An example of why a public option would be nice in the United States

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I assume you're referring to the 1798 Act For the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen, which created a series of hospitals for that segment of workers. Yes, the Congress, which was made up partly of the Framers themselves, passed the law, and President Adams signed it. The modern Veterans Administration considers this to be their founding. Each ship's Master was ordered to collect money from the sailors to pay for it.

Steve - your wrong here.

It was NOT each ships master - it was the master of any ship engaged in international trade. No purely domestic shipping was affected. This is a critical distinction - because as a tax on international trade - it was legal since the Feds were tasked with handling international trade. If a ship's last port was in the US, then it paid no tax or fee. To compare this with an internal, domestic only mandate from government is ludicrous.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

To compare this with an internal, domestic only mandate from government is ludicrous.

To think it has nothing to do with government being in the health insurance business going back to the founding of our country is even more ludicrous.

[Growler]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

Well how about all the Social security checks I've helped pay, even though I'm currently not on social security? do I get to be all mad because you guys are taking my money I'm paying in? I'm sorry. But I'm getting tired of all the "holier than thou" attitude where everyone who uses a social program is some kind of bloodsucking rabble...but you all deserve your cut because you are somehow better. I don't want to sound ungrateful to the military, and if you were drafted like in Vietnam or something thats special, you deserve respect...But we haven't had a draft since Vietnam, so essentially the military was your career choice, same as any other person in this nation, and you were paid off of our tax dollars to render us a service.

You also are missing the point. You act like If you pay for a socialized health care system is money wasted. Every thought that if you pay into the system, you also get the benefit if you become sick? So maybe you would grumble one day about oh it's so much and look at all these bums...but then the next day you break your leg and need to use the very same system.

While we're on the topic of missing points: Veterans earned VA benefits. Firefighters, police officers, civil servants earn benefits. Of course not all of them do; some are goldbricks or corrupt; the systems within which they operate should be catching them. Same as civilian state benefit programs. There are lots of people who benefit from the programs. There are also lots who exploit the system to their ultimate profit, at the expense of us and the expense of the people who genuinely need the help. The systems should be catching them, too. I would rather know that my tax dollars were going to people genuinely in need, rather than to people who are taking me and everyone else for fools. What's wrong with that? Is that too "holier than thou?" I never said any of those were any better than anyone else.

On the subject of paying the military with tax dollars: Go ahead and stop paying the military. Enjoy your new freedoms.

Oh, by the way? You know who pays McDonald's CEO his US$13.4M (2010) salary? Yeah, that would be non-tax dollars. So which is a better use of money? Tax dollars that give that E-2 his US$1K a month, and his health care after he fights for you, or that six-dollar Happy Meal that's going to drain your health care system - if the consumer doesn't drop dead of a massive coronary first?

None of this has ANYTHING to do with my point: National service (of some sort) = National sponsored Health Care.

Where did I raise the issue of Social Security? And oh yeah, while we're at it. If it helps get you through the night, then here's a freebie: My mom died two months before she would have received her first Social Security. There's your money. You're welcome.

Social Security is going to end sometime, but let it end on someone else. GREAT way to encourage change.

You seem to think that I think that paying into a socialized health care system is wasted money. Create a system that helps people who are content to suck off the teat, and it IS a waste of money.

I have zero compunction paying into a system within which the beneficiaries have contributed to a better, cleaner, safer country. How hard is that to understand? Earn your help. That's not hard... but I guess it is "Holier than thou."

[Armistead]

Most people on SS and medicare don't suck the teet as you think. Unless you're retired, if you become disabled it takes years for most to qualify, most get denied, have to get lawyers even after Doctors disable them. It's almost standard unless they fastrack a terminal illness, expect to wait years, 3-5 is standard.

To use medicare or caid, you first have to qualify, meaning you can have no assets of real value, then go through more red tape than you can imagine.

I've worked getting several truly disabled people help. Some couldn't stand it any longer living in severe pain and killed themselves. Many thousands of Americans face the will to live over pain with no care daily. Most that I know and deal with were middle class, worked hard, just got a severe illness that stopped them from working, then the insurance goes, Doctors , lose meds, then it's homelessness unless a family member will move you in.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Steve - your wrong here.

It was NOT each ships master - it was the master of any ship engaged in international trade. No purely domestic shipping was affected. This is a critical distinction - because as a tax on international trade - it was legal since the Feds were tasked with handling international trade. If a ship's last port was in the US, then it paid no tax or fee. To compare this with an internal, domestic only mandate from government is ludicrous.

That's true, but I was only answering Tribesman's challenge, so why are you taking me to task over it. Did I say I supported this? Go ahead, fight with somebody who agrees with you some more.

But don't talk to me.

