Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Click Orlando)   The death of the middle class continues, as the average income of middle-class families has decreased 40% compared to twenty years ago   (clickorlando.com ) divider line 490
    More: Sick, consumer finance, account balances, middle class, families  
•       •       •

10698 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jun 2012 at 2:22 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



490 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-12 07:00:54 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: ialdabaoth: cretinbob: wages have been flat over the past 20 years. taxes has nothing to do with it

We could use tanks; it'd be hilarious to just roll over people, real slowly, while they scream and their bones and tendons shatter under the weight of a 60-ton MBT. Leave bloody smears across the front lawns of all those underachieving scum that can't be assed to get off their butts and work for a living.

Decent plan but keep in mind that most of them don't have lawns. We could run them over in front of their housing projects but the bloody mess would unfortunately be washed away almost immediately by the water gushing from all the open fire hydrants.


Belt sanders? Or we can go back to the rape idea... I like rape.
 
2012-06-12 07:01:06 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Mr. Right: Consider Social Security. The worker has 15% of his wages taken away. The employer match is an illusion...

If Social Security were abolished tomorrow, all of a sudden employers would increase your paycheck by the 6.2% they're currently paying to Social Security.

/You can't see me, so what you don't know is that I couldn't type that with a straight face.


Whether or not they paid you more would depend on the labor market. My point is that the worker is already earning that money for the employer, he just never gets to see it. Whether your face was straight doesn't hide the fact that your mind is ignorant.
 
2012-06-12 07:01:43 AM  
I hate these threads, mainly because I know little about extensive politics and therefore can't spew relentless shiat.

What I've come to understand after spending years watching you all go back and forth is that we're all somehow to blame. It's true. It's taken a very specific series of actions to get where we are today.

If I were to really think about it (one of you political-savvy individuals can correct me on this point), I think our economy started the downward spiral after we started sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas. Because ultimately, it's not the super rich or the super poor that drives the economy. It's the middle class families that are willing and able to buy nice things like gaming consoles, tv's, cell phones, cars, etc.

Most of these things that we're buying up these days are made overseas, no? That means someone over there is getting paid, and someone over here...isn't.

Appreciate any and all thoughts at this point. I'm only awake because my daughter woke me up for one of her nightly feedings and the house was too hot for me to go back to sleep.
 
2012-06-12 07:03:08 AM  

Mr. Right: All of those middle men add enormous cost to our system with no real health care benefit.


So streamline the process. Also your assertion about history is wrong. As shown by, well every country offering some sort of national insurance plan, which is the vast majority of countries where everyone has coverage. It's funny that in England top shelf private health insurance, that blows the pants off any insurance plan in the US, goes for about $2,200 a year, and that's with everyone paying into and getting NHS coverage already.
 
2012-06-12 07:04:46 AM  

jeaux65: I think our economy started the downward spiral after we started sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas


This would be correct for a good part of the issue.
 
2012-06-12 07:08:09 AM  

jeaux65: I hate these threads, mainly because I know little about extensive politics and therefore can't spew relentless shiat.

What I've come to understand after spending years watching you all go back and forth is that we're all somehow to blame. It's true. It's taken a very specific series of actions to get where we are today.


That's why I advocate horrific indiscriminate violence.

If I were to really think about it (one of you political-savvy individuals can correct me on this point), I think our economy started the downward spiral after we started sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas. Because ultimately, it's not the super rich or the super poor that drives the economy. It's the middle class families that are willing and able to buy nice things like gaming consoles, tv's, cell phones, cars, etc.

Who cares?

Most of these things that we're buying up these days are made overseas, no? That means someone over there is getting paid, and someone over here...isn't.

Sure, but they're getting paid one fiftieth what someone over here would be. The problem is that we abolished slave labor.

Appreciate any and all thoughts at this point. I'm only awake because my daughter woke me up for one of her nightly feedings and the house was too hot for me to go back to sleep.

How much you want for her?
 
2012-06-12 07:08:59 AM  

Mr. Right: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Mr. Right: Consider Social Security. The worker has 15% of his wages taken away. The employer match is an illusion...

