Hawaii ends Universal Child Care

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: darincm

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Social medicine = fail.

Works well up here in Canada, and please dont spout propaganda about not being able to choose your own doctor or long wait times cause thats all bs

It doesn't work well up there. Plus, the Canadian health care system is a horrific human rights violation. It's like bragging about Guantanamo.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Or they understand you don't need a military if you aren't in the habit of dropping bombs on brown people.

*yawn*. What world do you live in? One with rainbows and butterflies and where everyone has a puppy?

Your lack of knowledge about foreign policy was just exposed.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

on the contrary, it should work great in one state as long as there aren't direct taxes on businesses because it should lower their cost as now they don't feel obliged to provide a medical insurance benefit. it should attract business. and people go where the jobs are. out caleeforneyway, so to speak.

That's a good point, but one of the other problems is that it might encourage people who are sick and in need of health care to move into the state. It could operate to push the people who pay more into the system than what they get out of it to leave while bringing in needy people. You have a good point about how it might work better if businesses weren't taxed, but that would also just serve to chase out the people who would end up with much higher taxes.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: StormRider

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Atheus
I know American politics is a completely different world to that in which I live, and there are many things I don't understand about it, but how could anyone be against healthcare for children? It just seems a completely barbaric and horrible thing to say for anyone in this corner of the planet. Even if you believe poor people should simply be allowed to die if they get ill, which I don't agree with but can accept as a valid opinion, why should the same apply to their children? It's not their fault who their parents are...

At some point common sense has to overcome emotions.

WHY is it MY job to pay for YOUR children? If you extend that logic, why dont I pay your rent too, that way the child has a place to live? And your food, and hell maybe you can just do nothing but screw and I'll pay for everything.

Well, we can extend that logic the other way. Why should I pay for the roads you use? Maybe we can create a society where all of us are nickeled and dimed to death. We can create cars that know which roads you use every day and charge you accordingly. If you enter a building, you are charged a fee for using it. If you drink from a water fountain you are charged for it. If you use a restroom you are charged for it.

The pricing model of roads, schools, etc is different than that of healthcare. There's no economies of scale in healthcare, and its not a public good.

Why wouldn't health care scale, because other countries seem to manage it fine. Instead of sending the cash to a health insurance company, the money is sent a central company that does it instead, and cuts down on all the paperwork and inefficiency in the healthcare market.
Also health care not being a public good is insane. How could not improving the health of the entire nation and improving the quality of life not be a public good?

Healthcare is rival and excludable...there's no common resource.

Me driving on the roads doesn't 'occupy' the road are prevent you from doing it (outside of traffic jams and such). A road for 10 people is essentially the same as a road for 1 person, but providing healthcare for 10 people requires close to 10x the resources of providing healthcare to 1 person.

It's not working fine in other nations; they simply ration it differently and are still facing their own budget problems.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Solution: stop spending $10 billion/month in Iraq so we can help our children here at home.

That's non-sense. I can't believe you're giving up on freedom and letting the terrorists win.

How many jobs are created by the Iraq war?

A MUCH better question is how may jobs in the US are created by the Iraq war? I bet you lots of stuff is bought from China. And many jobs are filled by foreigners in Iraq.

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper


I don't know if I'd want to use Hawaii as an example of what might happen in other states since Hawaii has its own unique problems (such as an insane cost for land and thus an insane cost of living).

on the contrary, it should work great in one state as long as there aren't direct taxes on businesses because it should lower their cost as now they don't feel obliged to provide a medical insurance benefit. it should attract business. and people go where the jobs are. out caleeforneyway, so to speak.

I've 5 family members in the Boston area and the horror tales they tell about the newly mandated health insurance would turn anyone against a government run health program.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

well what did they think was going to happen?

