Hiati

On 1/26/2010 12:39 PM, Tom K wrote:
wrote in message
...
Yes there are. You asked for figures. I gave them to you, and you spit
them out......just like ALL the people I know who are conservatives AND
HAVE INSURANCE CONNECTED WITH THEIR JOBS. If you lost your job and your
insurance, I'm betting your attitude would quickly change. It's sheer
selfishness on your part, but you will never see it, sadly.


Well... DUH....

But until then, it's easy to spout the Palin/Limbaugh/Mark Sanford
rhetoric...

One of my friends at work was the Republican Mayor of his town a few years
ago... but suddenly when he lost his job AND his subsidized medical
insurance, he became VERY interested in the Democrat's healthcare reform (he
went as far as saying he wanted to see congress approve the Govt. Option...
sacrilege for a working Republican... but then NOW he's out of work and sees
it from the other side...)



You don't get it. I never said there were people who didn't truly need
help. I'm just trying to get you blind folks to admit that there are a
lot of people out there who could afford insurance, but won't pay for it
because they're selfish, stupid, whatever name you want to give them.
Then, when they suddenly need it, they have a fit because they can't
afford the bill and they might lose all their material things.

Marsha

"MAS" wrote in message ...

You don't get it. I never said there were people who didn't truly need
help. I'm just trying to get you blind folks to admit that there are a
lot of people out there who could afford insurance, but won't pay for it
because they're selfish, stupid, whatever name you want to give them.
Then, when they suddenly need it, they have a fit because they can't
afford the bill and they might lose all their material things.

Marsha

Making everyone have insurance would solve that problem, then, wouldn't it?
And if people can't afford it you give them credits for it. But those who
can afford it but choose not to, would have no choice.

That seems to solve your issue.

--Tom

On Jan 26, 7:36*pm, "Tom K" wrote:
"MAS" wrote in ....

You don't get it. *I never said there were people who didn't truly need
help. *I'm just trying to get you blind folks to admit that there are a
lot of people out there who could afford insurance, but won't pay for it
because they're selfish, stupid, whatever name you want to give them.
Then, when they suddenly need it, they have a fit because they can't
afford the bill and they might lose all their material things.

Marsha

Making everyone have insurance would solve that problem, then, wouldn't it?
And if people can't afford it you give them credits for it. *But those who
can afford it but choose not to, would have no choice.

That seems to solve your issue.

--Tom

Tom do you believe in the nanny state ?

On 1/26/2010 7:36 PM, Tom K wrote:
wrote in message ...

You don't get it. I never said there were people who didn't truly need
help. I'm just trying to get you blind folks to admit that there are a
lot of people out there who could afford insurance, but won't pay for it
because they're selfish, stupid, whatever name you want to give them.
Then, when they suddenly need it, they have a fit because they can't
afford the bill and they might lose all their material things.

Marsha

Making everyone have insurance would solve that problem, then, wouldn't it?
And if people can't afford it you give them credits for it. But those who
can afford it but choose not to, would have no choice.

That seems to solve your issue.

--Tom



Think about that - government forcing people to buy insurance. Are they
also going to start forcing people to eat healthy and exercise? You
don't fix a problem by bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If
someone can afford insurance, but doesn't get it because they want to
take their chances, why does everyone else have to pay for their
foolishness? There are several options out there to help reduce the
cost of health care, but liberals have their own agenda and none of them
are listening. Would government officials would exempt themselves from
national insurance?

Marsha

Think about that - government forcing people to buy insurance. Are they
also going to start forcing people to eat healthy and exercise? You don't
fix a problem by bringing everyone down to the lowest level.

That's just plain stupid. We require drivers in our state to have
insurance. This is no different.

In New Jersey, people without insurance just show up at hospitals. And they
have to take care of them. Force those people to have insurance and it will
bring hospital prices for the rest of us down.

And why is New Jersey medical insurance 2X the price of Pennsylvania
insurance? You might fix those kinds of problems with health care reform.


If someone can afford insurance, but doesn't get it because they want to
take their chances, why does everyone else have to pay for their
foolishness?

Who said the rest of us have to help them? NOBODY. Make them pay it
themselves or they get fined.

It's the people without Medical insurance because they're out of work, or
their company doesn't offer it, or because they don't make enough to afford
it, that I'm worried about.