If Social Security were abolished tomorrow, all of a sudden employers would increase your paycheck by the 6.2% they're currently paying to Social Security.

/You can't see me, so what you don't know is that I couldn't type that with a straight face.

Whether or not they paid you more would depend on the labor market. My point is that the worker is already earning that money for the employer, he just never gets to see it. Whether your face was straight doesn't hide the fact that your mind is ignorant.


Why should the worker get to see any of that money?
 
2012-06-12 07:11:25 AM  

dericwater: It's interesting to note that those who are vociferously anti-communist are doing everything they can to destroy the middle-class, which will put the US into a feudal system, which will lead to a very bloody communistic uprising when the peasant class has enough of the oppression. Russia went through that where the aristocracy were taken over by the Bolsheviks. China went through that where the local feudal lords were taken out by the communist groups led by Mao. French aristocracy also went through that, but the outcome wasn't exactly communism (since it occurred roughly soon after the creation of the US of A, the revolution in France mirrored the origins of the US, and that pre-dated communism by about 150 years).

I'm quite surprised that these 1%'ers really think they can outwit history.


Keep dreaming. If you think the party of "everyone gets a participation ribbon" and "you're all winners!" is up to the task.
 
2012-06-12 07:12:00 AM  

ialdabaoth: krackpipe: Thanks Bush, Congress (Patriot Acts I, II, etc) and voters. Instead of admitting they overlooked intelligence, and maybe quietly spending $10B-20B to nab Al Queda top tier, they trumped it up to make it look appear a domestic surveillance system for US citizens and 2 wars were needed, and all on credit. How's that working out for our economy?

Pretty well, considering how many brown people we killed and how many bombs we sold ourselves to do it with.

The economy is working GREAT. The plebs are farked.


Ha! They can watch us from the drones while we head to the food banks for dried beans and gov't cheese. Good times!
 
2012-06-12 07:18:20 AM  
cdn.dipity.com

But the average income is up from 83 years ago!
 
2012-06-12 07:18:31 AM  

WhyteRaven74: jeaux65: I think our economy started the downward spiral after we started sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas

This would be correct for a good part of the issue.


The big downside of a global economy. You're playing by the rules of the lowest common denominator in terms of business laws (labor, environmental, etc.) and there isn't jack shiat you can do about it. The GOP thinks the answer is to roll back laws to more closely resemble the competition, and Democrats want to punish businesses simply abiding by the laws of supply and demand. Neither side is willing to take on the real problem by restricting/taxing imports from third-world shiat-holes.
 
2012-06-12 07:18:44 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: the american business owner and the guy from Guatemala aren't really to blame. they are just acting according to the dictates of supply and demand in a supersaturated labor force create by you.

The labor force is hardly supersaturated.



of course it is. that's why wages are dropping and have been for 40 years you farking dipshiat.
www.socialsecurity.gov


btw I hate talking to you. you are literally uninformed about every subject under the sun yet continually respond to me with nonsense, never once backing any of your bullshiat ideas with a citation. you fancy yourself as some kind of renaissance man with received knowledge of a whole range of subjects you never studied even for a few minutes. dealing with your idiocy is such a god damn time suck.

NOW, there are millions upon millions of people who want to work who can't find work and we are still adding 1.75 million foreign workers who are willing to work for less wages than Americans. Link

that's the reason why the unemployment rate is always lower for immigrants than it is for Americans! business can and does choose immigrants because they are cheaper, and because the labor market is so overflowing that the choice of workers is even an option. of course the labor market is supersaturated. the only time it wasn;t during the last 40 years was during the .com boom.

Immigrants' unemployment rate lower than U.S.-born workers'
By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
April 6, 2006: 5:30 PM EDT


Immigrants' unemployment rate lower than that of native born
May 1, 2008 - NEW YORK


Immigrant Unemployment Lower Than Natives'
By Lauren Raheja
Tuesday, Aug 3, 2010
 
2012-06-12 07:20:55 AM  

jeaux65: Most of these things that we're buying up these days are made overseas, no? That means someone over there is getting paid, and someone over here...isn't.


