Happy Birthday Mr. President

[angelfromanotherpin]

Insurance for self, spouse and children costs more than insurance for self and spouse. Only in this case it's the person having the baby who has to pay for it. In the birth control case everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is paying for it. Not that I want to bring the issue on the personal level, but I'm paying for it.

Yes, Tzor, we understand that given the choice between you spending a penny and someone else paying 50 dollars, you would choose not to spend the penny - even (or especially) if the 50 dollars was for baby food and vaccines.

We know you are a horrible person. You don't need to present us with further evidence.

[Psychic Robot]

getting bloo-bloo because tzor doesn't want to pay taxes is stupid. getting bloo-bloo because of his other ideas however is generally justified

[sabs]

Please, my Premiums go up based on the random whim of some asshole executive who needs a new Porsche. The cost of birthcontrol pills isn't going to do shit to my co-pay. I'm already paying 150 a month for JUST MYSELF.

My ex-wife's insurance is 150 a month for her and both our kids, as a counter example, with better insurance.

My co-pay is entirely based on the greed of the insurance company, and the buggery of the company I work for.

[Psychic Robot]

Please, my Premiums go up based on the random whim of some asshole executive who needs a new Porsche. The cost of birthcontrol pills isn't going to do shit to my co-pay. I'm already paying 150 a month for JUST MYSELF.

My ex-wife's insurance is 150 a month for her and both our kids, as a counter example, with better insurance.

My co-pay is entirely based on the greed of the insurance company, and the buggery of the company I work for.

liberalism.jpg

I will occasionally quotemine people from the den as evidence of how retarded liberals are and sabs you are at the top of my list. sad part is that this place is a bastion of conservatism compared to something awful. or rpg.net. at least here we don't have people talking about how facebook should be nationalized, what kind of fucked of viewpoint is that

[tzor]

Insurance for self, spouse and children costs more than insurance for self and spouse. Only in this case it's the person having the baby who has to pay for it. In the birth control case everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is paying for it. Not that I want to bring the issue on the personal level, but I'm paying for it.

Yes, Tzor, we understand that given the choice between you spending a penny and someone else paying 50 dollars, you would choose not to spend the penny - even (or especially) if the 50 dollars was for baby food and vaccines.

First of all I do want to thank you angel; I exposed myself severely in that statement and you actually went for the argument and not for the cute punch line.

But let's consider another point of view. I also am not a smoker. Do you think it's terribad that I get better rates because I smoke and other people have to pay more because they smoke? (both health and life)

Back to the original argument; we are talking about support for contraceptives with or without a copay. We are not talking about people who can't afford baby food and vaccines. I'll pay, I'll pay, but I would rather pay through taxes since this is charity and at the least (although I think this is the domain of the church) is the domain of the state, not the domain of insurance companies forced by the state. Let the state support the plight of the poor who need insurance and then if necessary, let me pay for it through taxes. But do not force the private insurance companies to force me to pay for it. At least with the state I can still vote out the guys who raised my taxes.

[DSMatticus]

Only in this case it's the person having the baby who has to pay for it. In the birth control case everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is paying for it.

Surprise, Tzor has no idea how insurance works. Insurance companies do not use your premiums to cover your expenses. If they did, it wouldn't be insurance, it would be, "here, we're going to hold onto your money for you until you get sick." The insurance company does not pay for the baby by raising your premiums; that's what they do to ease the damage, and cover future conditions the baby may have, because it's an entire new person you have to add to the plan and cover.

What insurance companies actually do is use the money of people who do not incur expenses to pay for the people who do incur expenses. Which means the less you use your insurance, the more pissed off you should be at anyone, and I mean anyone, who draws on insurance. If you are a non-smoker, you should tell smokers to go shove it up their ass. But to use lube, because if they hurt themself doing so you're the one footing the bill. If you're not having kids, you want people to draw from the pool for 10 bucks worth of condoms instead of thousands of dollars of prenatal care. Because even after the premium raise on parents, every single customer is paying a part of the bill, and it's more than they would be paying if that kid had never been.

[tzor]

Way to go DSMatticus for not reading what I wrote. I didn't even remotely consider personal expenses. Instead I commented upon a common factor in most insurance; the use of criteria for determining reasonable cost criteria. This effectively means that if you have no chance whatsoever in accuring an expense, you shouldn't be required to pay for it.

Co pay is ownership. Really, you think some rich bitch is going to sweat that $20 co pay? Remember if that person can't afford that co pay the odds are they are on Mediaid, not private insurance. So this isn't a cost thing. I have to pay more because some bitch doesn't want to pay a co pay but that bitch can't pay more because I have to pay a co pay for my peanut (life threatening) allergy? Fuck you.

[Gx1080]

Nationalized Facebook? Christ, what kind of fucked up dumbass came up with that?

[DSMatticus]

Only in this case it's the person having the baby who has to pay for it. In the birth control case everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is paying for it.

Do you remember the part where you said this?

