I think there should be a possibility to buy into medicare for (I'm
throwing out a random number here) 10% of your salary. It would mean
that those people would have motivation to work, since they'd still
get 90% of their salary. It would also force insurance prices
you haven't been keeping tabs on where taxes are at in, say, Switzerland or Scandinavia, have you?
Want to lose 60, 80% of your paycheck? Be my guest...
"If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain." -- misattributed to Winston Churchill
Mon May 24 2010 09:32:24 PM EDT from LoanShark @ UncensoredI think there should be a possibility to buy into medicare for (I'm
throwing out a random number here) 10% of your salary. It would mean
that those people would have motivation to work, since they'd still
get 90% of their salary. It would also force insurance prices
you haven't been keeping tabs on where taxes are at in, say, Switzerland or Scandinavia, have you?
Want to lose 60, 80% of your paycheck? Be my guest...
First, I live in a country with a very good socialized medicine system and a very very high military budget and a segment of the population which doesn't work "for religious reasons" and is basically supported by us and our taxes are around 50% which isn't that much more than your taxes are now... at least we have medical care for the money we pay.
Second, I believe that a fair number of people who are currently paying nothing and getting service would start paying SOMETHING for that service in my scenario, which means that the average worker bee will be paying less to support others.
Second, I believe that a fair number of people who are currently
Believe what you want to (I know you will) but if you look at people who pay nothing, they got really adept at paying nothing for a reason. And they're gonna try hard and adapt to stay that way. Point: we are now "giving them enough subsidies." That doesn't sound to me like they're paying more than they were.
It's been suggested that one vote per citizen should be replaced by one vote per tax dollar paid, since taxpayers should decide how their tax dollars are being spent.
Tue May 25 2010 11:10:29 PM EDT from LoanShark @ UncensoredSecond, I believe that a fair number of people who are currently
Believe what you want to (I know you will) but if you look at people who pay nothing, they got really adept at paying nothing for a reason. And they're gonna try hard and adapt to stay that way. Point: we are now "giving them enough subsidies." That doesn't sound to me like they're paying more than they were.
ok. I just know one specific person, who you know as well, who is probably not capable of working full-time. If he starts working part-time, he loses medicare. Therefore, he doesn't work, makes nothing and is 100% a drain on the system.
Me, on the other hand - I can't work full-time either, b/c of my fibromyalgia. I work very part-time. I make about $500 a month. I pay something into the healthcare system. I've worked pretty much constantly since I got sick because I've always been better off working than not. A system where you're better off not working than working is BAD for everyone.
part-time, he loses medicare. Therefore, he doesn't work, makes
nothing and is 100% a drain on the system.
Y'know, I think I know who you mean. Apparently a fairly smart guy who has his head in the clouds. And is not particularly motivated. So if we're talking about the same guy, then he's probably gone back to living with mommy full time. That's her decision.
Tue May 25 2010 11:39:31 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ UncensoredAnd furthermore, they will continue to "vote themselves money from the public coffers." I think it was Benjamin Franklin who first pointed out the folly of that.
Wed May 26 2010 12:04:25 PM EDT from Peter Pulse @ UncensoredI can guess who you mean, though my tired brain can't remember his name just now. It's been a long time... Anyway, there's being disabled.. then there's just being uncomfortable.
I suspect that between his depression and his host of physical problems, he's disabled. He's never managed to hold down a full-time job for any length of time. Despite genius level IQ, he barely made it out of high school.
But leaving the specific case aside, the fact is that a person can end up better off not working at all than working part-time, because of how the medicare system is currently constructed.
That's a huge, gargantuan flaw.
Imaginary physical problems seem quite possible
BTW - I've been looking into health insurance for Eli and I - we want a kid next year, and Eli would like to be a stay-at-home mom, which means going off the insurance she currently has. Since the company I work for has only five people, it means we have no group insurance plan. A halfway decent plan, for just the two of us, is about 50% of what I make, add a third and I'm pretty sure I've already pissed away 80% of what I'll make.
Wed May 26 2010 04:11:50 PM EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored
Imaginary physical problems seem quite possible
some problems are exaggerated, some are not. I suspect that if he really pushed, he might be able to work an 8 hour day with very little overtime, if he didn't have a bad commute. I suspect that he doesn't believe that he can do that.
Personally, I could do that at this point, but I wouldn't have anything left for my kids... which creates a whole mess for me... :(
AS a Union member I would like to object to that comment! Sadly, I can't disagree.
The latest thing my union has done....they've mismanaged the pension plan for years. It has been so badly mismanaged the feds caught it. So we had a vote. We are now taking money the employers are putting in our 401(k) accounts and giving it to the pension plan. So...if the plan has been mismanaged for years, why give them more money to mismanage?
I could not get anyone to listen. I was on the losing side of course, 90% voted to give them the money.
I hold a very dim view on unions.
They served a good purpose long ago. But that purpose is, for the most part, done. Now, they exploit both the workers and the managers to lace their own pockets with your efforts. So I've come to believe, anyway.
But then, I was raised in North Carolina, which have laws in place that make unions relatively scarce.
My dad, for quite a while, did the negotionations between Northern Telecom (before they become Nortel and royally screwed themselves over), and was pretty close to being a union buster. There were time where he nearly got into fisticuffs with reps from the Communications Workers of America - but there were others he quite liked, and quite respected; some of them were very good negotioators and did very well for their clients, some did not. I think, Unions, like companies, share this. But Unions are consolidated a lot over the years, which means it far easier to group them into one giant whole.