Actually just remembered a nice little detail that gets overlooked in all that. Samsung, which is a South Korean company, makes its phones in South Korea. Now the labor in South Korea is quite a bit more expensive than the labor in China, where most other cell phones are made, yet funny enough Samsung phones don't cost more than other companies for similar models and Samsung makes a ton on their cell phones. Oh and for a bit of irony, Samsung makes the processor chip used in iPhones, and the plant that makes those chips is in Austin, Texas. I can't help but think somewhere at Samsung is someone laughing behind Apple's back and how utterly screwed up their manufacturing processes are. Or rather how utterly screwed up the manufacturing processes they contract out are.
 
2012-06-12 07:22:01 AM  
As long as the lower classes continue to get at least proportionally equally poorer I'm happy.
 
2012-06-12 07:23:40 AM  

The Southern Dandy: Part of me wants Democrats to get out of the Republican's way and just let them drive the economy over the cliff, so Americans will finally come to their senses, but then I remember how farking stupid the American public is and how they'd listen to the Republicans as they blame the Dems for the disaster.


That's not a prediction. It's a recollection.
 
2012-06-12 07:24:02 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Actually they were caused by the collapse of the western Roman Empire. When it fell apart it was no longer possible to quickly and safely get goods from, say, Lyon to Turin. To say nothing of getting goods from Rome to London or vice versa. Over in the eastern part of the empire, it held together and such things weren't a problem and there were no dark ages. As for what caused the collapse of the western part of the empire, part of it had to do with it splitting itself into two and the resulting imbalances in trade that happened. Which left the western part in a poor place to properly defend itself once it had a hard time keeping things going. That part of the empire fell was not something inevitable from the time it was founded, it was the result of a few decisions made over the years, some made with the best possible intentions given the understanding of things like commerce and government of the time, and some made with less than the best possible motives.


This is true, but there's a little bit more to it than that.

In fact, you can trace the origins of Feudalism to the Marian reforms of 107 BC.

The Roman Republic needed to revamp the army to protect its growing influence, and Gaius Marius introduced a series of sweeping new reforms that defined Western Europe for the next 1500 years, in a Law-of-Unintended-Consequences sort of way. The most important change he made was that any free person or citizen could join the army (before then, only landowners could serve). And also, 25 years of service earns you a free farm as pension, should you survive.

These changes had two immediate affects: 1) It bolstered the army tenfold. Also, soldiers were compelled to be more loyal to their generals than to the Senate, which plunged the Republic into five messy Civil Wars over the next 80 years and ultimately collapsed the Republic itself. And 2) The "free land" stipend necessitated constant campaigning (current army was always conquering new land to pay the retiring army, like a pyramid scheme). Because of this, the army stopped becoming volunteer and part-time based and transmogrified into a full-on, professional fighting force that was marching, building, and/or fighting all the time. Not an issue for a system that was prepared for almost continuous warfare anyway (Rome was essentially a fascist military junta).

By the 1st century AD the Roman economy was essentially reduced to a plunder economy -- so long as new territory was being acquired and the spoils generously distributed, things were alright.

But when Hadrian declared that the Empire should have limits and the frontiers were fortified instead of expanded, that's when the cracks in the system began to show. A class of insulating elites in Rome sucked up the excesses of conquest (much like how the rich are today), and trade and commerce began drying up. Couple that with barbarian invasions and plagues and a few ineffective Emperors, and it all led to the Crisis of the Third Century. With no new spoils coming from conquered lands, the economy sputtered. In response, they devalued the currency, which caused inflation and led to a 50-year economic depression.

In a bad economy, trade slows down and desperation goes up. The bankrupt Senate could no longer afford to keep merchants safe with the patrolling Praetorian Guard. When they stopped policing the roads, brigandry rose. This reduced wayfaring and trade even more. Suddenly, all the lands in the Western Empire were cut off from each other. The regional governors (aka the retired landowners from the army and their descendents) realized they were on their own, with no help coming from the Senate (and no taxes or tribute either) and no communication with the outside world. It was up to them to police the roads themselves and get trade going again.

