When growing up, did you get anything you wanted and never have to do chores?

[NYC_SKP]

If you had to do chores, were there consequences if you didn't do them?

Do you think Social Security can work without there being consequences for those who fail to contribute?

Do you think Single Payer would be paid by just, say, printing more money?

It's a no-brainer that some fines and even jail time would be associated with non-compliance for any Health Care Program.

A NO-BRAINER.

Maybe someone can describe how health care can be provided without any consequences for failure to make contributions.

:shrug:

PS: Failure to pay taxes is not horribly punished today, jail time is extremely rare and even the worst deliberate scofflaws are still out there fucking the rest of us.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Your points are well taken.

The naysayers can all go take a hike.

K&R

[poverlay]

2. I once got into a really big fight with my mom and she went out and bought me a pop gun that

I really wanted. It was weird becauses I was being a brat, throwing a fit and totally didn't deserve it. Not to mention the fact that she was hardcore and certainly not the type to give in. She must have felt bad for some reason...
Anyway, you DID ask...

[Sinti]

3. Actually, yes

almost. When I didn't get what I wanted I was told "I don't think that would be a good idea right now, honey" so there was hope for the future and accepted the denial without a fuss. I did clean up my room, and various things like cooking large quantities of stuff with mom on the weekend so we didn't have to cook as much during the week - but it was a highly enjoyable task. None of these things could be called chores, I did it by choice. Why do you ask?

[valerief]

4. In the fifties, health insurance companies were non-profit.

They didn't explode into for-profits until the Reagan admin, when HMOs exploded.

Tax rates for the wealthy were much higher. All they could do with their excess money was dump it into business which created more jobs.


Trade policies were different, too.

Now, there were plenty of social injustices that created suffering then for many people, but lots more people than today could find jobs and pay for insurance and afford to live.

Why can't we suffer that way (without the social injustices)?

:shrug:

[stray cat]

9. Even if insurance is nonprofit - health care costs money - much more than in the 50s

[NYC_SKP]

10. Yep. Even a perfect Single Payer plan would cost more than our costs in past decades.

Better technologies, meds, research, tests, etc.

People who would have died living longer.

This shit costs money.

Of course we have to eliminate the profit aspect and seriously improve efficiencies and communication.

But to think that reform would make it free or cheap is just a little naive.

:toast:

[valerief]

12. Right. So either we get rid of for-profit and go to Medicare for All or

we change for-profit to non-profit, control/subsidize the medical delivery pricing structure, let the uninsured move to Medicare for All, and hope for the best.

[atreides1]

5. No

I didn't go to jail for not doing my chores, may have gotten grounded, but not incarcerated.

Seeing as to how employers are responsible for taking Social Security from our wages, that's a shit argument!

In single-payer, as in Medicare? There are different forms of single-payer, be a little more specific!

You don't make contributions you don't get anything more then emergency care.

Just because it's not punished today, doesn't mean it's going to remain that way. It's a great reason to build more private prisons, you can lock up all the poor, elderly, and any others who won't or can't pay, and at the same time create more jobs.

Is this the Hope that was promised.

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. Well said. Oh and us 'naysayers' can just go take a hike.

:eyes:

[Truth2Tell]

6. If we were talking about a GOOD program

that would move the ball forward and provide more Americans with healthcare then I expect you would find a very small number of DUers expressing concerns about punitive provisions. BUUUT, we are not talking about such a bill. We are talking about a bill that moves us backward and ensures that ultimately fewer Americans will recieve affordable healthcare. So the complaints about the mandates and the punitive provisions should be considered in that context.

[optimator]

7. so the IRS is a branch of corporations now

yipee

[stray cat]

8. Everythings a right unless you actually have to sacrifice something or pay for it

who in the world do people think is going to pay for them if they are not willing to pitch in

[Hannah Bell]

16. maybe the people who take 40% of income could pony up a bit more?

just a thought.

[Igel]

13. Yes.

In fact, it was deemed unseemly for me to do chores. I tried and was told not to contribute.

I took out the trash once and was yelled at. I was a teenager. I think they were idiots. I thought so at the time.

Another time my father was busy and so I got out the mower to mow the grass. He came out and told me to stop, it was his job.

I was allowed to tidy my room (but not vacuum) and pick up after myself. But nobody forced me to. My parents thought that I had more important things to do and couldn't afford the time, or simply were pragmatic--they could do it more quickly and competently, so training me wasn't necessary.

In so doing they taught me that I had no responsibilities to the family. I had no obligations. I was marginalized, essentially a ward of the state. It's a horrible thing to do to somebody, saying they have privileges and rights but no responsibilities. It breeds irresponsibility and contempt.

Similarly, for almost every levy there are exemptions. I was FICA-exempt in grad school. My bosses had opted out of FICA in the '50s. I know organizations exempt from property tax. My nephew might be exempt from paying tuition in college. A lot of people are exempted from paying income tax.

Then there are the opt-in programs. My kid didn't apply for free lunches at school--and nobody was forced to. Similarly for college--it's optional. Even high school after age 16 or so is optional. So is formal school of any kind--homeschooling's possible. Car insurance is strictly optional, if you get right down to it--use the public transportation, bike, or walk; in some states I've been in drivers could post a bond instead of having car insurance (gee--that seldom gets mentioned; I wonder if it's even still possible or if somebody's made that decision for everybody).

So it's crucial, it seems, that health insurance be mandatory. After all, we've been told that car insurance is. (?) Your argument is that everybody must contribute. Now, under the House bill won't there there be those who do not pay for health insurance, or who pay little? Does your argument hold for them, as well? Or is it the case that everybody absolutely must pay for it to work--except for those who don't have to?

[NYC_SKP]

14. An analogy:

To try to answer your question at the end.

My mom had polio. She didn't do as many chores, or she didn't do the same chores, so there were exceptions.

As you say, "It's a horrible thing to do to somebody, saying they have privileges and rights but no responsibilities. It breeds irresponsibility and contempt."

So I think we agree. It must be mandatory (though car insurance is analogous only to all drivers).

And I'm fine that some will not be able to contribute.

My OP was more in reference to those who can but would refuse to, and whether or not there should be penalties.

:donut:

[anonymous171]

15. Forcing citizens to purchase private health insurane is way different than forcing them to pay taxes

[NYC_SKP]

17. As I read this graphic, nobody is Forced to buy private insurance.

The Tan Rectangle represent the Public Option available to anyone without employer provide insurance, medicare, or medicaid.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6963675