Health Care: Right, Privilege or Responsibility
- Thread starter The Ozzman
- Start date
zabu of nΩd
Free Insultation
- Feb 9, 2007
- 14,620
- 805
- 113
AchrisK
Weakling
Dude, come on! Don't preface your post like that. I am among the last people to write off someone's statements because I know we fundamentally disagree on something.
It can't be a s simple as just giving out money. Is he looking to eliminate health insurance companies? Remove the insurance expectation away from employers?
I guess I need to look into it, though I don't see that alone changing my vote.
Dak
mentat
........yeah......good one.
AchrisK already responded to Lotus for me.
Better idea, end Medicaid and Medicare. The solution to failing socialism is not more socialism.
Ok Vihris, since obviously you are for socialistic programs, do you mind explaining who should pay for them?
AchrisK
Weakling
Those are just differing opinions, not nonsense.
You seem to have trouble with the existence of differing opinions.
It's nonsense IN HIS OPINION GOD DON'T YOU FUCKING REALIZE IT AWIOPBRGIRGBUIOAERVFGUILAEBRGAEUILRGWERAGBUIAERG
ThisIsACoolName
Member
AchrisK
Weakling
zabu of nΩd
Free Insultation
- Feb 9, 2007
- 14,620
- 805
- 113
You seem to think that ANY FUCKING OPINION WHATSOEVER is just as valid as the next, no matter how baseless and retarded it is.
"Hey, leave that guy alone who thinks Hitler should have taken over the world and eradicated the Jews from the planet. He just has a different opinion than yours."
AchrisK
Weakling
If his opinion differs, then the accusation should be based on how they differ, not a blanket statement of nonsense.
AchrisK
Weakling
No, it is just that I generally think the people behind the statements are valid, and I trip out on how totally different two valid people can see things.
I don't know why that is so hard for you to process. I thought you could "think outside the bun". Maybe I am wrong.
You're retarded.
So, you're saying that people of similar intelligence should see eye to eye on things? Am I reading that correctly?
Dak
mentat
Lotus-Eater
Worst New Comer
Einherjar86
Active Member
The main problem I have with Obama is that I don't agree that employer's should have to pay for their employees' health care coverage. I can understand that plan for corporations exceeding a certain number of employees; but as far as I know, Obama makes no distinction between big corporations and small businesses when it comes to this (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).
Obama says that he wants to make it easier for employers to afford heath care for their employees. Now, that sounds good, but only if you believe that employers should have to pay their employees' health care. In large businesses and corporations this seems like a more plausible approach. However, in small businesses where you only have a small number of employees and they're all on a first-name basis with the company owner, this idea of employer-based health insurance isn't as effective, in my opinion.
Am I totally incorrect here? This is what I thought Obama's position was...
Obama says that he wants to make it easier for employers to afford heath care for their employees. Now, that sounds good, but only if you believe that employers should have to pay their employees' health care. In large businesses and corporations this seems like a more plausible approach. However, in small businesses where you only have a small number of employees and they're all on a first-name basis with the company owner, this idea of employer-based health insurance isn't as effective, in my opinion.
Am I totally incorrect here? This is what I thought Obama's position was...
Einherjar86
Active Member
I don't think it's necessary. In small businesses the relationship between an employer and his/her employees is much more personal and intimate. Employees have the freedom to discuss options with their employer. Employer-based health care demands that the employer must pay a certain amount of money for his employees' health care. However, in a system such as that of many small businesses, it's unnecessary because the employees and employer have a much stronger bond. And more than likely, in employer-based health care, the employer will be paying more than he/she needs to. In small businesses, if certain employees need a hand, the owner will commonly lend them one. It's faulty logic to believe that small business owners aren't fond of or are unwilling to help their employees. Most small business owners would gladly help their employees.
Well, the way the system here works is that I have a co-pay for office visits, but if I have to go to the ER or something, I pay out of pocket and then get reimbursed for the cost.
AchrisK
Weakling
Me? No, not at all. It's just an observation I have been contemplating. How adamantly opposed to each other the opinions of two people who are reasonably intelligent can be. To the point of thinking that the other person is fundamentally lacking some level of intelligence.
I tried to have this conversation and give examples of how it is more a fundamental difference in how people see things, than a lack of intelligence. vihris-gari could not handle it and could not stop arguing the points. I wasn't making point about issues, I was giving examples of how differing thoughts on fundamental ideas will result in different views on issue.
AchrisK
Weakling
Typically it has been cost-prohibitive for small employers to offer insurance because they don't get the "volume discount" that larger employers can. But if a number of small businesses can get together, maybe it is possible for them to effectively get volume discount rates.
Similar threads