In time, these governors and landowners assumed full control over their own lands: All legal, political, economic and social control of everything and everyone who lived/worked on it. They continued under this system unabated, even as the Western Empire was quietly whisked away from them. This system evolved into Manorialism, and would persist well into the late Middle Ages.

There's more to it, but this is the abridged version. Marian reforms + Crisis of the Third Century led to land redistribution, ownership and control in Western Europe that ultimately paved way for Feudalism.

/the more you know
//this is more fun to read if you read it in James Burke's voice
 
2012-06-12 07:25:04 AM  
Kali-Yuga:The government has spent $5.4 trillion over the past 30 years on welfare and yet the poverty rate hasn't declined at all. Government does not exist for charity. In fact, government never really gives charity, because it does not give what it has created; it gives what it has confiscated from the "productive members" of society.

First of all Alan Greenspan had to go in front of Congress and eat shiat because his Randoid belief in the Galtian overlords turned out to be a bunch of hooey. This horseshiat about how Our Betters need more tax breaks, less regulations, etc. is all a strange...almost submissive worldview that is like a fetish with Objectivists. Let them pay their fair share to support our nation, and if they find the tax rate oppressive, let them move to Liberia, Guyana or Somalia or some other low tax paradise and see how that works our for them.

Our infrastructure is part of the reason why the "job creators" will always be here...you can't drive your Bently to dressage on dirt roads! The quicker retards like you get exposed for your stupidity, the quicker we can adopt a solution, instead of having goofs like you pulling in the wrong direction.
 
2012-06-12 07:25:05 AM  

ialdabaoth: jeaux65: I hate these threads, mainly because I know little about extensive politics and therefore can't spew relentless shiat.

What I've come to understand after spending years watching you all go back and forth is that we're all somehow to blame. It's true. It's taken a very specific series of actions to get where we are today.

That's why I advocate horrific indiscriminate violence.

If I were to really think about it (one of you political-savvy individuals can correct me on this point), I think our economy started the downward spiral after we started sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas. Because ultimately, it's not the super rich or the super poor that drives the economy. It's the middle class families that are willing and able to buy nice things like gaming consoles, tv's, cell phones, cars, etc.

Who cares?

Most of these things that we're buying up these days are made overseas, no? That means someone over there is getting paid, and someone over here...isn't.

Sure, but they're getting paid one fiftieth what someone over here would be. The problem is that we abolished slave labor.

Appreciate any and all thoughts at this point. I'm only awake because my daughter woke me up for one of her nightly feedings and the house was too hot for me to go back to sleep.

How much you want for her?


You can't haz my babby. Not even with the trade of two testicles and three payments of your soul.

a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net
 
2012-06-12 07:26:18 AM  
GAT_00 [TotalFark] 2012-06-11 09:39:15 PM

Wangiss: Double the taxes! Triple the taxes! Squeeze every drop out of those insolent, musical peasants.

Don't forget, more tax cuts on the rich will fix everything! Never mind how, they totally will!


Yeah, because increasing taxes revenue by closing tax loopholes and ending tax breaks for the ones who can actually afford it....that's just pinko commie talk.

Ignore that pesky part where corporations and wealthy people paying their fair share, instead of us paying them for merely existing, actually cuts down on the deficit dramatically.
 
2012-06-12 07:29:10 AM  

Mr. Right: The Community Reinvestment Act. The goal was to make home loans available to lower income families. Fannie Mae would underwrite the loans that banks made. The goal was noble but there were a lot of unintended consequences, one of them being that home prices rose more rapidly than inflation, making the housing market much more attractive to speculators. When there are television shows called "Flip This House," that will be a sign to you that not everyone who is buying a house is trying to save up to buy a little bungalow in which they may comfortably spend their golden years. Also, given that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would underwrite anything and then the financial institutions created all the residuals and other Mortgage Backed Securities (all with the full approval and regulation of Congress, we must add). and what started out as a means of improving the rate of home ownership helped lead to near total economic collapse.


In 1977?
 
