Tax the rich and give to the poor?

[Agathon]

For us, yes, because we have catastrophic health care coverage. So anything above $2500 is paid for by insurance. And we wait only a week at most

So you have to pay $2500 a go? How wonderful for the poor....

[The Mad Monk]

I live in New Jersey, I make between 32,000 and 54,000 dollars a year, I rent an apartment, AND I AM AGAINST THIS TAX.

[Agathon]

...wtf?

It's true. Think about how much time and energy people waste on competitive consumption (the old "keeping up with the Joneses" thing). It's a game that no one can win, produces no increase in welfare, and in which all the participants are better off not playing.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by MikeH
Anything ABOVE $2500?!

You have to pay $2500 out of your own pocket for an MRI?!

I'm pretty sure that's per illness, for the year.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Jaguar
For us, yes, because we have catastrophic health care coverage. So anything above $2500 is paid for by insurance. And we wait only a week at most.

So, how many people could not pay for MRI scans even when they need them to save their lives, because they don't have health insurance?

[MikeH]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk


I'm pretty sure that's per illness, for the year.

Er...

So if you get sick you have to pay the first $2500 but then if they cure you of that and you get something else you have to pay another $2500 or would the first one cover it?

I can't get around the fact that someone might be sick and they wouldn't get treated because they can't afford it. To me that's just wrong.

[The Mad Monk]

They don't pull MRI out and bill it separately, the deductible is for the entire treatment.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Agathon


Eh? Not another Canadian right winger complaining about health care. These are the same cretins who endlessly whine for tax cuts and then wonder why things like healthcare and public transport face cuts. Just like the former Conservative government in Ontario who cut taxes and spent so that the Liberals have had to raise taxes again and cut services just to stay afloat.

When healthcare is funded properly, there are no such problems. If people are stupid enough to vote for governments who tell them they will cut taxes and ensure adequate provision of social services, they are sadly mistaken.

And what this guy isn't telling you is the vast number of frivolous MRIs that go on in the US. A complete waste of time IHMO.

Did you know that the US has more than ten times the number of mammography machines it needs to give every woman in the US the recommended number of mammograms. What a complete waste of resources.

And Canada's health care system is single payer. A lot less socialist than the UK, Australia or New Zealand for that matter. I take it that you are aware of the difference.

BS about your sister too. If she had that and lived here she'd be right at the front of the queue. People who screw up their knees performing silly carnival stunts have to wait like all other non-urgents.

don't blame the US health care system for the excesss of mammography machines. That's because of women who entertain themselves by doing walks for breast cancer every other day.

BTW, here's some more information about my sister. Part of her condition caused her to have siezures up to 20 times a day. She has now had zero in the past 15 years thanks to a drug called Depakote, which was invented in the US. It came to Canada and Europe over a year after my sister became seizure-free.

Europe and Canada can no longer invent drugs at any reasonable speed becase there are no companies to do research and development.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by MikeH
Anything ABOVE $2500?!

You have to pay $2500 out of your own pocket for an MRI?!

We don't have Medicaid. My dad is a partner in a lawfirm, which means he's technically not an employee. He shares in the profits. If the partners decided to give health benefits to themselves, it would have no effect really. They'd just end up paying for their own health care anyway.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Agathon
It's true. Think about how much time and energy people waste on competitive consumption (the old "keeping up with the Joneses" thing). It's a game that no one can win, produces no increase in welfare, and in which all the participants are better off not playing.

I agree it's a stupid thing to do. I don't agree that a progressive tax does anything to limit it. We have a progressive tax and everyone is still trying to keep up with an unattainable. Most are in debt living paycheck to paycheck, to pay for the SUV that cost 5x the car they could have bought that gets them around better (among countless other things... bling bling).

The only thing that is going to help that is fiscal responsibility on an individual's part. It's not an economic phenomenon, it's cultural.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
They don't pull MRI out and bill it separately, the deductible is for the entire treatment.

Right... but per year or per illness?

How much does good insurance cost? ie. Whatever I have I go and get treated and don't pay any more.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Agathon


So you have to pay $2500 a go? How wonderful for the poor....

Medicare.

[Jaguar]

I proclaim that the healthcare threadjack must end.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by MikeH
How much does good insurance cost? ie. Whatever I have I go and get treated and don't pay any more.

Depends heavily on your health history.

[RGBVideo]

Think about how much time and energy people waste on competitive consumption (the old "keeping up with the Joneses" thing).

In here it's about 0% (of the total time, energy and resources). The whole "competitive consumption" as you put it was a fad of the 80s in Finland (until now, I thought it was a global fad...).

It's a game that no one can win, produces no increase in welfare, and in which all the participants are better off not playing.

...so what you're saying is, since invididuals are too stupid to responsibly spending their money, the goverment needs to increase taxation? High taxes work in progressive, flat, and even regressive models, so how is this an argument against a flat tax?

Jaguar, check your PM's.