Gov. Insurance would allow coverage for Abortion

[johnny861]

Originally Posted by I AM EL-NINO

Its a bad thing that we will be forced to pay for someone elses decision to terminate a life expecially when we have absolutely nothing to do with it. I am all for the supporting a Mothers decision to do so however I cant see where I and others should have to pay for it. You got pregnant, you have to deal with it, if you decide to have an abortion you should have to pay for it. Not me or anyone else. So yes....its another bad idea. I cant for the life of me see where I should be responsible for financing someone elses problem.

I suppose you are also pissed that there are federal dollars already being spent on special circumstance abortions?

Not that I can disagree with your anger. I mean, I'm pretty pissed off that I'm forced to pay for American kids to go die in Iraq. However, I also understand the importance of paying for national defense.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Ash

You paid property taxes last year right? I'm sure it was well into the thousands if not $10k+.

1. How much did you pay into the Dallas ISD?
2. How many kids do you have that attend in Dallas ISD?
3. You sucked it up and dealt with it didn't you?


*hands out tissues*

well hell yeah, we all pay taxes and as Americans it is incumbant upon us to bitch about it

Isn't that the heart of politics though Ash? Allocation of public resources?

[Ash]

Lol, I remember at one time my employer paid for our insurance 100% too. That seems like a looooooooooong fucking time ago.

[matt]

Originally Posted by I AM EL-NINO

You can live with going ahead and having a child. You cannot save a life stricken with certain types of cancer without chemo in this day and age. And, I dont pay for anything as my company covers the healthcare. And we as a company pay about 40% less in insurance fees that other companies might pay. Hence the reason they cover all of us AND our spouses 100% at no cost to the employee. So yes....for me and my wife it is running perfectly. We do not need any changes to our coverage. Expecially since we will not be having a pregnancey that we may have decided to abort in the future.

good to know that you will be working for your company forever and that your company will always have the same coverage well into your retirement and thereafter. glad to know that your company will always thrive and will always be around with you as an employee. thats just peachy.

[Ash]

lol, I think his company must be hemmoraghing a LOT of money

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Ash

Lol, I remember at one time my employer paid for our insurance 100% too. That seems like a looooooooooong fucking time ago.

That's one likely consequence of a gov't plan competing with private insurance.

Employers will shed the cost of insurance knowing employees can get it from the gov't.

Private insurers will then have to compete against the gov't who sets even lower reimbursement rates than insurance companies. A prime reason for disparity in billing practices is that doctors who accept gov't programs try to make up for it from other patients with private insureds next up and cash payes often getting bent over a barrel. Long run private insurance won't be able to compete on a large scale and a two tiered system could well emerge. (more distinct than the one we have today)

[johnny861]

Originally Posted by Ash

lol, I think his company must be hemmoraghing a LOT of money

or is based in Europe.

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by Ash

Do you pay taxes?


Good then you're already paying for people you have nothing to do with.

I mean why pay for a $200 procedure when you could be paying $20,000 for the baby to be born on Medcaid if the mother is homeless, poor, teenage, whatever. Oh, let's not forget the hundreds of thousands dollars of financial burden it will cost over it's lifetime.

Yeah, $200 is too much.

But we are talking about abortion. Not life threatening issues. And what taxes are we talking about? Welfare? Ya....dont like that one so much either and if I had my way we would take the Clinton approach to it and cut it waayyyyy back.

"if the mother is homeless, poor, teenage"

How about this novel idea...........maybe teach them some personal responsibility so the rest of us wouldnt have to spend our money on thier bad decisions. This would greatly reduce the need to have abortions in the first place and relieve the rest if us of this burden. Im sorry....I just cant get behind paying for something that is in my opinion 95% not necessary. I guess I should have to be taxed to pay for obese people to get gastric surgery as well so they can lose the weight they were to lazy to lose on thier own?

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by Ash

lol, I think his company must be hemmoraghing a LOT of money

Lollzzzz.....not at all. We are one of the most profitable companies in the world. And yes...we are totally owned by the French.

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by matt

good to know that you will be working for your company forever and that your company will always have the same coverage well into your retirement and thereafter. glad to know that your company will always thrive and will always be around with you as an employee. thats just peachy.

We dont have retirement. We have profit sharing and intercompany investment opportunities. Real peachy.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by I AM EL-NINO

But we are talking about abortion. Not life threatening issues. And what taxes are we talking about? Welfare? Ya....dont like that one so much either and if I had my way we would take the Clinton approach to it and cut it waayyyyy back.

"if the mother is homeless, poor, teenage"

How about this novel idea...........maybe teach them some personal responsibility so the rest of us wouldnt have to spend our money on thier bad decisions. This would greatly reduce the need to have abortions in the first place and relieve the rest if us of this burden. Im sorry....I just cant get behind paying for something that is in my opinion 95% not necessary. I guess I should have to be taxed to pay for obese people to get gastric surgery as well so they can lose the weight they were to lazy to lose on thier own?

We're not talking about teaching personal responsibility, we're talking about dollars. Screw 95% not necessary, you know what's 100% not necessary? Raising someone elses mistake(s) for the rest of their lives when it could be taken care of with a simple procedure. If I have to pay $1 extra for some fatass to get their stomach stapled to prevent another $5 extra for long term care of the person that can't lose weight, then let's do it.

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by PETA

so... what about people in need of health care because of their decisions?

Smokers... people with horseshit diets... people who abuse drugs and alcohol?

Should bad choices leading to health consequences result in denial of care?




Are you arguing that its better to terminate an unborn child's life than suffer the economic consequences of lettting it live?

Not denial of care. I never said that. Just not out of my pocket. I made a bad decision a few months back to dance just a bit too hard during one of my sets and actually seperated my left ACL and crushed part of my miniscus. While my insurance is good, I am still liable for $2500.00 as my portion of a $30,000 dollar surgery. Standard split but still a good bit out of my pocket that I was going to use for repairs to my house. I never at any time felt the desire for someone else to pick up my slack. I did the damage and Im responsible for it. Wether Im insured or not.

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by johnny861

I suppose you are also pissed that there are federal dollars already being spent on special circumstance abortions?

No I dont have a problem with that.

[I AM EL-NINO]

Originally Posted by PETA

That's one likely consequence of a gov't plan competing with private insurance.

Employers will shed the cost of insurance knowing employees can get it from the gov't.

Private insurers will then have to compete against the gov't who sets even lower reimbursement rates than insurance companies. A prime reason for disparity in billing practices is that doctors who accept gov't programs try to make up for it from other patients with private insureds next up and cash payes often getting bent over a barrel. Long run private insurance won't be able to compete on a large scale and a two tiered system could well emerge. (more distinct than the one we have today)

Another great reason not to pass the bill.

[Ash]

Well I hope for your sake you're always able to keep your job and everyone in your family has badass insurance and never has any need for medical care in the next 40 years.

*crosses fingers*