2012-06-12 07:29:11 AM  

WhyteRaven74: It's funny that in England top shelf private health insurance, that blows the pants off any insurance plan in the US, goes for about $2,200 a year, and that's with everyone paying into and getting NHS coverage already.


Private insurance in the UK couldn't exist at those prices without the NHS as a basis. Otherwise it would be 20 times as expensive. Also, private health insurance doesn't blow the doors off anything. It just allows policy holders to skip to the front of the line to be treated by the same NHS trained doctors. Also, anyone with money in the UK pays cash at the medi-centres even if they have private insurance. Oh yeah, don't forget to add back price of deductibles to that price tag you're hawking.

Frankly, anyone who holds the NHS as an "ideal" in terms of universal healthcare is just downright silly. It's generally considered one of the worst among Western European countries. Germany, Holland, Denmark all pretty good. France... depends on where you are (Don't get sick in Marseilles). Southern Europe? That's farking third world healthcare. Don't ever get sick or injured in Greece, trust me on that one. Farking third world Hell.
 
2012-06-12 07:29:57 AM  

Erebus1954: [andreas.com image 640x473]

Taxes so unfair.
Half my millions taxed away.
Your food stamps untouched.


i get $27 a month in food stamps, perhaps i could pay $10 of them away so i can live off ramen (which I'm always doing)
 
2012-06-12 07:31:54 AM  
Wow, someone was able to bring up the CRA. That's impressive.

Not as impressive as the fact that CRA-backed mortgages were less likely to default and CRA-covered institutions were less likely to fail, but still impressive.
 
2012-06-12 07:34:30 AM  

GoldSpider: there isn't jack shiat you can do about it.


The problem isn't some ethereal laws of supply and demand, it's the people in charge of businesses and how they're allowed to act and what is expected of them. New Balance could contract out the manufacture of its shoes to any number of nations with cheap labor. As it stands, every pair of New Balance shoes is made in the United States or United Kingdom. And sure their top of the line running shoes go for $150, but Nike has a few running shoes that cost that much or more yet they use far cheaper labor. It's like Samsung and Apple. Apple has iPhones produced in China. Samsung makes their phones in South Korea. And yet despite using substantially more expensive labor for a Samsung Galaxy SII you can get it for less than an iPhone.

restricting/taxing imports from third-world shiat-holes.

If you take care of the business end of things, that really isn't needed.
 
2012-06-12 07:34:44 AM  

Mr. Right: History has already proven me correct


You have yet to be correct about a single damn thing in this entire thread.
 
2012-06-12 07:38:02 AM  

relcec: business can and does choose immigrants because they are cheaper,


So if you ran a factory you'd pay an immigrant less than an American to do the same job just because they're an immigrant? Or you'd go hire up a bunch of immigrants to pick your farm because hell fark 'em, they'll suck up crap wages?

Ebbelwoi: It just allows policy holders to skip to the front of the line to be treated by the same NHS trained doctors.


Wrong, with private insurance you can go to a private doctor and a private hospital. If you want to go to an NHS doctor or hospital you just use your NHS coverage.
 
2012-06-12 07:38:18 AM  

Jon iz teh kewl: Erebus1954: [andreas.com image 640x473]

Taxes so unfair.
Half my millions taxed away.
Your food stamps untouched.

i get $27 a month in food stamps, perhaps i could pay $10 of them away so i can live off ramen (which I'm always doing)


You could always try getting a job.
 
2012-06-12 07:39:22 AM  

MemeSlave: You could always try getting a job.


affordablehousinginstitute.org
 
2012-06-12 07:40:05 AM  

Ebbelwoi: Frankly, anyone who holds the NHS as an "ideal" in terms of universal healthcare is just downright silly. I


Well yeah, but in the US every time someone brings up providing coverage for everyone people go screaming about the UK. And compared to the US it is a better system. They have to be doing something right when they have better teeth than Americans do. And let's not even get into American dental insurance.
 
2012-06-12 07:41:44 AM  

MemeSlave: You could always try getting a job.


