• You've discovered RedGuides 📕 an EverQuest multi-boxing community 🛡️🧙🗡️. We want you to play several EQ characters at once, come join us and say hello! 👋
  • IS THIS SITE UGLY? Change the look. To dismiss this notice, click the X --->

Toast - Sup? (1 Viewer)

I'm pleasantly surprised to see so many old faces still around, except maybe Generel.

I've been doing pretty good in the past year (yeah, it's been that long), focusing on getting my life in general in order. I teach at Northwest Florida State College now, and I really think they should pay for my health insurance.

How's everyone been? What's the state of NA?
 
Still pretty active, relative to the population in Everquest, and im sure the WoW side is hopping. Been a while since i've seen ya Cade, I remember you posting compiles for EQ probably 4 years ago or so.
 
Cade said:
I'm pleasantly surprised to see so many old faces still around, except maybe Generel.

I've been doing pretty good in the past year (yeah, it's been that long), focusing on getting my life in general in order. I teach at Northwest Florida State College now, and I really think they should pay for my health insurance.

How's everyone been? What's the state of NA?
Click to expand...
Congrats on the job. Yeah, I personally think all employers should have to pay for health insurance or we should all get health insurance for free, but that's a whole heated discussion :)

I'm still working way too much as usual. 12+ hours a day, sometimes 7 days a week. Well, more often than not 7 days a week. Getting married in 2012... Plus a few other odds and ends at home :)
 
Not that much going on in the wow section.

Great to hear you are doing fin, and yeah you should get free healthcare...

You could move to denmark we have it here, and free education... for only like 30% tax (after you get some deductions etc) =)
 
Hi Cade,

I am trying to finish college (CIS), and working fulltime (finally) but on a commission base (Real Estate). No time for EQ any more, but I do miss it from time to time. What are you teaching?

Good to see you.
 
NOTBACON.jpg
 
Ok, I'll do it, Healthcare cannot be free. It can be stolen, it can be unpaid for, but it cannot be free. Doctors are not free, nurses are not free, hospitals, offices, phones, electric, taxes, drugs, bottles, parking lots, ambulances... and so on. None of that is free. Unless you steal time, and materials from someone else any "free" healthcare you think you might be getting is being paid for by someone. If hospitals cost money, then the services they provide ..must.. cost money. The only available variable is are you someone that pays your own way or someone that doesn't?

*flamesuit on*
 
Healthcare cannot (and should not) be free, but for far different reasons than the ones stated above.

So, I am in agreement with your premise, but not necessarily with your reasons...although I do follow you logically, am do not specifically disagree.
 
RedBema said:
Healthcare cannot (and should not) be free, but for far different reasons than the ones stated above.
Click to expand...

Well I cant see any reason why healthcare should not be free =)

And no ofc its not free everyone just pays a little bit every month and then every one can get whatever treatment they need.

- decker
 
Doesn't socialism lean that way Decker, everyone pays in, and most can get some care.

The problems begin when over half the people, are using more in services than what their little bit pays for.

Everyone pays (d) for services (s) . But when people realize that the services are free (and can get them out of work) more people take advantage of the services costing more for the services than they pay. At some point (d) * payers < (s)*users. It's Free! FREE!!! FREEE!

So everyone pays a little more, so some can have "free" care. Then a little more, then a little more... eventually everyone is paying a lot for a large few to do nothing. This true with heathcare or welfare. The government of the United States of America, pays more today on healthcare than all other budget items combined. And it's not even free yet.

DebtClock

Note unfunded liabilities, at the bottom of the page. 15 trillion, 20 Trillion and 75 trillion. Social security, prescription drug, and medicare. And it's not free yet.

Oh 75 Trillion is more than GDP of planet earth.

GDP of Earth

Good thing we were actually paying for our healthcare today otherwise it might get expensive when it's free.
 
