Canadians Being Truthful About Socialistic Medical Care

Getting a job, any job plus ditching the welfare but keeping the foodstamps for the kids would work. So would getting the food for the kids thru private charities (churches, Salvation Army).

I am also all for hunting down fathers who skip out on their family like you describe, leaving their children they created high and dry. Unless their reason for skipping out is severe illness (disability), give the fathers the choice of either prison or go to work and pay child support. If they choose prison, thrown'em in and lock'em up and throw away the key.

Eric

Julie wrote:"getting a job, ANY JOB" - tell that to someone with 3 kids who expected her other half to stick around for the hard times, only to find he didn't. ANY job will not feed those children and feeding them would have to be her first priority. You don't GET IT!

And then who will support the kids? And who will babysit them when their mother's out there on minimum wage - unable to afford daycare?

their dog will baby sit the kids

Eric

Julie wrote:And then who will support the kids? And who will babysit them when their mother's out there on minimum wage - unable to afford daycare?

I will never understand the thinking behind fighting against free healthcare for all citizens of a nation. It's just bizarre to me that people would not only want to prevent access to it for others but also for their friends, family and themselves. It truly boggles my mind.

Why do people feed the trolls? Fascinating.

I am not against having access to healthcare, 100% for everybody. But I would like to keep it private somehow and avoid that "one payer system" the libs want so badly. I hate health insurance, I believe health insurance is the real problem. Sure, nearly all hospitals and many many MDs contribute to the problem by charging way inflated prices only because they know health insurance will pay for it. They stroke each other, health insurance and hospitals and MD specialists.

I see the problem differently than many others. I see the problem in America as more of a criminal justice system problem. Lets face it, there are a ton of people in medicine who are just totally, completely corrupted by money. There is fraud in the American medical system, a lot of it. There is a lot of ommission of treating sick people done by the doctors and hospitals and its health insurance behind it, by refusing to pay for needed treatment.

Again, I see it as a white collar crime problem that our criminal justice system is not set up to handle. Local prosecuters are used to going up thugs, drug dealers, murderers and those who have committed various petty crimes. Sometimes they will prosecute insurance people for various white collar crime activity, embezzlement, fraud, whatever. But overall, the American criminal justice and Judicial system has this prejudice against prosecuting healthcare anything.

I would have liked to have seen "health insurance reform" rather than obamacare. Led by the criminal justice system. It simply should be illegal to get away with withholding medical treatment to anybody who is truly sick. Those MDs and hospitals and health insurance companies that engage in this practice should simply go to prison when convicted. If a death resulted from ommission of proper specific treatment, murder charges should be filed against those healthcare individuals or organizations that were directly involved.

health insurance company leadership KNOW that by setting "limits" and not treating people to "keep costs down" kills people who are seeking healthcare. The fact they know this, fits the mens rea component to convict someone of a crime. For example when health insurance industry execs sit down to decide what they will and will not pay for and under what conditions, common sense will tell you that such an approach to medicine amounts to a group of people planning to withhold medical treatment. Doing that is a conscious decision and its foreseeable that with decisions these health insurance execs make, that sick people seeking healthcare are going to either stay sick or get sicker or even in some cases, die.

It is NOT negligence or a "mistake" these health insurance industry execs are engaging. Its conscious decision making where they are fully aware their shitty, greedy decisions and policies are going to lead to preventable deaths. To me, that meets the mens rea component of charging them with ommission to act when contracted to take care of you when sick, possible battery in some cases, neglect, murder in extreme cases, fraud and no telling what other crimes.

Instead, these health insurance companys have paid lobbyists to make a lot of this stuff "torts" when much of it would have been handled in the criminal justice system, decades ago.

Eric

ddk wrote:I will never understand the thinking behind fighting against free healthcare for all citizens of a nation. It's just bizarre to me that people would not only want to prevent access to it for others but also for their friends, family and themselves. It truly boggles my mind.

SuddenlyWornOut45 wrote:LOL

Your entire post displays the typical entitlement mentality. If someone is one welfare and is able to get a job that pays ANYTHING (that is legal), and welfare deducts what you make from that job, then hell you should be jumping for joy. Hell, youre that much more off of welfare!!!!!!!

The "why bother stay at home and live off the government" BECAUSE you cannot find a job that pays more than welfare is the very exact attitude that keeps so many people on the welfare "lifestyle" for decades, generations even.

