BoatShoes;485046 wrote:The world needs retail sales clerks, bartenders, etc. too and they ought to be able to get affordable health care...I don't have all of the answers but if my healthcare is more expensive and I'm lucky enough to have a good job...I suppose I can live with that if it's subsidizing the healthcare of the people who check me out at the grocery store, get me drunk on the weekends and bring me food when I take my girl out.

Fact is, if the market for health care were truly open, those folks could actually afford decent coverage or paying a doctor out of pocket. It's government interference via Medicare, Medicaid, legislative mandates, etc. that have created this screwed up mess.

I know it's not possible, but if we could somehow do away with all the regulations and mandates, and open up coverage nationwide for all companies, I think you'd see a remarkable drop in the cost of medical care.

BoatShoes;485046 wrote:The world needs retail sales clerks, bartenders, etc. too and they ought to be able to get affordable health care...I don't have all of the answers but if my healthcare is more expensive and I'm lucky enough to have a good job...I suppose I can live with that if it's subsidizing the healthcare of the people who check me out at the grocery store, get me drunk on the weekends and bring me food when I take my girl out.

1. A majority of those positions you are talking about are either HS kids, college kids, etc that are still under mom/dad's insurance, or people just suplimenting their income with a part time job. I would say that a very small percentage of retail/bartenders/etc have that job as their "career plan" and would need health insurance from it.

2. As I said, while the country needs those positions, a vast majority are HS/college students just like I said so the "supply" will always be there to fill those positions, and those kids are still covered under mommy and daddy's health insurance.

BoatShoes;485046 wrote:The world needs retail sales clerks, bartenders, etc. too and they ought to be able to get affordable health care...I don't have all of the answers but if my healthcare is more expensive and I'm lucky enough to have a good job...I suppose I can live with that if it's subsidizing the healthcare of the people who check me out at the grocery store, get me drunk on the weekends and bring me food when I take my girl out.

That sounds generous and benevolent...but in my "greedy" world view if the grocery clerk, bartender, and waitress want health care benefits they should find another job or do what it takes to make it happen.

What right do you or the Feds have to take my income and redistribute it to the "downtrodden" after I worked my ass off over the years, paid my dues to society with 9 years of military service, and earned a degree so I can have a job with adequate health care benefits?

jmog;485107 wrote:1. A majority of those positions you are talking about are either HS kids, college kids, etc that are still under mom/dad's insurance, or people just suplimenting their income with a part time job. I would say that a very small percentage of retail/bartenders/etc have that job as their "career plan" and would need health insurance from it.

2. As I said, while the country needs those positions, a vast majority are HS/college students just like I said so the "supply" will always be there to fill those positions, and those kids are still covered under mommy and daddy's health insurance.

This is false guy. Wal-mart is the nation's largest employer with 1.3 million associates but 54% of their employees are uninsured and don't say it's because they the "turn it down," when the average wage is barely over $10.00 an hour...and this corporate burden is passed onto the rest of taxpayers.

Our economy is now driven 70% by consumption...College graduates are getting jobs as retail sales managers getting paid low wages, not being offered health insurance (if they are, it's not affordable) with a high debt burden from student loans.

There's all kinds of people who aren't going to be going to college anytime soon and spend their lives as a server, bartender, gas station clerk...How often do you go out to eat? Do you see nothing but early 20's teeny boppers? No.

I can live with paying more for my health insurance to lower the cost of health insurance for these groups of people without a good job like I have.

BoatShoes;485157 wrote:I can live with paying more for my health insurance to lower the cost of health insurance for these groups of people without a good job like I have.

Good for you, but keep your hands out of my wallet.

BoatShoes;484911 wrote:I have heard that even Medicare's chief actuary projects that health care costs will go up close to $250 per capita. A liberal might say that's a small price to pay for 30 million more Americans to have health insurance.

K, you can pay our $40,800 yearly health insurance bill, if that's how you feel.

BoatShoes;485157 wrote:

I can live with paying more for my health insurance to lower the cost of health insurance for these groups of people without a good job like I have.

Did you miss the whole real world example of this thread? It's not lowering costs, it is merely legislating that people HAVE insurance. I don't know where people keep getting this idea of "lower costs" because it is false

LJ;485174 wrote:Did you miss the whole real world example of this thread? It's not lowering costs, it is merely legislating that people HAVE insurance. I don't know where people keep getting this idea of "lower costs" because it is false

The cost will be lower for people with lower wages at lower paying jobs. See the link I posted earlier...Overall, per capita, costs will go up.