Yeah, but the problem with our Health Care system is that the big insurance companies are charging more and more money each year, and finding more and more reasons not to pay out when people need it. Example: I'm being gouged for $400 a month on Health Insurance for my wife and I. My wife needed to go in for stitches because she cut her hand, we had to fight the insurance company to pay even PART of the bill, because the med she takes every month marks her as having a pre-existing condition. It took 4 months to get PART of a $350 bill paid. I have a $50 co-pay for Urgent Care. I ended up paying almost $200 in the end.

I'm not going to get all political here, but the people who say our current system isn't broken need to step back and look at the big picture. My situation is very minor compared to some of the other stories out there. /politics off
 
Jmo, that's the circle though. I defined the circle and your experiencing it. Less people paying more for more people to pay less. Of that $400, how much of that is being used to recover on the underpayments on bills from medicare or prescription drugs?

Health insurance needs to go away. Insurance the way we think of it is OMG I crashed my car! My house caught fire! or the tornado / hurricane ruined my city. Insurance only works cause it can replace what is lost by buying new. They can't cap the expense on healthcare because they can't buy a new you.

Were using health insurance like a health warranty, But health is not something that you can put a warranty on.

Add to that this. I want a health insurance policy that only pays out when my healthcare cost go over $50,000.00. I can cover up to 50k by refinancing the house, or selling the cars or whatever. that's my choice. But I cannot buy that policy. Politicians decided that a policy with a deductible that high was not in the best interest of individuals. If you could buy a policy that only kicked in at 10k (most of us could scrape up 10k if our life depended on it) don't you think it would be OMG less expensive than a policy that has to cover your ingrown toenail as well as your blunt trauma to the head? Check out the drop in auto insurance with a $1000.00 deductible vs no deductible.

Pay your own way, like you do with your house, or your car. And buy insurance for your health, for the same reasons you buy insurance for your house or your car.
 
Last edited:
@ eqnotaddicted have to say; You say ppl will fake illness / cut of a finger on purpose? What will they gain ?

I make a lot of money and never use the hospitals, yet i pay some % of my salary to it. I really don't care if I pay taxes or insurance.

But just for fun lets do some math;
I make $6400 pr month $1640 (this ofc is not the same for all, depends on a lot of things) of these are tax free that makes it $4760

Of these $4760 i have to pay 45% tax thats $2142
Now these $1475,6 goes to;
Free health care
Free or deducted dental care
Free education (the state gives you around $740 every month you are under education from the day you are 18 and until you are done, there are restrictions on how long you can be under education ofc)
Maternity leave
No payed roads
And prolly a lot I just take for granted.
And thats ofc; for me, my children, anyone I know

Now I hardly use any of this but Im grad I have the option not to have to plan sickness.

The minimum salary (depenting on what job you have) is around; $3100 so the math for me had I only made this would be:
$3100 - $1640 = $1460
45% of $1460 = $803 (for the same stuff I get)

Not to mention that insurance companies are companies; some will try to cut expenses and the only way i can think of (or at least the easiest way is not to pay out clams).

I bet that had we only payed health care we would be way under $400 in taxes.

Well I guess we will never agree but hey there is no need we all live in a free democratic world, well most of us do =)

- decker
 
Last edited:
I knew your tax rates were high, wow!

"Denmark has had the world's highest tax level in 2005 and 2006, at 50.7% and 49.1% respectively. Denmark also held this position 1970-74 and 1993-95.*(1)

Your healthcare providers seem to be more local townships or municipalities, at least they seem to have the most control. It appears that you like your system, because you feel like you have a say in what happens.(2) And with local control, as in individual you would have a larger say than a citizen of USA on a federal healthcare plan. Local is better, but individual control is still best. (IMHO)

In 2002 your country has a 1-2 month average wait time. (2). In US we wait 1 or 2 hours. If we need a procedure, or even when the doctors just think we need a procedure. Even for the most obscure a 2 week wait would end up in litigation if the outcome would have been better if the test would have been sooner. (it's not all good) But an MRI or CAT scan can be done after a phone call to the clinic, you leave the family doctor and drive to the clinic.