It is only when limits are placed on welfare or the amounts allotted in welfare are reduced to subsistence level living (prevention of starvation, prevention of freezing to death in the winter or prevention of heat stroke in the summer) that people on welfare will become self motivated to get the hell off of government help by either 1) getting a job, ANY JOB. Or by 2) going back to school full time to acquire a marketable skill that will provide a long term living wage kind of job or profession. I have no problem paying for such individual's vocational occupation, btw, with taxpayer money.

Man, if I was on welfare and was getting $300 a week from it and could find a job making the equivalent amount, I'd be jumping off the springboard to take that job.

The weak, the stupid, the sick and people who feel sorry for themselves get wiped out of the gene pool. Thats the way God made it and its never going to change, ever.

You're not getting the point. Somebody staying at home one welfare keeps more money than somebody who works for the exact some income. It costs money to go to work. Transportation, child care, work clothing, etc.

If the money is going to be tight either way, it makes financial sense to stay home and not work. And that discourages people from looking for work and moving up.

When I was in grade school, my family moved to Iowa during the farm crisis. My dad was an aircraft mechanic, something they don't need in Iowa. My dad worked full time in a repair shop for lawn mowers and chain saws. He worked part time cleaning a shop. He opened up some of the town parks and put collected the trash. After school, my mom and I would do the trash and bathrooms at the other town parks. My dad and brother dug graves at one cemetery, and the whole family mowed a different cemetery. All that, and he still earned less than unemployment would have paid. We also received food stamps, and my mom would drive to another town to use them because she was so embarrassed by them.

When I was 14 we moved back to Seattle. I got a paper route. I remember another 14 year old girl that was visiting my brother's girlfriend. She was pregnant. She asked me how much money I earned with my paper route. She then suggested I get pregnant and get on welfare. I was shocked. I can't imagine doing such a thing on purpose. But that was my first lesson in motives and the welfare system. I kept the paper route.

robysue wrote:

49er wrote:Zoocrew,

I don't feel like doing a fact check but if I remember correctly, doesn't the welfare system discourage people from entering training programs that could give them access to a well paying job that would enable them to move up? It seems to compel folks to accept any job even if it has a lousy future.

Major reforms to the US Welfare system were in enacted back in 1996, and within some rather broad parameters, the individual states are now largely responsible for setting the actual requirements for welfare in the state requirements for welfare recipients to look for work or be actively enrolled and attending training programs or education programs (i.e. working on a GED or working on a college degree). And in most states, welfare requires the recipient to participate in job searching, training programs, or education and these activities must be documentable. In a number of states, school age children in families on welfare are required to have good, consistent attendance at school---i.e. the benefits to the family can be cut if one of the kids is chronically absent (truant) from school.

A lot of that was undone. They redefined what qualified as working or seeking work, so people can claim they are reading, losing weight, journaling, etc.

I can assure that my sister and nephew have been unemployed during the last 2 years, and neither one had to apply for jobs or prove they were trying. All they had to do was go online once a week.

ddk wrote:I will never understand the thinking behind fighting against free healthcare for all citizens of a nation. It's just bizarre to me that people would not only want to prevent access to it for others but also for their friends, family and themselves. It truly boggles my mind.

A lot of us would like to see healthcare improvements without having to destroy our own. I almost lost my insurance. My contract was finally approved 5 months after the old one expired and a strike vote. My employer was trying to remove our insurance benefits - without any wage offset to help us get insurance elsewhere. In fact, they were going to reduce sunday and holiday wages in addition to cancelling out insurance. I looked at the state website. My premiums for the bronze plan was 4 times the cost of my current premiums. And the deductible would have quadrupled too. Had that happened, I would have chosen to go without and pay the penalty, buy my cpap supplies and prescriptions out of pocket, and cut back on doctor visits.

I don't understand why having a new system to help the poor has to be designed in such a way as to hurt so many of us who are poor or just barely above poor. I have a 3 year pass, and then my contract will be up again. By that time, the waiver for the 40% cadilac tax will be gone, and the process will start all over again.

My sister does not have insurance and will continue to not have insurance. For the small amount of health care she currently uses, the monthly premiums and high deductible don't make sense. She is better off paying out of pocket.