If he's getting that little in food stamps he already has a job. How about making sure that anyone has a full time job, or even better, works 35 hours a week earns enough to not need food assistance? A certain Richard Nixon thought that paying people enough that if they work they don't need assistance programs would be a swell idea.
 
2012-06-12 07:41:55 AM  

ialdabaoth: Debeo Summa Credo: ialdabaoth: cretinbob: wages have been flat over the past 20 years. taxes has nothing to do with it

We could use tanks; it'd be hilarious to just roll over people, real slowly, while they scream and their bones and tendons shatter under the weight of a 60-ton MBT. Leave bloody smears across the front lawns of all those underachieving scum that can't be assed to get off their butts and work for a living.

Decent plan but keep in mind that most of them don't have lawns. We could run them over in front of their housing projects but the bloody mess would unfortunately be washed away almost immediately by the water gushing from all the open fire hydrants.

Belt sanders? Or we can go back to the rape idea... I like rape.


I like the rabid bear rape idea. But you need to train the bears not to kill the poor person before raping, and that will require time and patience.

Also, realize that some poor people are gay and would likely enjoy being raped by a bear. Worst case scenario would be looking on approvingly of justice being meted out via bear rape and the limp wristed deadbeat looks up with a smile on his face "ha ha you had to pay for my aids medicine and now you treat me to a beast rape? Thank you!". Aaarggh that would be so irritating.
 
2012-06-12 07:42:18 AM  
Not that I'm a stickler for accuracy in headlines, but isn't it 40% drop in net worth between 2007 and 2010, subby?

You know, come to think of it, that is almost exactly like income and 20 years...if you squint.
 
2012-06-12 07:43:53 AM  

Therion: [newsimg.bbc.co.uk image 203x300]


They have us paying for that boot on the face. Forever.


2.bp.blogspot.com

Bob Dobbs will save us all!

/for $35
 
2012-06-12 07:44:16 AM  

Ishkur: There's more to it, but this is the abridged version. Marian reforms + Crisis of the Third Century led to land redistribution, ownership and control in Western Europe that ultimately paved way for Feudalism.


All very true and I skipped it largely in the name of brevity. Which a few posts later I demonstrated absolutely no interest in.

/also I love James Burke
 
2012-06-12 07:45:11 AM  

Ebbelwoi: WhyteRaven74: It's funny that in England top shelf private health insurance, that blows the pants off any insurance plan in the US, goes for about $2,200 a year, and that's with everyone paying into and getting NHS coverage already.

Private insurance in the UK couldn't exist at those prices without the NHS as a basis. Otherwise it would be 20 times as expensive. Also, private health insurance doesn't blow the doors off anything. It just allows policy holders to skip to the front of the line to be treated by the same NHS trained doctors. Also, anyone with money in the UK pays cash at the medi-centres even if they have private insurance. Oh yeah, don't forget to add back price of deductibles to that price tag you're hawking.

Frankly, anyone who holds the NHS as an "ideal" in terms of universal healthcare is just downright silly. It's generally considered one of the worst among Western European countries. Germany, Holland, Denmark all pretty good. France... depends on where you are (Don't get sick in Marseilles). Southern Europe? That's farking third world healthcare. Don't ever get sick or injured in Greece, trust me on that one. Farking third world Hell.


It's more like France some areas better then others.
The real problem with the NHS is every bloody government that gets in is desparate to stuff some 'revolution' in the way it's run down its throat. It's in a more or less permanent state of Reform. The NHS was never broken it's just the system it operates in is.
If they actually left it alone it'll muddle along like everything else, regardless it is head and shoulders better then the system in the U.S
 
2012-06-12 07:49:51 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Wrong, with private insurance you can go to a private doctor and a private hospital. If you want to go to an NHS doctor or hospital you just use your NHS coverage.


Read it again. I said NHS trained doctors. They are private but no better than NHS docs. Try reading comprehension 101.

NHS is shiate. I've lived in the UK. If people are paying CASH to go to a Medi-centre for services that their private insurance theoretically already pays for... well you can bet that something is wrong. FWIW I support universal healthcare in the US if and only if we can get a level of performance similar to Northen European countries. If we get a Yankee version of the NHS or the crap healthcare they have in Portugal or Greece.... then no way Jose.
 