Your countrymen believe in economics of scale, "With the tax burden at around half of GDP, a survey July 2008 found that 81% of Danes are of the opinion that the public sector can deliver more service for the same money..." (1) I question and admit I have no answer, will that belief continue as the local control you have, is gradually erased to gain even greater advantages of scale? "i.e. in the number of city court circuits (from 82 to 24), police districts (from 54 to 12)"(1)

What's wrong with everyone paying for themselves? Individual responsibility anyone? Public roads benefit everyone, schools benefit everyone, military, law enforcement, streetlights, sidewalks, courts and republicly elected officials are examples of a legitimate tax burden. Nothing personal but 99.99% of the time, your healthcare is not my problem. If it's a global epidemic, yea spend like hell trying to end it. If your dieing of liver disease, and you drank like a fish I don't want to pay for you. Even better I don't want anyone else to have to make that decision either. Acceptation of the exceptions not withstanding, take care of yourself, and expect others to do the same.

Other details.. USA is not the only country overspending. "Denmark's national debt totals $493bn, more than Norway, but their slightly higher population of 5.5m means that their liabilities per capita is $89,853" (3)" It would seem that even at a 50 percent tax rate (plus a 25% Vat), you still can't tax more than you can spend to the tune of $90,000 per person. (If your interested, it's about $380,000 per person in the US) (4)

Everything sourced, and I don't have the time to verify all the sources sources. But the question still remains, what gives anyone the right to take from me via taxes (or theft) my money to pay for someone else individual health care? If it benefits both of us we both pay an equal share of the total bill. What's mine is mine, what's yours is yours.


(1) Wikipedia
(2) www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Denmark.pdf
(3) http://hubpages.com/hub/External-Debt
(4) http://www.usdebtclock.org/
 
The us debt has a lot more to do with other spending than on health care...

Before Bush, we had a surplus. It was going to pay off the debt. Bush cut taxes, started a war, borrowed, borrowed and borrowed. Health care is in no way responsible for the debt. The other thing is that people don't seem to understand that if we had a full healthcare system you wouldn't be paying your monthly health insurance premium.
Take that premium for everybody, send it to the government, make everybody pay for it and you would have no problem whatsoever with a health care system.
By going to a national system, you take out the requirements of making a profit, individual vs group policies, determinations of whether or not something gets paid, lawyers, etc. The overhead of a corporate health care system is easily 20-30%. Medicare maxes out at 5-6% including legal fees.
Now as for fraudulent claims, it ends up being practically removed as you have no reason for anybody other than a hospital to file a claim and that's just for payment for services rendered. There is no reimbursement to the individual anymore.

As for hospitals wanting to make a profit.... why? Each year all the government needs to do is put away what didn't get used in the medical account for the country and then dish out a credit to each hospital of an equal amount that can only be used on medical equipment.
 
eqnotaddicted said:
I knew your tax rates were high, wow!

"Denmark has had the world's highest tax level in 2005 and 2006, at 50.7% and 49.1% respectively. Denmark also held this position 1970-74 and 1993-95.*(1)
Click to expand...

Not true; You have a large amount that you do not pay tax on. In my case; $1640.

eqnotaddicted said:
Your healthcare providers seem to be more local townships or municipalities, at least they seem to have the most control. It appears that you like your system, because you feel like you have a say in what happens.(2) And with local control, as in individual you would have a larger say than a citizen of USA on a federal healthcare plan. Local is better, but individual control is still best. (IMHO)
Click to expand...

Well thats not the way I see it. The state provides healthcare for everyone.

eqnotaddicted said:
In 2002 your country has a 1-2 month average wait time. (2). In US we wait 1 or 2 hours. If we need a procedure, or even when the doctors just think we need a procedure. Even for the most obscure a 2 week wait would end up in litigation if the outcome would have been better if the test would have been sooner. (it's not all good) But an MRI or CAT scan can be done after a phone call to the clinic, you leave the family doctor and drive to the clinic.
Click to expand...