Welcome to the brilliant leaders within our govt.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Atheus
I know American politics is a completely different world to that in which I live, and there are many things I don't understand about it, but how could anyone be against healthcare for children? It just seems a completely barbaric and horrible thing to say for anyone in this corner of the planet. Even if you believe poor people should simply be allowed to die if they get ill, which I don't agree with but can accept as a valid opinion, why should the same apply to their children? It's not their fault who their parents are...

At some point common sense has to overcome emotions.

WHY is it MY job to pay for YOUR children? If you extend that logic, why dont I pay your rent too, that way the child has a place to live? And your food, and hell maybe you can just do nothing but screw and I'll pay for everything.

So you don't support public school then?

Thats a fine line.

I dont support public schools for people who dont have children. I have 3 kids. I dont see why on earth you should be required to pay for something you dont use (Assuming you dont have children). The burden of financial support for schools should fall to me and me alone as I am the one with the children!

Its not a fine line.

You just said you don't think those with kids should have any of their taxes fund public school. I can only imagine how our country would be today if such an idea were implemented.

You either have no idea what I said, or you mistyped.
I believe people with children should carry the burden of educational expenses.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Or they understand you don't need a military if you aren't in the habit of dropping bombs on brown people.

*yawn*. What world do you live in? One with rainbows and butterflies and where everyone has a puppy?

Your lack of knowledge about foreign policy was just exposed.

Do tell, I wish to learn from the great Ocguy31, I'm sure you have more then talking points, despite all evidence to contrary.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

People without children benefit by living in a society of educated citizens who get better jobs as a result and therefore these citizens pay more taxes to pay for more schools, roads, libraries etc. etc....

Plus there's always the fact that someone else probably paid for their public education.

Our crime and welfare stats do not support you ideas of being better off with publicly funded education.

Its another wet dream that never pans our in this thing called the real world. It sounds good, hell it looks good on paper. In practice it falls flat on its ass just like "helping" the poor and "for the children".

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Gov. Linda Lingle's administration cited budget shortfalls and other available health care options for eliminating funding for the program. A state official said families were dropping private coverage so their children would be eligible for the subsidized plan.

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

Well obviously. Idiots. :roll:

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Solution: stop spending $10 billion/month in Iraq so we can help our children here at home.

Awesome, so your argument is that a federal program will be a huge success when a state program fails. Logic++

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
A small group of islands in the Pacific != the USA

Something stateside

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: darincm

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Social medicine = fail.

Works well up here in Canada, and please dont spout propaganda about not being able to choose your own doctor or long wait times cause thats all bs

Uh, not so well. Do you actually know anybody who works in healthcare up there? I know several. Even physicians in Canada I've spoken to cannot believe how quickly my access to health care is down in the US. The real propaganda is, imo, in Canada; it's like people have just completely stopped questioning the merit of the canada health act, have no problem with it making private care in most cases actually illegal. The debate is over, people scorned for questioning it.

 

[techs]

Well it works pretty well in Germany.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ElFenix

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

well what did they think was going to happen?

Exactly!!!

How long until Mass gives up on its program??

Mass is different, here they fine and punish you if you can afford it, very few people who work and make a living here get free coverage, rather they are forced to buy cheaper yet still spendy plans with horrible coverage.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: techs
Which is why we need UNIVERSAL health care.
Gotta love it when the party of 'moral majority' gloats over dead babies.

Universal healthcare will come at the cost of massive taxation, for everyone, look at canada, everything I have read about their system sucks.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: umbrella39
A small group of islands in the Pacific != the USA

Something stateside

The point I was trying to make is that you can't tell how a program like this will work based on the results of individual State efforts in the past. I am not a big advocate of UHD anyhow.

Hell, I would be happy if my premiums go down a little for health care, prescription meds, and be able to get more than $1000 a year worth of dental work. I have the best dental U of M offers and after having to get a root canal, post core, and crown this year, I had to dig out $650 over and above what my insurance paid. I have another tooth rearing its ugly head and I can't do jack shit about it until the new benefit year. Sucks.