Please learn how think or to read what is written. I didn't claim you are looking for "a free lunch" moron , only that you ardently believe in them. Realistically that makes you just as bad if not more dangerous than the person only looking out for personal gain at the expense of "others".
Your response doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It's a direct threat to your prosperity. A friend of mine was faced with 26% increase in his premiums. One person I know was lucky enough to only have 16%. What's your percentage increase each and every year? 8%? 10%?
My plans, which I have posted many times in the last year, requires EVERYBODY to pay more in taxes for health care security. (Of course, assuming employers add back their current health care costs to the employee paychecks, MOST will still see a net cash flow GAIN.) Furthermore, the tax increases that I propose continue the progressive tax rate structure that we currently have and we have the most fairest tax structure that can be devised. The more you make, the greater the your tax percentage. We do agree on one thing: there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The government will confiscate the fruits of your labour, whether you`re represented or not. A private insurance company in a free market, that does not provide what you`re demanding, will lose your business to someone who offer a better product!
Do they have healthy lifestyles? The europeeans, canadians and japanese are waiting/dying in line! Why should health insurance be attached to employment, why not the person in question? Why should health insurance be attached to employment, why not the person in question? Why have they entered an agreement that`s not watertight?
What`s everybody`s best interest? Private insurance could sell you the insurance you want/need(free market), if the government would let them/you make that deal. Is that a joke, what has the government ever delivered as promised? I would prefer to enter into an agrement both I/the insurance company were satisfied with, and I would prefer to have a government that made sure that that agreement was uphold by both parties(free market).
Are there no limits, can everyone get more than they produce, there has to be a balance, one can`t get more than one produces/receives in charity. Well somone will be getting more than they pay for tomorrow, and it will not be charity, but extortion. Public schooling, roads, healthcare are all mediocre at best. It`s a ponzi scheme, future generations, that are not even born yet, will be forced to pay.
Are anyone allowed to buy a private insurance instead? Why should people pay more for goods/services, if they produce more goods/services? You think there should be a free lunch for some people, right? "An interview on the US health care crisis with Dr. Mary Ruwart, http://www.ruwart.com. Mary J. Ruwart, Ph.D. is a former pharmaceutical research scientist and Assistant Professor of Surgery. She has worked extensively with the disadvantaged in low-income housing and was a contender for the 1992 Libertarian Party Vice-Presidential nomination. Her scientific, political, and community activities have been profiled in several prestigious biographical works, including American Men and Women of Sciences, World's Who's Who of Women, International Leaders in Achievement, and Community Leaders of America" Link
Remember the paradigm for anything "public" is the public restroom. A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization. Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis: U.S. 65% England 46% Canada 42% Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months: U.S. 93% England 15% Canada 43% Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months: U.S. 90% England 15% Canada 43% Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month: U.S. 77% England 40% Canada 43% Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people: U.S. 71 England 14 Canada 18 Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health": U.S. 12% England 2% Canada 6%
Your statistics are false. <b>"In a report on worldwide cancer survival rates, Canada ranked near the top of the 31 countries studied with an estimate five-year survival rate of 82.5 per cent."</b> http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080716/cancer_statistics_080716/20080716/