First off; in the US 1 - 2 hours depends on your insurance.

2th: Any important procedure have a waiting time at 15-30 mins. Any procedure that does not effect your well-being can have 1-2 mount waiting time, true.

eqnotaddicted said:
Your countrymen believe in economics of scale, "With the tax burden at around half of GDP, a survey July 2008 found that 81% of Danes are of the opinion that the public sector can deliver more service for the same money..." (1) I question and admit I have no answer, will that belief continue as the local control you have, is gradually erased to gain even greater advantages of scale? "i.e. in the number of city court circuits (from 82 to 24), police districts (from 54 to 12)"(1)
Click to expand...

Me too but who don't think there can be improvements any place ?

eqnotaddicted said:
What's wrong with everyone paying for themselves? Individual responsibility anyone? Public roads benefit everyone, schools benefit everyone, military, law enforcement, streetlights, sidewalks, courts and republicly elected officials are examples of a legitimate tax burden. Nothing personal but 99.99% of the time, your healthcare is not my problem. If it's a global epidemic, yea spend like hell trying to end it. If your dieing of liver disease, and you drank like a fish I don't want to pay for you. Even better I don't want anyone else to have to make that decision either. Acceptation of the exceptions not withstanding, take care of yourself, and expect others to do the same.
Click to expand...

I think of the ppl that cant pay for them self. And call me selfish but I dont want to deal with the problems that property gives.

eqnotaddicted said:
Other details.. USA is not the only country overspending. "Denmark's national debt totals $493bn, more than Norway, but their slightly higher population of 5.5m means that their liabilities per capita is $89,853" (3)" It would seem that even at a 50 percent tax rate (plus a 25% Vat), you still can't tax more than you can spend to the tune of $90,000 per person. (If your interested, it's about $380,000 per person in the US) (4)
Click to expand...

IN 2008 the debt Per capita was 35.000 DKK. the US dolor is at 610 DKK for $100
That gives
$5737,7 Per capita
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danmarks_statsgæld (run it through google.translate.com or something)

EDIT: Yeah the estimated debt per capita of 2010 is $13114,75 but even the US is getting a hit from the global crisis ($41,997)

"The national debt equates to $30,400 per person U.S. population, or $60,100 per member of the U.S. working population,[32] as of February 2008."
Sources: [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt"]United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg" class="image" title="U.S. Budget & Debt Topics"><img alt="U.S. Budget & Debt Topics" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg/200px-Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/a/a5/Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg/200px-Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg.png[/ame]
Just scroll down to under section that stats that People's Republic of China owns 23.4% for US Treasury Securities.

USA = 13.2% live in property
Denmark = just around 0%
 
Never the less I really don't think we are gonna see this the same way: so lets just agree to disagree.

BTW I don't think our way is gonna work in the US. Never in a million years will it be something you guys can implement. However I still think it would be great if everyone could have some help, even if that means buying one less computer / WoW account whatever =)

PS Im not gonna discuss this anymore I see ppl are getting a rise in they blood-pressure and I don't want a hospital bill on my continence (that was a joke BTW)

- decker
 
Siddin said:
The us debt has a lot more to do with other spending than on health care...

Before Bush, we had a surplus.
Click to expand...

False. We have not had a surplus for a long, long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg


As far as taxes go. I can agree that zero percent tax would generate zero income for the government. Can you agree that 100 percent tax would have the same effect? Would you work for free?

If you can agree to the above, then you must agree that there is a percent somewhere in the middle that must let the workers keep what they earn, and pay an equal share for the fundamental functions of government. What that percent is, may be debated. Lower the percent and you will risk more because you can keep more. Raise the percent and you will risk less because you lose even if you win.

Another way of looking at the tax rate. How long will you willingly work, so that another person is able to choose not to work. EVERYONE agrees that taxes for roads and bridges and crap have to be collected. Take out the entitlements the pork, the bridges to nowhere, the vacations for congress's family, and any other expenditure that's not in the Constitution, I'd be the first in line to actually write my check. They would not have to steal it from me twice a month under the cover of the Social Security trust fund, or "interstate commerce line tax" on my phone bill.