The person having the baby is paying for the baby, but they are not the only one. The other people paying for the baby are you and every other single insurance customer. So, in the birth control case, everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is paying for it. And in the baby case, everyone who is single and doesn't even have sex is still paying for it anyway. Which means if people go out and buy condoms instead of having a baby, you are left with more money in your wallet, even if you are single and do not have sex. And are sterile.

This effectively means that if you have no chance whatsoever in accuring an expense, you shouldn't be required to pay for it.

This doesn't happen, because if it did insurance companies would have a harder time paying for those very conditions, and then the people who were at risk for those conditions would be less likely to get insurance due to its expense.

Your pay is weighted by risk, but your premiums still rise and fall with the overall expenditures your insurance company has to make. Which means the less expensive any group is, even if you are not a member of that group, the less you have to pay in the end. And using condoms is less expensive than having babies. So you have a personal financial incentive to let your insurance money buy people condoms.

[Draco_Argentum]

sad part is that this place is a bastion of conservatism compared to something awful. or rpg.net. at least here we don't have people talking about how facebook should be nationalized, what kind of fucked of viewpoint is that

If it makes you feel any better TDG style liberalism would probably involve telling people to suck a barrel of cocks when they get their social security payments.

[Koumei]

How would nationalising Facebook work? I mean, what for? What would the point be, exactly?

[sabs]

Can we nationalize facebook, and then run every single one of their servers through a giant magnet?

[Psychic Robot]

How would nationalising Facebook work? I mean, what for? What would the point be, exactly?

the argument goes that social media such as facebook have become a cornerstone of democratic movements and a key part of our lives now. facebook's ability to suppress speech as a private entity make them an enemy of this movement; ergo the government should be running things

yes there are people who seriously believe this

[sabs]

I'm a flaming liberal and proud, and those people are idiots

[Gx1080]

How would nationalising Facebook work? I mean, what for? What would the point be, exactly?

the argument goes that social media such as facebook have become a cornerstone of democratic movements and a key part of our lives now. facebook's ability to suppress speech as a private entity make them an enemy of this movement; ergo the government should be running things

yes there are people who seriously believe this

There's a typical case of psychological projection (Google it up). When people say things like that, what they meant to say is: "I want a SWAT team to go and kill anybody who disagrees with my sacred liberal dogma, Heil Obama!".

[DragonChild]

How would nationalising Facebook work? I mean, what for? What would the point be, exactly?

the argument goes that social media such as facebook have become a cornerstone of democratic movements and a key part of our lives now. facebook's ability to suppress speech as a private entity make them an enemy of this movement; ergo the government should be running things

yes there are people who seriously believe this

There's a typical case of psychological projection (Google it up). When people say things like that, what they meant to say is: "I want a SWAT team to go and kill anybody who disagrees with my sacred liberal dogma, Heil Obama!".

And this, too, is projection - especially as I've seen plenty of conservatives online who have made death threats against liberals and supported the Oslo shooter.

[Psychic Robot]

(Google it up)

shut the fuck up

[Zinegata]

You people do realize that this whole "health insurance" business is little more than a giant scam, and America would have been much better off with a direct health care system wherein people can go to an accredited public hospital and have themselves checked out for free, right?

[DSMatticus]

Shut up, you socialist bastard. America is about people losing their homes paying for 'not dying juice.' The founding fathers wanted it that way.

[tzor]

You people do realize that this whole "health insurance" business is little more than a giant scam, and America would have been much better off with a direct health care system wherein people can go to an accredited public hospital and have themselves checked out for free, right?

Go to a hospital for a "check up?" Talk about flushing dollars down the toilet.

No really, the overhead associated with a hospital is major; a clinic is all that is necessary for routine checkups (blood pressure, pulse, check your weight, throw in a blod test / urine test as well, although the later is probably the bulk of a checkup cost). Wether that should be handled by the government is another matter.

But seriously, that's not the problem with health care. There are plenty of charitable organizations that do this. Unfortunately, they don't have the resouces to cover the illegal immigrant population, never mind the legal poor people who can't get normal coverage.

I would definitely argue that some things should belong to the government; poison controll centers, emergency clinics for people with signs of illness that might not require the full power of a hospital to diagnose and treat, and so forth. Whether regular checkups should be counted in that list is debateable; getting a checkup is only half of the solution, getting that data to a primary care physician who tracks that data and can apply that data to your given situation is the most important part and that is the keystone of the entire primary care health system. Linking that to the state could result is a degregation of service.

[tzor]

Double Posted ... Mea Culpa

[Zinegata]

Shut up, you socialist bastard. America is about people losing their homes paying for 'not dying juice.' The founding fathers wanted it that way.

Medicare is an existing socialist program implemented in the most inefficient way possible because it goes through insurance companies.

I'm not a fan of socialist programs. But if you're gonna do it, do it smartly. Not through a fucking middleman who is gambling that their clients die or don't get sick to get money!

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Zine: I think DSMatticus was being facetious.

[Zinegata]

You know I am oblivious to people being facetious dammit .

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I've been told that I am as well.