Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Nanny State
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 19, 2012 at 3:23 pm #767393
JanSParticipantSmythe…are you talking about the editors? Seriously? I’d like to disagree. There are civility rules on this forum…and one rule is to not make it personal. Comment on what is said, not the person.If any posts were taken down, it’s probably because of that. We on here respect the rules of this forum. It is not political, for goodness sake.
August 19, 2012 at 3:46 pm #767394
JoBParticipanthoop
look.. this is what you get when you decide to defer the cost of health care through insurance buying pools controlled by employers..
universal health care would remove that burden from our nation’s employers
and deliver healthy employees
August 19, 2012 at 5:27 pm #767395
hooper1961Memberand how does one equitably distribute the cost JoB. people that smoke and have high BMI cost the system more and need to pay more.
cost controls?
August 19, 2012 at 11:26 pm #767396
kootchmanMemberSounds all well and good JoB except the employers who you are going to “deliver” don’t want your help. No government program ever goes silently about the business of doing whatever the were schemed up to provide. It’s human nature… more for less at someone else’s expense. It’s beginning to look like you will have more disposable income by suckling on the federal teat, taking no risks, putting no capital at risk… bty.. a house is not an asset… unless you use it to generate income… as a rental. Therein lies the crux of our problem.. we have a population with the open maw of entitlements…who can’t distinguish between and assest (income producing) and a speculative holding. Like all things.. universal healthcare absolves many from taking reasoned precautions to protect their own health. Diet, excersize being two of them. Risk adjusted premiums make people healthy.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.