Politicians have lied to us for ages, and ages. Healthcare is not a right. Rights don't come from congress. Taxes should be spent wisely. The current wars suck, and Obama just put us in for another 75,000 troops. Another president Lied.. Bring the damn troops home like you said you were going to. Gitmo still open? Lie. Unemployment over 8? Lie.

D's and R's in Washington just lie. In an honest discussion, any two random Americans would have much more in common with each other than the leadership of either party would ever admin to. Just like any 2 or 3 of us in an honest debate on the internet can agree that politics sucks.
 
Here's something else that scares me to death, and a reason we need a different system:

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

The U.S. is 37th. Look at the top 5-10 and see how their systems work. That's what we need to do to our system. We've turned everything in this country into making some guy at the top of these big companies really rich, while it's getting harder and harder for the rest of us to get by. Healthcare shouldn't be about anyone making a profit, it should be about people's well-being and quality of life.
 
eqnotaddicted said:
False. We have not had a surplus for a long, long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg
Click to expand...


Um, looking at that graph shows that there was a surplus near the end of Clinton's Administration....

Also: http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/new/html/Fri_Dec_29_151111_2000.html
Shows how much the surplus was.

Record deficits have become record surpluses. This Administration has have moved the country from a deficit of $290 billion in FY 1992 to an expected surplus of $256 billion in FY 2001. Eight years ago, the Congressional Budget Office projected a $513 billion deficit in FY 2001. Thus, the fiscal picture is now projected to improve by $769 billion in FY 2001 alone.
Click to expand...
 
Were confusing 2 things. I'll explain the way I see it, and you can let me know if I'm wrong or if you agree.

Budget surplus -vs- National Debt

Budget surplus is when the Government does not include all government spending in the budget.(wars, social security, medicare, medicare part b, pensions of federal employees, pensions of assumed states (CA, and likely NY) assumed pensions of General Motors and Chrysler, Universal Healthcare (how else do you think it was called budget neutral), some research spending on military technology, Fanny and Freddy home loan guarantees.

The more they push off budget, the better it looks. Now they don't really spend any less, actually since before most of us were born there have been off budget accounting schemes in the federal government.

There has not been a year since 1980, that's as far back as the report below goes, that the US government has spent less than it has taken in.

http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/index.html

As of 1 May 2010, the Treasury Department spent $195 Billion of your money on _interest payments_ to the holders of the National Debt, this year.

Interest: 195 Billion January to May http://www.usdebtclock.org/
NASA: 17.6 Billion (2009) (wikipedia)
Post Office : Revenue - Expenses 3.79 Billion (2009) (wikipedia)

We are so broke, spending so much money, it's hard to grasp just how fracked up we are.

1960 total Fed spending 97.3 Billion
1970 total Fed spending 195.6 Billion
1980 total Fed spending 590.9 Billion
1990 total Fed spending 1,253 Billion
2000 total Fed spending 1,789 Billion
2010 total Fed spending 3,720 Billion (est)

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/numbers

Just the deficit spending in 2010, would pay the entire budget, of the entire decade of the 1960's.

Just the interest we will pay in 2010, would pay for the entire federal government form 1970 to 1974.

Either we stop spending, stop giving away free shit, and allow people take responsibility for themselves, or economics will do it for us.

But when the "the state" collapses who's going to take charge?
 
Ok, I can see where you're coming from. Really the only way I see to fix the problem of surplus vs deficit would be to have everything put onto a separate accounting that shows all spending vs what was taken in.
 
Siddin said:
Ok, I can see where you're coming from. Really the only way I see to fix the problem of surplus vs deficit would be to have everything put onto a separate accounting that shows all spending vs what was taken in.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.

Oh and, "Yea good luck with that" or "How's that honesty thing working out for ya?" They will never do it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Toast - Sup?
Next unread thread 🦁

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top