignore Me] #94
Figment
Lieutenant General
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by elfailo View Post
But...we're disgusting European socialists, how could we possibly acknowledge competition as a good thing?
Damn hippies!
Figment is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-06-30, 12:36 PM   [Ignore Me] #95
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: What a travisty


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:06 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 12:59 PM   [Ignore Me] #96
Vecha
First Sergeant
 
Vecha's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by DjEclipse View Post
Where are the new hospitals in Obamacare?

In NYC we've had big hospital closings. In replace of the hospitals, banks and luxury high rises of course. For critical care and emergency care, I just don't see the there-there that HMOs or Obamacare provide.

Whichever side wins the debate of where the sheep goes, they're going to the same hospitals, and Mercy General just may be closed.
Yep.

We need an infrastructure bill...as well as a bill/something that persuades docs to go towards PC.


Nothing worthwhile will be passed until after the election.
Vecha is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:24 PM   [Ignore Me] #97
therandomone
Sergeant
 
Re: What a travisty


So its cool of them to require us to buy car insurance if we want to drive a car but not health insurance?
__________________
Lower your voice and strengthen your argument -Unknown

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ- Ghandi

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.- Sun Tzu
therandomone is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:27 PM   [Ignore Me] #98
Vecha
First Sergeant
 
Vecha's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by therandomone View Post
So its cool of them to require us to buy car insurance if we want to drive a car but not health insurance?
That's been discussed the other side(conservatives) say it is necessary as you are driving on publicly owned roads.

The healthcare market is not the same in their eyes.
Vecha is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:33 PM   [Ignore Me] #99
Vash02
Major
 
Vash02's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by therandomone View Post
So its cool of them to require us to buy car insurance if we want to drive a car but not health insurance?
No, no, driving a car is a "privilege". Even for people who may live up to 5-10+ miles from the nearest store, its a "privilege" to be able to go and buy food.
Vash02 is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:35 PM   [Ignore Me] #100
therandomone
Sergeant
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by Vecha View Post
That's been discussed the other side(conservatives) say it is necessary as you are driving on publicly owned roads.

The healthcare market is not the same in their eyes.
Well, with that logic then as long as you do not use publicly owned roads, state institutions and other things provided by the government then you shouldnt have to pay the tax, if you do decided to use those services though-pay it.

1. Revenue Act of 1942: 5.04 percent of GDP;

2. Revenue Act of 1961: 2.2 percent of GDP;

3. Current Tax Payment Act of 1943: 1.13 percent of GDP;

4. Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968: 1.09 percent of GDP;

5. Excess Profits Tax of 1950: .97 percent of GDP;

And here are the top five tax increases from the "modern" era of 1968-2006:

1. Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968: 1.09 percent of GDP;

2. Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982: .8 percent of GDP;

3(t): Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980: .5 percent of GDP

3(t): Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993; .5 percent of GDP;

5: Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990; .49 percent of GDP.

Depending on your rounding, that would mean the tax increases resulting from the health care law would be about the size of tax increases proposed and passed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter, in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush and in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.

The health care-related tax increases are smaller than the tax increase signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and a temporary tax signed into law in 1968 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. And they are significantly smaller than two tax increases passed during World War II and a tax increase passed in 1961.


....so we're complaining why again?
__________________
Lower your voice and strengthen your argument -Unknown

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ- Ghandi

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.- Sun Tzu

Last edited by therandomone; 2012-06-30 at 04:46 PM.
therandomone is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:49 PM   [Ignore Me] #101
Vecha
First Sergeant
 
Vecha's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by Vash02 View Post
No, no, driving a car is a "privilege". Even for people who may live up to 5-10+ miles from the nearest store, its a "privilege" to be able to go and buy food.
I'm curious to know what definition you are using(there are several). Do you mean that people don't "need" to drive? Don't need to drive to a job/groceries?

Also, the logic behind connecting car insurance to health insurance has to do with responsibility.

With Car insurance, Responsibility in having at least basic car insurance in order to maintain some responsibility in any damage you cause on the road.

With Health Insurance, having responsibility in not putting the burden of your emergency room visit on those around you.

