So Let's See What Happens

[bu villain]

I just posted up the link in post #112 in the previous page - did you not read my post?
"The UN disagrees with you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Expectancy_by_Country
France's and Norway's LE is 80, and the US is 78 - basic math tells you that it is 2, not 10 - and we have a lot more people die of unnatural causes - such as car crashes. ".

I already responded to that when you first made the post but you still didn't answer my question. So your position is that going to a doctor for basic health care has no value?

If a family's costs rise, but their income does not, where do you think they will cut? I suggest you do some studying - try reading the 1910 study by Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree in York, England. BBC did a special on it called A Life Without Work. Rowntree found that people had to spend on their shelter, and would spend less on their food, and even go without, to have shelter first. This had a direct effect on their health. BBC also showed that it still is happening the same way now - a 100 years later.
My food analogy was based upon fact, so believe what you want, but you are simply in denial as it does not agree with what you want to see..

Your cherry picked facts are not telling the whole story. It's not hard to see the rediculousness of your argument. You really think someone with a 250,000 dollar house driving a beamer is going to have their grocery bill as the first item on the chopping block if their health care costs go up? And as we both know poor people don't pay taxes so they don't have to make any sacrafices.

The education that the public schools provide is not worth the cost. Take a look at how many people are out doing the worng thing or working for peanuts. How about all of those on government assistance? Guess where they got their education from..

You believe if we just got rid of public schools we wouldn't have people doing the wrong thing, making low wages, or being on government assistance. Really?

I had a friend that went bankrupt from his child's sickness. He was able to rebuild after a few years and all of them are living fine now. The hospitals wrote off the costs, and the taxpayers ultimately paid for it. The current status quo cost less per family than your proposal to prepay these occurances.

That's exactly opposite of what I am advocating. I already said if testing would cost more than the savings of finding problems early then I wouldn't support that test.

My feelings won't change. I have made sacrifices to prepare my family's finances. Why should I have prepare other peoples financial situations for them? That is exactly what you are after. You are saying that I, the one who has sacrificed and prepared and planned properly to take care of my family, should pay the healthcare costs of people who do not. You are saying that I am not smart enough to know how to spend the money that I work for and earn, and that my money should be taken from me by the government, and the government, in its infinite knowledge, knows how to spend my money better than I do. That they can provide proper healthcare for everyone, when they can't even get basic programs like Social Security - I won't rely on it either.

I realize you feel no moral obligation to help anyone out but your own family even if it would benefit the world your family lives in. Point made.