[gimpy117]

well I'm very sorry for your loss growler but this goes to show that we can't generalize people on public programs. I just don't like the whole demonization of people who are using welfare, especially being somebody who has been in a hard working family that has been on food stamps. I work 40+ hours a week in the summer to pay for school and my mom used to handle 80% of the claims in her insurance agency...all for 30,000 a year...supporting me and my brother.

I am grateful for the military. Sadly The bulk of the money that has been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't go to our deserving troops. It went to contractors on terrible contracts and research and buying new bells and whistles. Furthermore, I don't know if we are any more secure coming up on 10 years after 911

and, how is tax payers PAYING FOR HEALTH CARE "sucking off the tit"? we all pay for it, so we ALL can use it. sure, some don't pay as much because they don't have the means...but in the end we all get health care. Whatever happened to helping our fellow man? I think it's a travestry that in the richest nation in the world some of our citizens, like my neighbors who are some of the nicest people i know, have to have a bake sale so becky can stay alive while shes fighting cancer.

[Sailor Steve]

I do have a question on something I don't understand. Does the Health Care bill require everyone to purchase insurance? Does this include the homeless?

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I do have a question on something I don't understand. Does the Health Care bill require everyone to purchase insurance? Does this include the homeless?

I think so. I can agree with you that it's a terrible Idea. whoever came up with the mandate part was the congress idiot.

[CaptainHaplo]

Steve,

I wasn't trying to argue with you, my friend. Just trying to make sure that historical fact isn't represented incorrectly.

As for the homeless question - one can only assume a homeless person would qualify for medicaid or its equivelant - and would thus be provided free insurance just as they are now. If you have an income that disqualifies you from such aid, then you would be mandated to purchase coverage. A failure to do so will mean you are subject to a penalty fee imposed by the government.

[August]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

I think so. I can agree with you that it's a terrible Idea. whoever came up with the mandate part was the congress idiot.

I don't think it's gonna work anyways but if it has any chance at all then it's going to require mandatory participation.

[Growler]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

well I'm very sorry for your loss growler but this goes to show that we can't generalize people on public programs. I just don't like the whole demonization of people who are using welfare, especially being somebody who has been in a hard working family that has been on food stamps. I work 40+ hours a week in the summer to pay for school and my mom used to handle 80% of the claims in her insurance agency...all for 30,000 a year...supporting me and my brother.

I am grateful for the military. Sadly The bulk of the money that has been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't go to our deserving troops. It went to contractors on terrible contracts and research and buying new bells and whistles. Furthermore, I don't know if we are any more secure coming up on 10 years after 911

and, how is tax payers PAYING FOR HEALTH CARE "sucking off the tit"? we all pay for it, so we ALL can use it. sure, some don't pay as much because they don't have the means...but in the end we all get health care. Whatever happened to helping our fellow man? I think it's a travestry that in the richest nation in the world some of our citizens, like my neighbors who are some of the nicest people i know, have to have a bake sale so becky can stay alive while shes fighting cancer.

First off - let me apologize for the tone of my last post. Yesterday was not a shiny day for me; I had no call for the attitude I took with you.

to sum up: My issue isn't with the concept of paying for health care - please understand that. My issue is with the expectation of health care. I can't say it any clearer than this: I would gladly pay tax dollars to a system that ensured that everyone is covered - the only caveat being, the people who are eligible for coverage under the system have or are contributing to the betterment of their communities via some form of service - law enforcement auxiliaries, police officers, firefighters (career and volunteer), military, national guard service, street sweeping, library work - some action over a period of time to tell the rest of the community "I am committed to helping all of us be better" as a form of recompense, if you will, for the benefits of a health care system that covers the community.

What irks me is the expectation of many that the health care system will be provided to them, and all they have to do is walk in, and not do anything for it. Yes, I understand that paying taxes supports the system, too. But money isn't solving any of the problems here - it's not about money, it's about the expectations people seem to have - something for nothing, or something for their tax dollars. Give some time to your communities via a few years of some form of national service. It doesn't have to be military.

Let's face it - the more you make in income, the more you pay in taxes (basically; I'm not an expert o tax law, shelters, etc). Right now, the people making the most are paying for systems the people earning the least use. That's socialism already.

So here's the simplest distillation of my point: When we stop expecting from each other and start working with each other instead, we become much more effective in what we can do.

There's always going to be the few who seek something for nothing; those become very obvious when everyone around them is contributing, and they aren't. And by not contributing, they are choosing to not enjoy the benefits.

Now, clearly, there are cases where an individual cannot, through some means physical or mental, be involved in some form of national service. When everyone is contributing, helping those who genuinely need help is part of the process.

I'm not talking about communism, or socialism, or whatever -ism. What I'm saying is, if people want an nationalized health care system, they should be willing to help the nation for it.

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Growler

First off - let me apologize for the tone of my last post. Yesterday was not a shiny day for me; I had no call for the attitude I took with you.

no problem, we all have our bad days. I'm not offended in the least