Oh Great! Govt Healthcare

[quote]Tancredi wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Rituximab was banned due to dangerous side effects, some provinces allow people to take it as long as they are made aware of possible sides, but others don’t allow dangerous drugs to be used at all (ie Ontario).

http://www.healthyontario.com/DrugDetails.aspx?brand_id=1439&brand_name=Rituxan

Secondly their is an appeal process, where if he could prove both safety and efficacy of said drug, than he could get funding for it. That article is a bit off imo…[/quote]

This guy was about to die.

Prove the safety?

WTF?

[/quote]

On the flip side insurance will often refuse to cover “experimental” treatments when they are clearly past that stage. . . .
and their officials will sometimes do anything to weasel out of their legally obliged coverage when the treatment is not experimental.
[/quote]

This is nothing new, I had surgery 2 yrs ago, to have my insurance take back their payment saying it was experimental. I appealed and I won. My point is that they will try, and should they try, then you curb stomp them.

Besides, it is much easier to chew the ass of a private entity than the government.

[quote]hedo wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]saveski wrote:

Then I’ll have to pay more for unemployment for all the clowns that can actually work but are too fucking lazy to find a job. (And yes, there are jobs out there - it’s just so much easier to just get unemployment!) [/quote]

Not to take this off topic, but I have to take issue with this section of your post.

I was discharged from active duty Army last June. I had an Iraq deployment under my belt, as a company level (168 personnel) XO, no less. I have a resume that most men and women at my age would be jealous of. I began actively looking for jobs in May. Guess how many jobs I found that suited my skill level, income, and experience? Zero. I used head-hunters and all sorts of internet job finders to no avail.

In September I finally decided to start my own business. So far so good.

I just think it is a bit misleading to say that people receiving unemployment are too lazy to find a job. It isn’t that simple.

[/quote]

I have to ask this question. Are you looking all over the country, or just in the city you are currently residing? I think this is the issue the OP has with Unemployment. There are jobs here in the South, but people up north are not willing to move. They beleive the jobs have to come to them. During the depression men moved all over the country to find a job, and when money was good the rest of the family moved.[/quote]

This is a good question. The head-hunters I used suggested I relocate. This, of course, is after I had moved back to my home town and bought a house my wife and I really liked. I was willing to make long commutes if need be. And despite buying a new house, I would have been open to relocating if the job was worth it.

You make valid points, but I just think it is unfair and inaccurate to make such a general statement that the OP made. There are some individuals out there that are, as the OP said, too lazy to get a job.

However, everyone has a different set of circumstances that they have to deal with.[/quote]

Dustin

Stick with you own business. It’s the best decision I ever made.

And the job market is incredibly difficult right now. It’s hard for very qualified folks to get a new job. I’ve never begrudged anyone unemployment compensation. They paid into it and earned it so if they need it they should get it. As an employer I’ve never disputed a claim, not once, even if I fired the guy for something. I just don’t want the bad karma and eventually those people find jobs, and some become customers.

I actually see things picking up. I had some friends that were long term unemployed, over 6 mos., and they are starting to get more interviews and jobs.

As a business owner, however, Obamacare, will raise my costs and increase my taxes. Both are disincentives to growth and expansion. In fact this administration has been a disaster for small business. It has destroyed customer confidence. If some of the core issues the Democrats and Obama embrace come to pass, I think you will see a long term recession take hold with negative growth. Obamacare is a disaster in the making, like the tariff act during the great depression.[/quote]

I agree with all of this.

Luckily, I’m running the store by myself (my wife will watch the store if need be) so I don’t have to worry about employees.

And like you mentioned in your last paragraph, I’m concerned about the economy worsening, especially since the products I provide (sport supplements) are a luxury expense.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

Don’t worry, Push, big brother is going to do everything in his power to help you, the little guy, out – and it is going to be completely free.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.[/quote]

I think you answered your own question. He could share the burden, which would mean employees make less. But remember something, some people don’t want health insurance, so in essence they are losing money on something they don’t want.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

I think you answered your own question. He could share the burden, which would mean employees make less. But remember something, some people don’t want health insurance, so in essence they are losing money on something they don’t want. [/quote]

Change the tax code so that people could just take the money instead of the health care. It will allow the employee to do with the money they are making what they really want to spend it on. If its health care great, if it is a new car great.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.[/quote]

You know, I got to thinking…since health care insurance coverage is such a huge benefit for the employee and we all agree that employers have an “obligation” to be intertwined with their employees’ insurance lives, I have decided to quit fuckin’ around with JUST health insurance.

