4 ms·

>and I don't want to pay for the bad mistakes of others When some moron nail guns a board to his head and goes to the ER you are still paying for that. What y

>and I don't want to pay for the bad mistakes of others When some moron nail guns a board to his head and goes to the ER you are still paying for that. What you are now not paying for is people fighting cancer, MS, AIDs, and other long term and terminal diseases. What made you believe that this legislation would enable you to avoid 'paying for the bad mistakes of others'?

Overtonwindow 9y ago
Technically, since you apparently missed my point by writing a post on pure emotion, If I don't have to buy insurance then I'm not forced to pay for insurance and thus my money does not go towards someone who drinks to excess, smokes cigarettes, or engages in deliberate behavior that will likely increase their chances of going to the hospital.
- unprepare 9y ago
  > my money does not go towards someone who drinks to excess except that you absolutely will be paying for them not seeing a doctor and waiting until they have to go to the emergency room. People who drink in excess go to the ER and get their stomachs pumped - thats paid for by the taxpayers if the person doesnt have insurance. My point was exactly that - you cannot avoid paying for these emergency rooms visits by changing how insurance works, the way to pay less for these emergency room visits is to decrease them by promoting more holistic care - and how does the government promote things? by providing economic incentives in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, etc. I guess you missed my point by responding with pure emotion...
  - Overtonwindow 9y ago
    Again slow down, think carefully and try to stay rational. You'll never have universal health care or coverage. Someone had to pay for it. You can't force people at the end of a bayonet to pay for the mistakes of others. Well, perhaps in your socialist dream world. Keep voting for Bernie and maybe someday you'll grow up.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]

Overtonwindow 9y ago

Technically, since you apparently missed my point by writing a post on pure emotion, If I don't have to buy insurance then I'm not forced to pay for insurance and thus my money does not go towards someone who drinks to excess, smokes cigarettes, or engages in deliberate behavior that will likely increase their chances of going to the hospital.

unprepare 9y ago
> my money does not go towards someone who drinks to excess except that you absolutely will be paying for them not seeing a doctor and waiting until they have to go to the emergency room. People who drink in excess go to the ER and get their stomachs pumped - thats paid for by the taxpayers if the person doesnt have insurance. My point was exactly that - you cannot avoid paying for these emergency rooms visits by changing how insurance works, the way to pay less for these emergency room visits is to decrease them by promoting more holistic care - and how does the government promote things? by providing economic incentives in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, etc. I guess you missed my point by responding with pure emotion...
- Overtonwindow 9y ago
  Again slow down, think carefully and try to stay rational. You'll never have universal health care or coverage. Someone had to pay for it. You can't force people at the end of a bayonet to pay for the mistakes of others. Well, perhaps in your socialist dream world. Keep voting for Bernie and maybe someday you'll grow up.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]