2012-06-12 07:51:14 AM  

Mr. Right: Father_Jack: Mr. Right: Employer paid health insurance (the government mandate) will have the same effect. A huge chunk of a worker's productivity will be confiscated by the employer and spent, supposedly, on the worker's behalf. The problem is that no matter how healthy the worker may keep himself, he will never see a dividend on that insurance premium unless he used medical services. Which, of course, will lead to increased demand and rising prices for medical services.

mr right,

Thanks for your thoughtful and polite post. Your Randian libertarian roots are showing but that's ok. :)

I would like to point out this is incorrect, however. If more people had insurance, ie, it was mandated by the govt for everyone to buy a policy, this would put more money into the insurance pots, and lower the risks to the insurance company of any single individual taking out too much for illness and costing the insurer too much money. Having more people in the insurance pool lowers premiums. This means that the premiums go down since the risk is spread across more people. So I don't think you have your supply and demand causality worked out correctly here.

History has already proven me correct. For several years, insurance would not cover office visits but it would cover emergency room visits. Immediately, everything became an emergency room visit. About 40 years ago, I was working on a construction job, jumped off a ladder and on to a nail, right through my foot. My insurance only covered major medical - pretty common in the day. I called my doctor's office, told him what had happened, I wasn't bleeding to death or anything so his office made room for me pretty quickly, I went in, was treated, had a quick X-ray to make sure no bones were broken, got a tetanus shot, wrote a check for $25.00, which paid for everything, and went back to work, just a little bit more careful about going down ladders instead of jumping off to save a few seconds. Fast forward to about 2 years ago when ...


Not sure how the anecdotatal story you told refutes my point... if anything you sound like youre advocating single payer care to do away with the legions of admins who must go thru the paperwork shenanigans whenever anyone's admitted to hospital because there are so many insurers and insurance products on the market it makes administration and processing of claims a nightmare. If everyone had the same policy that wouldn't be an issue now would it?

My equivalent story:
Torn tendon in my knee. Went to the clinic (not the ER, not the regular dr) in phoenix Arizona. Went thru 3 separate nursing stations where I signed papers swearing to pay, not to sue, I understand their privacy policy (so glad to know the hospitals will keep my data to sell to marketers) yadda yadda 3 hrs later finally see a dr.

Torn tendon in my knee (do it once, you do it more than once) here in switzerland. Go to the ER. Swipe a card. See a dr. immediately.

And re: rand, your posts have a libertarian "govt is theft and takes from productive members of society" feel to it, which is championed heavily by Objectivists, ie, the Rand fetishists. Assuming you're in your 50s/60s based on your story, youre much too old to be a standard Rand fan, since the typical rand fan seems to be the privileged white republican male, aged 17-25. Most sensible folks out grow Rand, but her stuff is an important developmental phase in people and her influence is very important in libertarian thinking, much the way marx is in hardcore leftists or hitler is in the teaparty.
 
2012-06-12 07:51:51 AM  

Ebbelwoi: f people are paying CASH to go to a Medi-centre for services that their private insurance theoretically already pays for... well you can bet that something is wrong


People do that in the US. Granted for different reasons.

I said NHS trained doctors

my fault there
 
2012-06-12 07:53:42 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: business can and does choose immigrants because they are cheaper,

So if you ran a factory you'd pay an immigrant less than an American to do the same job just because they're an immigrant? Or you'd go hire up a bunch of immigrants to pick your farm because hell fark 'em, they'll suck up crap wages?


As long as you keep buying your veggies from the next guy because he's selling them for less money, yes.
The race to the bottom is pretty much unstoppable because everyone is doing it.
 
2012-06-12 07:54:20 AM  

Father_Jack: If everyone had the same policy that wouldn't be an issue now would it?


Or if they got rid of all the paperwork and just went with insurance cards that were swiped and took care of everything. That would help. Also getting rid of referral visits, there's a lovely chunk of money straight down the drain, pre-approvals etc that would also help. Also allowing doctors to always dictate care would help. No people being sent home too early only to come back with something they would've never have had had they been in the hospital a few days longer.
 
