"hk" wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford the
insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the degree
necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported) health
care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory health
insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or government,
into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never been a good
thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to pay
the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them, which I
doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or increased
insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But to subsidize
health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"hk" wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest & most efficient way to pay for it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums colected
from anyone who reports an income?

On 3/29/2010 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums colected
from anyone who reports an income?



Don,
Why do you care what the US does? You don't live here. Just between
you and me, you need to get your butt out of my butt, it is hard to walk.

Your buddy,
Harry Krause

"hk" wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2010 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care
insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those
who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies
to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for
it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums
colected
from anyone who reports an income?



Don,
Why do you care what the US does? You don't live here. Just between you
and me, you need to get your butt out of my butt, it is hard to walk.

Your buddy,
Harry Krause

Hi...Ditzy...or it it The Freak?
The way I look at it...... Canadians & Americans are somewhat like
cousins...part of an extended family.
I only want the best for you...as any compasonite family member would.

On 3/29/2010 11:17 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2010 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care
insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those
who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies
to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for
it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums
colected
from anyone who reports an income?



Don,
Why do you care what the US does? You don't live here. Just between you
and me, you need to get your butt out of my butt, it is hard to walk.

Your buddy,
Harry Krause

Hi...Ditzy...or it it The Freak?
The way I look at it...... Canadians& Americans are somewhat like
cousins...part of an extended family.
I only want the best for you...as any compasonite family member would.




Don,
You are our ugly step sister, now go back to your room.

On 29/03/2010 9:17 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2010 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care
insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those
who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies
to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for
it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums
colected
from anyone who reports an income?



Don,
Why do you care what the US does? You don't live here. Just between you
and me, you need to get your butt out of my butt, it is hard to walk.

Your buddy,
Harry Krause

Hi...Ditzy...or it it The Freak?
The way I look at it...... Canadians& Americans are somewhat like
cousins...part of an extended family.
I only want the best for you...as any compasonite family member would.

HK doesn't get it. Fact is most Canadians don't speak french and don't
hate the USA.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

On 3/29/10 10:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums colected
from anyone who reports an income?




I stated previously I see no purpose served by health insurance
companies, but we're stuck with them for a while longer.

--
Conservatives - just pretend Obama's health care legislation is another
unnecessary war and you'll feel better about it.

On 29/03/2010 8:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums colected
from anyone who reports an income?

This company protected the people they service by preventing fraud.

Get over it. Or you pay for it and don't be a liberal loser looking for
other peoples money. Didn't see liberals out there providing the money
for the expensive operation. Yep, liberals just envy and greed for
other peoples money. Typical.

The blame for this is 100% on the parents. End of story. They do need
government to manage their lives but don't pass the costs and crap to
honest people. Make these people live right, and make them slaves if
they can't manage their lives better.


--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 29/03/2010 8:08 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
m...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care
insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford
the insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the
degree necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported)
health care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory
health insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or
government, into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never
been a good thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those
who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to
pay the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them,
which I doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or
increased insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But
to subsidize health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

I agree that you should kick those parasitic health insurance companies
to
the curb and have a government supplied universal health care system.
The question is...what's the fairest& most efficient way to pay for
it... a
national sales tax..... an increase in income tax.... or premiums
colected
from anyone who reports an income?

This company protected the people they service by preventing fraud.


Yeah, a gravely ill baby is fraud. Got it.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:12:11 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"hk" wrote in message
om...

I think " necessary health care" and "subsidized health care insurance"
are
two different things.

Eisboch



No "other words" are needed. I believe health insurance or a national
health plan should be mandatory, and if you legitimately cannot afford the
insurance, it should be subsidized for you and your family to the degree
necessary.


The hang-up I still have is the difference between a mandatory health
insurance program and the right to free or subsidized (tax supported) health
care for life threatening or disabling conditions. Mandatory health
insurance puts another massive layer of bureaucracy, private or government,
into the mix. When it comes to getting care, that has never been a good
thing.

A mandatory health insurance law is in effect here in MA. For those who
can't afford the subsidized insurance (state programs) it is cheaper to pay
the fine (assuming the state even enforces the collection of them, which I
doubt.)

Tough call. I guess my attitude is that those of us that are fortunate
enough to be able to afford decent health insurance also have a moral
obligation to assist those who need medical care (though a tax or increased
insurance premium) for those who cannot afford insurance. But to subsidize
health *insurance* programs is another matter.

Eisboch

Are you suggesting that those that can afford it pay retail, but those
who need subsidized care get it through some other method?

Not sure I understand.