I already pay 100% of my employees medical costs for work related claims and disability (Worker’s Comp) and unemployment insurance (state and fed). I think from now on in addition the “right” of health care insurance I’m going to provide my employees with:

Life insurance
Auto insurance
Mortgage insurance
Property insurance
Renter’s insurance
Travel insurance
Boat insurance
Pet insurance
Credit insurance
Dental insurance
Earthquake insurance
Legal expense insurance
RV insurance

and last but not least

Terrorism insurance

To do any less would indicate I just don’t care for them.

[/quote]

That health insurance is in any form tied to employment does not make sense but this does not change with the new plan, at least, as far as I understand. I am from Europe so I do not know the details of your health care system. I am just amazed why so many of you are so violently opposed to the general good idea of providing affordable health care for everyone.

Anyway, the question was: How much MORE do you have to pay for your employees with the NEW plan?

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.[/quote]

I think you answered your own question. He could share the burden, which would mean employees make less. But remember something, some people don’t want health insurance, so in essence they are losing money on something they don’t want. [/quote]

I think sometimes you have to force people do the reasonable thing. Otherwise, if people get ill and cannot pay for their treatment, the alternatives are:

  1. The reasonable people pay for the treatment.
  2. One lets them stay in their misery or even die.

Both options do not seem attractive.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.[/quote]

You know, I got to thinking…since health care insurance coverage is such a huge benefit for the employee and we all agree that employers have an “obligation” to be intertwined with their employees’ insurance lives, I have decided to quit fuckin’ around with JUST health insurance.

I already pay 100% of my employees medical costs for work related claims and disability (Worker’s Comp) and unemployment insurance (state and fed). I think from now on in addition the “right” of health care insurance I’m going to provide my employees with:

Life insurance
Auto insurance
Mortgage insurance
Property insurance
Renter’s insurance
Travel insurance
Boat insurance
Pet insurance
Credit insurance
Dental insurance
Earthquake insurance
Legal expense insurance
RV insurance

and last but not least

Terrorism insurance

To do any less would indicate I just don’t care for them.

[/quote]

That health insurance is in any form tied to employment does not make sense but this does not change with the new plan, at least, as far as I understand. I am from Europe so I do not know the details of your health care system. I am just amazed why so many of you are so violently opposed to the general good idea of providing affordable health care for everyone.

Anyway, the question was: How much MORE do you have to pay for your employees with the NEW plan?
[/quote]

I have no idea. But it will be more than what I pay now because I do not provide it.

As far as you being from Europe and not understanding the American mindset, let me remind you of something - the vast majority of our forefathers are from Europe. Notice the use of the preposition “from”. “From” means something intrinsic in this discussion.

You’re great-great-great grandpappy and mine parted ways on the Continent awhile back because mine wanted something different than yours. Yours was comfortable with the way things were (and are). Mine wasn’t.

When you can wrap your mind around the idea that you and I don’t want the same things out of our governments THEN you can begin to understand why so many of us are so violently opposed to the general good idea of providing affordable health care for everyone in the manner of this bill.

[/quote]

A plan for affordable health care has been in the making for decades. So, I think it’s better to start with something not so perfect that can be improved later on rather than wait for another century.

[quote]
Now answer this for me, why would you be opposed to the general good idea of the government providing affordable auto, life, and property insurance for everyone. Tell me why.[/quote]

First, if we generalize auto insurance to affordable transport or property insurance to affordable living, I would not be opposed so much.

Anyway, I view health as a vary basic need that one of the richest countries in the world should be able to provide to its citizens. Even more so if it has enough money to spend on waging wars with questionable benefits.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]chris666 wrote:

…I am just amazed why so many of you are so violently opposed to the general good idea of providing affordable health care for everyone…
[/quote]

By the way, apparently English is a second language for you so you may not understand the meaning of some of our more complicated words so I thought I’d provide this for you:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/violently[/quote]

Help me out:

“4. roughly or immoderately vehement or ardent: violent passions.”

So, what’s wrong with “violently opposed”? It’s not like a lot of you are just slightly annoyed with the new plan. At least that’s not how you come across.

You can’t take from someone it is called theft.

Do people in other countries really not understand property rights?

[quote]John S. wrote:
You can’t take from someone it is called theft.

Do people in other countries really not understand property rights?[/quote]

Of course they do but they unterstand just as well that they have to pay for services they consume.

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I am a small business owner with several employees. Let me go on record that this plan will absolutely cause a disincentive for me to expand my business and employ additional workers.[/quote]

How much does Health Care for America cost you as percentage of payroll per employee?

Is there no way to share this burden with the employee? It’s a huge benefit for them after all.[/quote]

The whole premise is wrong since it is already payd by the employee because whatever the costs of hiring someone are, they must come out of the workers productivity.

[quote]chris666 wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
You can’t take from someone it is called theft.

Do people in other countries really not understand property rights?[/quote]

Of course they do but they unterstand just as well that they have to pay for services they consume.

[/quote]

Ah, government is a “service”.

Where can I cancel my subscription?