Maybe in a few years, they will have these things figured out better, and people might actually be able to afford the insurance plans that we are supposed to be happy with. In the meantime, the penalty is cheaper than a single month's premium.

ddk wrote:I will never understand the thinking behind fighting against free healthcare for all citizens of a nation. It's just bizarre to me that people would not only want to prevent access to it for others but also for their friends, family and themselves. It truly boggles my mind.

There is no "FREE" healthcare. Somebody has to pay for it.


Den

.

My sister does not have insurance and will continue to not have insurance. For the small amount of health care she currently uses, the monthly premiums and high deductible don't make sense. She is better off paying out of pocket.

Maybe in a few years, they will have these things figured out better, and people might actually be able to afford the insurance plans that we are supposed to be happy with. In the meantime, the penalty is cheaper than a single month's premium.[/quote]

If god forbid, your sister ended up in the hospital, she would have a different opinion about insurance. And other medical problems can pop up out of the blue as I have learned.

Personally, I wish we had single payer. Would eliminate all the insurance issues and the high premiums and deductibles for people not getting subsidies.

Heck of a lot cheaper.

Roby Sue, thanks for the link about the welfare system.

49er

Free is only free, when others are robbed to pay for it. When more Free is required than you can take from others, free fails.

Also for a government to prosper, there's got to be a reward for working. When you reach a point where you hold a working person down to keep a non-working person so they can stay non-working, and continue breeding non-working off spring, you end up with the welfare state we have now.

It's now only fools that work hard and try to improve their lives. Jump up on that Sow, and latch on! Bite down tight, the ride is going to get rough. Jim

49er wrote:My sister does not have insurance and will continue to not have insurance. For the small amount of health care she currently uses, the monthly premiums and high deductible don't make sense. She is better off paying out of pocket.

Maybe in a few years, they will have these things figured out better, and people might actually be able to afford the insurance plans that we are supposed to be happy with. In the meantime, the penalty is cheaper than a single month's premium.

If god forbid, your sister ended up in the hospital, she would have a different opinion about insurance. And other medical problems can pop up out of the blue as I have learned.

Personally, I wish we had single payer. Would eliminate all the insurance issues and the high premiums and deductibles for people not getting subsidies.

Heck of a lot cheaper.

Roby Sue, thanks for the link about the welfare system.

49er[/quote]

Not much choice. She can't afford premiums. So far, the new rules haven't made insurance affordable unless you qualify for medicaid. The subsidies sound good, and the rates they offer sound great to somebody in the middle class who has to pay a lot more. But to somebody barely making it week to week, where is that extra money supposed to come from?

zoocrewphoto wrote:

49er wrote:My sister does not have insurance and will continue to not have insurance. For the small amount of health care she currently uses, the monthly premiums and high deductible don't make sense. She is better off paying out of pocket.

Maybe in a few years, they will have these things figured out better, and people might actually be able to afford the insurance plans that we are supposed to be happy with. In the meantime, the penalty is cheaper than a single month's premium.

If god forbid, your sister ended up in the hospital, she would have a different opinion about insurance. And other medical problems can pop up out of the blue as I have learned.

Personally, I wish we had single payer. Would eliminate all the insurance issues and the high premiums and deductibles for people not getting subsidies.

Heck of a lot cheaper.

Roby Sue, thanks for the link about the welfare system.

49er

Not much choice. She can't afford premiums. So far, the new rules haven't made insurance affordable unless you qualify for medicaid. The subsidies sound good, and the rates they offer sound great to somebody in the middle class who has to pay a lot more. But to somebody barely making it week to week, where is that extra money supposed to come from?[/quote]

Sorry to hear that. That is another reason I am in favor of a single payer plan so everyone can access health insurance.

49er

zoocrewphoto wrote:My sister does not have insurance and will continue to not have insurance. For the small amount of health care she currently uses, the monthly premiums and high deductible don't make sense. She is better off paying out of pocket.

Is Washington one of the states that opted not to increase the eligibility for Medicaid after the SC said they didn't have to comply with that provision in the ACA? That ruling allowed the anti-ACA state legislatures to really screw up the implementation. A lot of people who would have qualified for Medicaid now find they are in the gap that isn't covered by the subsidy provision of ACA. My daughter in Louisiana is in the same boat. Maybe she would be better off to dump car insurance and pay for medical insurance.