Many, many people go into major debt over hospital bills when they choose not to get regular doctor visits, maintain health insurance.

Who pays for those bills? They don't just disappear.

What is sad is that the individual mandate was, in part, a Republican idea.

Originally Posted by therandomone View Post
Well, with that logic then as long as you do not use publicly owned roads, state institutions and other things provided by the government then you shouldnt have to pay the tax, if you do decided to use those services though-pay it.

1. Revenue Act of 1942: 5.04 percent of GDP;

2. Revenue Act of 1961: 2.2 percent of GDP;

3. Current Tax Payment Act of 1943: 1.13 percent of GDP;

4. Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968: 1.09 percent of GDP;

5. Excess Profits Tax of 1950: .97 percent of GDP;

And here are the top five tax increases from the "modern" era of 1968-2006:

1. Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968: 1.09 percent of GDP;

2. Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982: .8 percent of GDP;

3(t): Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980: .5 percent of GDP

3(t): Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993; .5 percent of GDP;

5: Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990; .49 percent of GDP.

Depending on your rounding, that would mean the tax increases resulting from the health care law would be about the size of tax increases proposed and passed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter, in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush and in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.

The health care-related tax increases are smaller than the tax increase signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and a temporary tax signed into law in 1968 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. And they are significantly smaller than two tax increases passed during World War II and a tax increase passed in 1961.


....so we're complaining why again?
I agree with you.
Vecha is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:55 PM   [Ignore Me] #102
Vash02
Major
 
Vash02's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by Vecha View Post
I'm curious to know what definition you are using(there are several). Do you mean that people don't "need" to drive? Don't need to drive to a job/groceries?

Also, the logic behind connecting car insurance to health insurance has to do with responsibility.

With Car insurance, Responsibility in having at least basic car insurance in order to maintain some responsibility in any damage you cause on the road.

With Health Insurance, having responsibility in not putting the burden of your emergency room visit on those around you.

Many, many people go into major debt over hospital bills when they choose not to get regular doctor visits, maintain health insurance.

Who pays for those bills? They don't just disappear.

What is sad is that the individual mandate was, in part, a Republican idea.
Sorry, forgot to put in /sarcasm. That's the argument that was put against me in the near beginning of the thread for making the same point therandomone made.
Vash02 is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 04:58 PM   [Ignore Me] #103
Vecha
First Sergeant
 
Vecha's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by Vash02 View Post
Sorry, forgot to put in /sarcasm. That's the argument that was put against me in the near beginning of the thread for making the same point therandomone made.
No problem...I get into the same issues with sarcasm detectors alot.
Vecha is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 05:43 PM   [Ignore Me] #104
n2q0_matrix
Contributor
Corporal
 
Re: What a travisty


Originally Posted by ChargerCarl View Post
you know you have the choices not to pay your taxes, just be ready to accept the consequences of your actions.
That is a cop-out position. Justify why someone can force me to pay taxes. What is the morality of that? Where does this authority come from? How did any individual come to fall under it? How is this "freedom"?

There should be no consequences for not allowing someone to take what is yours, especially at the threat of violence, or death.

It is absurd if you actually question these things IF you actually support the concept of Liberty. Problem is, most don't or can't get pass the "it has always been this way" mental roadblock. Cognitive Dissonance at it's best.
__________________
-n2
____________________
"If you are not paranoid... you are not paying attention." -unknown
n2q0_matrix is offline  
Old 2012-06-30, 06:01 PM   [Ignore Me] #105
Warborn
Contributor
Major General
 
Warborn's Avatar
 
Re: What a travisty


You pay taxes because you take advantage of services that could only exist through the collective effort of society. You have clean, running water, cheap electricity, relative safety due to law enforcement, and secure borders thanks to a national military and diplomatic service. All of these things are the direct result of people working together, either directly building and maintaining these services, or financing them through their taxes.

If you don't want to pay taxes, it's actually very easy. Just stop doing any business within society. Find some nice national park or some other vast area of wilderness and live off of the land. If you stop participating in society, and your obligation to society ends.
Warborn is offline  
 
  PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > Political Debate Forum

Bookmarks

Wiki Activity Read More >
Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 AM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.