There are several options out there to help reduce the cost of health
care, but liberals have their own agenda and none of them are listening.
Would government officials would exempt themselves from national
insurance?
Marsha

What are you talking about? Government officials ALREADY have insurance
from the Federal Govt. They've got the best plan of all. And they're
WORKING. It's only the poor schlubbs who lost their jobs because of the
lousy jobs that our government officials have done the past 30 years to keep
jobs in America that need a reasonably priced national plan.. Or people who
can't find any jobs other than for minimum wage at places like at WalMart
where they offer no medical benefits to many of their employees. It's
people like that who are being screwed big time, who need help with medical
coverage.

You don't seem to care about the people who lost their jobs, or people who
have jobs but no medical coverage, because YOU'RE A WORKING RIGHT-WINGER
WITH MEDICAL INSURANCE, with your own agenda.

You twist everyone's words instead of addressing how we get coverage for
people who can't afford it... but in the end, it comes out. The image you
portray (at least to many of us) is simple: You're covered.... so screw
everyone else. Compassion for those less fortunate seems beyond you. And
yet you work in a hospital... seems rather ironic.

--Tom

"Mr Met 06" wrote in message
...
On Jan 26, 7:36 pm, "Tom K" wrote:
"MAS" wrote in ...

You don't get it. I never said there were people who didn't truly need
help. I'm just trying to get you blind folks to admit that there are a
lot of people out there who could afford insurance, but won't pay for it
because they're selfish, stupid, whatever name you want to give them.
Then, when they suddenly need it, they have a fit because they can't
afford the bill and they might lose all their material things.

Marsha

Making everyone have insurance would solve that problem, then, wouldn't
it?
And if people can't afford it you give them credits for it. But those who
can afford it but choose not to, would have no choice.

That seems to solve your issue.

--Tom

Tom do you believe in the nanny state ?



What's a nanny state?

You don't seem to care about the people who lost their jobs, or people who
have jobs but no medical coverage, because YOU'RE A WORKING RIGHT-WINGER
WITH MEDICAL INSURANCE, with your own agenda.

Well, Tom, as you so aptly put it, DUH!

You twist everyone's words instead of addressing how we get coverage for
people who can't afford it... but in the end, it comes out. The image you
portray (at least to many of us) is simple: You're covered.... so screw
everyone else. Compassion for those less fortunate seems beyond you. And
yet you work in a hospital... seems rather ironic.

--Tom

I see this as job burn-out. Sometimes in these little microcosm-type
situations, the workers starting projecting "everyone" onto these
situations. "Everyone I see comes in without insurance who could have it."
There is a marked lack of compassion for all those thousands and thousands
of people they don't see or refuse to treat or who just don't bother to come
in for treatment who have gotten screwed by the insurance they did have
which won't cover this or won't cover that, and who just can't afford
insurance and can't get coverage anywhere else. I personally know several
people in this situation. To top it off, in many depressed states (can you
say Michigan?) employees are being asked to pay for more and more of their
coverage while taking huge pay cuts. But of course, we don't need a
government option....nosiree......because MARSHA has coverage. Also Marsha
seems really angry and can't see beyond her own nose. It's more important
that I top-posted than that people don't have insurance and are dying and
losing their homes.

On 1/26/2010 9:17 PM, Tom K wrote:
You don't seem to care about the people who lost their jobs, or people who
have jobs but no medical coverage, because YOU'RE A WORKING RIGHT-WINGER
WITH MEDICAL INSURANCE, with your own agenda.

You twist everyone's words instead of addressing how we get coverage for
people who can't afford it... but in the end, it comes out. The image you
portray (at least to many of us) is simple: You're covered.... so screw
everyone else. Compassion for those less fortunate seems beyond you. And
yet you work in a hospital... seems rather ironic.

--Tom


I've already said that there are people who genuinely need help, but
you're not listening. That's all you want to focus on. And contrary to
what a lot on here seem to think, I was without insurance at one time,
through no fault of my own. Insurance is not a right, and you can't
make everything seem like a right just to please everyone. Compassion
is out there, too - it's just that people are tired of giving and giving
and giving to those who could help themselves but won't. This is the
only group I'm referring to, but you can't seem to see that. I think
I'm done with this conversation. If you want a nanny state where
government takes everyone under their wing, which is not what we were
founded on, then move to Canada or England or wherever else you think
they have it so much better. Good luck.

Marsha

In article ,
"Tom K" wrote:


Making everyone have insurance would solve that problem, then, wouldn't it?
And if people can't afford it you give them credits for it. But those who
can afford it but choose not to, would have no choice.

The constitutionality of that possibility is very much up in the air.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

Clint, Royal Carribean International Cruise Line owns an island named
Labadee off the coast of Haiti that is used on some of their cruises.
Right now they have given permission to the U. S. to unload supplies
there for the earthquake victims.