2012-06-12 07:56:15 AM  

Zenith: regardless it is head and shoulders better then the system in the U.S


Like that's hard. Health care in the US is like a prom dress made of carpet remnants.
 
2012-06-12 07:57:29 AM  

neaorin: As long as you keep buying your veggies from the next guy because he's selling them for less money, yes.


Who says you couldn't sell them for the same price even if you pay more for the labor? Or who says the difference in price would be so much that people would care or even notice? If you're selling your crop to some distributor who sells to supermarkets, a few cents a pound is no big deal. The price can swing more than that just owing to seasonal conditions as evidence by how one year some produce will cost more than it does the year after. Also there's the Henry Ford effect, if people find out you're paying more they'll want to work for you because hey more money, and if you're getting the good labor only way for someone else to get it is to pay at least as much as you do.
 
2012-06-12 07:58:21 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: No, subby, you are wrong.

please re-read and try again. you get 3 chances.


No shiat. Subby is a 10 percenter, as in the dumbest.

And you can thank Barney Frank and the U.S. govt for inflating home prices.
And now there's the education bubble, courtesy of Uncle Sam.
 
2012-06-12 07:58:37 AM  

WhyteRaven74: MemeSlave: You could always try getting a job.

If he's getting that little in food stamps he already has a job. How about making sure that anyone has a full time job, or even better, works 35 hours a week earns enough to not need food assistance? A certain Richard Nixon thought that paying people enough that if they work they don't need assistance programs would be a swell idea.


I'm actually on unemployment
all i gotta do is apply only to 5 jobs a week
 
2012-06-12 07:59:12 AM  

Animatronik: And you can thank Barney Frank and the U.S. govt for inflating home prices.


That would be rather wrong.
 
2012-06-12 08:00:10 AM  

Jon iz teh kewl: I'm actually on unemployment


Close enough. I knew with that little in food stamps you weren't actually without any source of income.
 
2012-06-12 08:00:14 AM  

Ebbelwoi: WhyteRaven74: Wrong, with private insurance you can go to a private doctor and a private hospital. If you want to go to an NHS doctor or hospital you just use your NHS coverage.

Read it again. I said NHS trained doctors. They are private but no better than NHS docs. Try reading comprehension 101.

NHS is shiate. I've lived in the UK. If people are paying CASH to go to a Medi-centre for services that their private insurance theoretically already pays for... well you can bet that something is wrong. FWIW I support universal healthcare in the US if and only if we can get a level of performance similar to Northen European countries. If we get a Yankee version of the NHS or the crap healthcare they have in Portugal or Greece.... then no way Jose.


there's been a spate of German trained and registered GPs being brought in and killing patients here because they are not good enough.
when my daughter was born early and under weight the treatment she and my wife received was astonishing I couldn't have asked for better and I didn't have to pay cash in a medi-centre for the service.
funny enough the trainee midwife was a young german girl who came here because she couldn't get trained to do her choice of vocation in Germany.
 
2012-06-12 08:01:40 AM  

Zenith: The NHS was never broken it's just the system it operates in is.
If they actually left it alone it'll muddle along like everything else, regardless it is head and shoulders better then the system in the U.S


Sorry can't agree. There's a difference between a "good" healthcare service and an "equitable" healthcare service. Universal providers like the NHS are a milllion times more equitable than the US system. But if you've got a good job and good insurance in the US, you have access to excellent healthcare.
 
2012-06-12 08:01:51 AM  
This is a real-world problem. If the current trends in wealth distribution continue, we have much worse times ahead of us. Maybe it's time we put away the ideology and the theories and started looking for some solutions - before it's too late. Of course, that would require reason, and compromise.
Never mind.
 
2012-06-12 08:04:22 AM  

Ebbelwoi: you have access to excellent healthcare.


Well yeah, but the insurance company may decide to stiff you on the bill. Also you may not have access to it if the insurance company doesn't cover that doctor or hospital.
 
Displayed 50 of 490 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report