Gas is $10 a gallon and a carton of cigarettes is $100.

We currently have tax rates from 0-35%

France 10-48%
Germany 15-45%
Italy 23-43%
Spain 15-45%
Austria 21-50%

So I guess if you start taxing the poor, we could afford it.

__________________

Liberals believe it is okay to kill babies, but not terrorists.

democrats believe it is okay to taser a 10 year old if this stance will get their guy elected.

Oh come on, now you are a comedian. The federal reserve is good for society but it is NOT BAD for society if low-income people are allowed to die for lack of health insurance! Too funny.... It is kind of like saying, " I am doing fine, fit as a fiddle, the system is working great, it is just that my liver is necrotic- I am not about to let that spoil my life!"

And yet you don't mind that one quarter of your health care dollars are paying the parasites of the system - paper pushers, C.E.O. salaries and investors. Sounds like a warped ideology, to me.

It is not bad for society if someone dies for a reason that is their fault. They could have health insurance if they were willing to pay for it. They choose not to, even though they could have the money if they were willing to cut luxury spending and work harder or possibly get a better education. It is bad for society if the government tries to implement socialized medicine where the rich pay for the poor.

I care for the cheapest coverage that meets my needs. Unless the government wants to run a revenue positive, minimum profit health insurance department, then private insurance is the cheapest thing that still provides the benefits a person needs. When the government tries to run a program off of tax dollars alone, it becomes wasteful, inefficient, and corrupt, which in turn costs people more and lowers the level of benefits that they receive.

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

I very rarely deal with absolutes, but this is one of the rare cases I will.

Physically disabled? Should be better off working.
Mentally disabled? Should be better off working.
Dying? Should be better off working.

I am not saying any of these groups should not receive assistance if they don't work, I just don't think their standard of living should go down if they do decide to work.

Nothing is stopping them from purchasing health insurance.

I think the point White Fox is trying to get at, and forgive me if i am wrong... but it's not so much that we don't want everyone to be able to recieve medical treatment when needed, but we just don't trust the government to run it. They screw up every single thing they get their hands on, and the last thing we need is them blowing tax payer dollars on a new program.

Our system isn't perfect, but if you are under the impression that Uncle Sam is going to do a better job you are dreadfully mistaken.

__________________

That's mostly my point, but there can be an exception for the people that love to scream at CEOs and corporations. See, the reason that government programs fail is because they don't have the incentive to use their money wisely, the reason being that they rely on using taxpayers money and they have no responsibility to ensure that their spending is justified economically. If a government department was set up to sell health insurance while relying on sales to fund its existence (being revenue positive, in other words) then it would not fail for the same reasons that other government programs do. However, then one must ask why the government should even attempt to do this. Companies in a free market make the minimum amount, or very near the minimum amount, of profit needed to make them economically viable. If the government was required to do the same, then it would cost about the same and there would be absolutely no benefit to anyone.

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

I understand what you are trying to get at here, but you are overlooking some major differences in the two scenarios you outlined above.

1) In the first case, all employees are paying the same amount into the system for an identical level of coverage. In the second case, since not all taxpayers pay the same amount of tax, they are paying different amounts for an identical level of coverage.

2) In the first case, you can choose your level of coverage. Pay more in premiums, get better coverage (i.e. smaller deductibles). In the second case, there would be no choice. If you want better coverage, you would have to supplement it with private insurance.

3) In the first case, you are not covered if you choose not to enroll in the plan and don't pay your premium. In the second case, you are still covered even if you don't pay any taxes. Not everyone in the country pays taxes.

Insurance is a funny service. It is the coverage you are buying, not the medical procedure you may need. Don't confuse the two. In the first case, everyone is paying the same amount for the same coverage, so no free lunches. In the second case, not everyone pays the same amount (some don't pay at all) for the same level of coverage. So there are expensive lunches, cheap lunches, and even free lunches.

I am not trying to argue for or against national healthcare here. I am just trying to point out differences between privately funded and publicly funded healthcare.

Source
Of course, since you're a democrat, you will probably refuse to believe anything that doesn't fit your agenda. That's ok, though. You're just falling in line with the other sheep.

__________________
"I should be calling collect from jail for the things I commit each night in my head" - D. Mustaine.

His next post he'll tell you that your source is "obviously bias" and can't be trusted.

__________________