We've got extremes, right? Would you accept living in a country where only those could afford to pay get medical care? I'm not sure that I can accept that, especially when we're realistically looking at a medical cost situation without some form of assistance where 95% or more of the retirees won't be able to pay for medical care out of pocket because they're not muti-millionares.Vol Texan wrote: Sure, this has been an enjoyable read, but that's where you lost my interest. I'm NOT willing to accept any socialist aspects.
Like TAM, I'm through with anyone who tries to convince me of the benefits of this travesty of a law. It's like trying to convince me that getting shot in the heart (and dying fast) is better than getting shot in the arm (and bleeding to death more slowly), because the pain is over quicker.
So we go back to the old system. That's wealth redistribution too. It's just hidden, which seems to make it more palatable. We don't deny anyone medical care in emergency situations, so those that can't afford care go to the emergency room. You, me and the rest of the taxpayers pick up those tabs through $10 aspirins and massive inflation of costs on those that can pay. I'd wager that most emergency room visits that are incurred without insurance don't pay out... Someone is covering it... You and me.
Medicaid: It's a form of wealth redistribution. Those who have pay for have-nots. Taxpayers can't opt out.
Medicare: "Social insurance". Again, we can't opt out (at least not most of us)... We all pay in. Seems like this should be much more offensive than Obamacare, as you don't get a choice at all. I'm not allowed to manage my money effectively and provide for the costs of private health insurance when I'm older. Additionally, if I'm doing really well, I have to pay even more than everyone else!
Sure seems to me like we've already accepted the socialist aspects... and we have for decades.
Realistically, we've got to decide on two things:
1) What do we do with people who can't afford to pay for care - particularly the poor and those that are older? I say those that are older because most Americans can't afford to retire... And it's getting worse, not better.
2) We have to head-off the current and pre-Obmacare course of heath care costs. I think Obamacare is a band-aid, that is, it was designed under the theory that if healthy people pay more, sick people won't have to pay as much... Course, it remains to be proven that it can even work in that aspect.
The current path.. And the one before Obamacare will not sustain.
I'm getting edumacated here.. I thought that if you ran your own business and there was no withholding, you were required to pay estimated taxes?The Annoyed Man wrote:CB, because of how I do business, I file yearly like everyone else, except that for the past 5 years or so, I have filed an extension in April, and wrap it up during the first week of October.
IE: http://www.irs.gov/irspup/Businesses/Sm ... ated-Taxes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;