BoatShoes;485176 wrote:The cost will be lower for people with lower wages at lower paying jobs. See the link I posted earlier...Overall, per capita, costs will go up.

Uh huh, and the real world is saying differently as the renewals for next year are coming in all over the place. My uncle has lower wages at a lower paying job and his insurance went up over $1000/year this renewal, and he got a $200 raise. Seems to be working well!

LJ;485183 wrote:Uh huh, and the real world is saying differently as the renewals for next year are coming in all over the place. My uncle has lower wages at a lower paying job and his insurance went up over $1000/year this renewal, and he got a $200 raise. Seems to be working well!

Yeah...I'm looking forward to paying higher premiums this coming January too. And with those Bush tax cuts about to expire on those eeeeeeevil rich folk, I have a hunch the eeeeeeevil rich bastard who signs my paycheck may not be in a very generous mood when my annual review hits next March.

BoatShoes;485157 wrote:
I can live with paying more for my health insurance to lower the cost of health insurance for these groups of people without a good job like I have.

The problem is that in theory this sounds like peaches and roses but in reality you aren't lowering the cost for ANYONE. As has been found, even for those who don't have it now (because they can't afford it) is going up. If someone can't afford it now, and the cost goes up, how will they afford it then?

They will end up just paying the "fines" or taxes in the health care bill instead, making them have less money and still no insurance.

believer;484612 wrote:The answer lies in a free market. You can lay blame on those eeeeeevil pharmaceutical, insurance, and medical technology companies all you want. Are they part of the blame? Certainly but without eeeeevil profits what incentive is there for these companies to continue to develop life saving drugs and medical technology? Unfortunately you are right...the American consumer/taxpayer gets stuck with the bill as usual.

You mean the same free market that has raised my premiums an average of 10% every year the past five years while at the same time reducing my coverages and increasing my deductibles? I am sure that is going to work also. The system was broke and the Republicans did not have the "Belly" (pun intended) to fix it. More of the same is not what we need.

Bigdogg;485856 wrote:You mean the same free market that has raised my premiums an average of 10% every year the past five years while at the same time reducing my coverages and increasing my deductibles? I am sure that is going to work also. The system was broke and the Republicans did not have the "Belly" (pun intended) to fix it. More of the same is not what we need.

Google "How insurance works"

And you don't have to have insurance, thanks for playing.

LJ;485174 wrote: I don't know where people keep getting this idea of "lower costs" because it is false

obama/pelosi/reid told us ...............................


change we can believe in .............................

LJ;485183 wrote:Uh huh, and the real world is saying differently as the renewals for next year are coming in all over the place. My uncle has lower wages at a lower paying job and his insurance went up over $1000/year this renewal, and he got a $200 raise. Seems to be working well!

Well, take for instance some 20 somethings who's insurance previously was too expensive for them but now they can go on their parent's insurance until they're 26...dramatically cheaper for them. Now please let me be clear, I'm not saying that this doesn't bit e for you or for your Uncle or for many others...just pointing out there are some people who definitely have cheaper access to healthcare now. A 24 year old Subway Sandwich Artist now has an avenue for cheap access to healthcare. Just sayin.

believer;485163 wrote:Good for you, but keep your hands out of my wallet.

I, nor anyone else is sticking their hands in your wallet. Your elected representatives consented on your behalf. It's how democracy works and Nov. 2 is coming very quickly and we'll see how many people didn't like what the dems did on their behalf.

BoatShoes;486051 wrote:A 24 year old Subway Sandwich Artist now has an avenue for cheap access to healthcare. Just sayin.

Just what we want, to incent a 24 year old to keep working at Subway.

believer;485152 wrote:That sounds generous and benevolent...but in my "greedy" world view if the grocery clerk, bartender, and waitress want health care benefits they should find another job or do what it takes to make it happen.

Let's suppose Believer pharmaceuticals engineered a pill of some kind that allowed anybody who took it to be as self-reliant, hard-working, motivated and ambitious as Believer. Let's imagine that this pill is cheap and readily deliverable to all children and young workers and grocery clerks, bartenders and waitresses so that they all may be motivated to leave their dead end jobs and achieve success.

Let's imagine if everyone were as hard-working and determined as yourself....Every waitress you see is living in a cheap apartment eating rice and beans while earning as many degrees as possible, studying when she gets off work, sleeping maybe 4 hours a night and only studying and working hard. Let's imagine that nobody is outworking anybody.

What then? There are only enough "good jobs" to go around; especially in an economy driven by people purchasing consumer items and goods.

The answer by conservatives is always "work harder. Hard work pays off." Well, what if everybody heeded that advice...by definition, because resources are scarce, it wouldn't pay off for some people. There are plenty of hard-working, well-meaning, ambitious people who's lives just don't turn out to where they've achieved all of their dreams and they end up working in low paying service or retail jobs...especially these days where more and more people did what Believer did...go to college and get a degree....but are finding out that these degrees are more and more worthless because more and more people believed "if I just worked hard and got an education, there'd be a good job for me that I've earned."

queencitybuckeye;486071 wrote:Just what we want, to incent a 24 year old to keep working at Subway.

Where's the incentive when that coverage runs out in two years?

BoatShoes;486074 wrote:What then? There are only enough "good jobs" to go around; especially in an economy driven by people purchasing consumer items and goods.

This is incorrect, the number of jobs is not fixed. We need to stop looking outward as opposed to inward to get rid of this wrongheaded thinking. "They" don't create jobs, "we" do.

BoatShoes;486084 wrote:Where's the incentive when that coverage runs out in two years?

The incentive traditionally has been if one has a shiity job, one strives to find something better. If I knew I was losing my insurance in two years, I'd do something about it.

Bigdogg;485856 wrote:You mean the same free market that has raised my premiums an average of 10% every year the past five years while at the same time reducing my coverages and increasing my deductibles? I am sure that is going to work also. The system was broke and the Republicans did not have the "Belly" (pun intended) to fix it. More of the same is not what we need.

It wasn't quite a free market, you couldn't get better competition by buying insurance from a Pennsylvania company if you lived in Ohio.

Boat, your example gets shot in the water when that "24 yr old Subway employee" turns 26. They are still working at Subway and now their insurance premiums are much more expensive than if they paid for it themselves as of the laws last year (Cobra or something similar).

So, unless you are in that 26 and under catagory, your health insurance costs will go up NO MATTER WHAT due to the health care bill. If you buy your own insurance now, your premiums will go up. If you can't afford health insurance now, you will either pay a higher premium than you would have had to, or you will be "fined" by the government.

It is actually screwing the people it set out to "help". Unless the said person is under 26.

BoatShoes;486074 wrote:The answer by conservatives is always "work harder. Hard work pays off." Well, what if everybody heeded that advice...by definition, because resources are scarce, it wouldn't pay off for some people. There are plenty of hard-working, well-meaning, ambitious people who's lives just don't turn out to where they've achieved all of their dreams and they end up working in low paying service or retail jobs...especially these days where more and more people did what Believer did...go to college and get a degree....but are finding out that these degrees are more and more worthless because more and more people believed "if I just worked hard and got an education, there'd be a good job for me that I've earned."

The answer by liberals is always, "No need to work hard and achieve. We'll just confiscate the labor earned by the hard worker and make the greedy bastards pay for your health care."

Resources are indeed scarce but as usual, you leftists live by the "Finite Pie Theory." The pie is only so big so we all need to suck it up and sacrifice our labor for the common good.

I see the pie as something that can be grown. And the pie can grow if you stop adding people to the government entitlement train and get off the backs of the innovators and producers.

If you convince enough people that the pie can't grow and that the only way out is to allow the government to control their lives, then the incentive to be self-sufficient, to innovate, and to be creative flies right out the door. They become stagnant and dependent.

There will always be a need for bartenders, waitresses, and retail clerks and someone, somewhere will fill those slots. But I am NOT responsible for paying their health care bill.

believer;486318 wrote:The answer by liberals is always, "No need to work hard and achieve. We'll just confiscate the labor earned by the hard worker and make the greedy bastards pay for your health care."

Resources are indeed scarce but as usual, you leftists live by the "Finite Pie Theory." The pie is only so big so we all need to suck it up and sacrifice our labor for the common good.

I see the pie as something that can be grown. And the pie can grow if you stop adding people to the government entitlement train and get off the backs of the innovators and producers.

If you convince enough people that the pie can't grow and that the only way out is to allow the government to control their lives, then the incentive to be self-sufficient, to innovate, and to be creative flies right out the door. They become stagnant and dependent.

There will always be a need for bartenders, waitresses, and retail clerks and someone, somewhere will fill those slots. But I am NOT responsible for paying their health care bill.

Outstanding reply.