Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    8:01 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: How To End Cross-Generational Government Dependence? Back to Topics
SemiSteve

Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 4, 2013 5:49:19 PM

We don't want to turn a cold shoulder to the needy; but we also can't make life too comfortable for them. Allowing people to live in their own private homes and giving them enough to get by; and also giving them more if they have kids is not motivating them to better themselves. Worse, it sends the message to the kids that this is what you do. There is no need to strive and make a better life for yourself, the government will provide. Sends the message that the more kids you have the bigger your checks will be. Hence our policy has not effectively reduced poverty. Instead it has increased the problem and made it larger with each generation.

Here's my idea.

I've presented it before; due to input from you and further consideration I have refined it.

End welfare and free government checks. Operate government-run poor houses instead of most forms of government assistance.

For all the money the government pays out for food stamps, WIC, subsidized rent, child credits, welfare, etc it would be cheaper to construct and operate dorm-like facilities to offer food and shelter to the needy. And we can offer them much more to motivate them to get out of the system as we make life undesireable for them to remain in the system.

The poor houses would take in anyone who can't make it on their own but if they make trouble they are OUT.

All the residents are expected to take part in chores such as cleaning, cooking, laundry, building maintenance, security and child care. The child care would free up single mothers to go seek work. When mom can afford her own place she can still bring the kid(s) to the poor house for free child-care as long as she is employed. The beauty of this is that the child-care can be operated 24-7 so mom is free to take a job with any hours needed.

Mothers who have two or more children must be sterilized as a condition of acceptance into the poor house and/or child-care.

Free counseling, birth control and early-term abortions would be offered to all residents.

The facilities would also offer skill-sharing where residents teach each other things that they know how to do. Thus it would lead to job skills for many.

Residents can still stay at the center if they find low wage work outside the center. If so they will have to pay a small rent. But in that case they get out of the requirement to perform duties at the center.

If residents have children and an outside job they would qualify for a private room within the center. If not they will be sleeping in one of four large dormitories, one each for men, women, boys and girls.

The government should also offer free vocational training and college for those who can earn passing grades. Since residents would have to be bussed to classes it would be wise to locate the poor houses near the free colleges and vocational training centers. This may seem too costly but it is in the best interest of the government because when these people get jobs they are no longer wards of the State.

The poor houses should conduct some profit-generating operations to assist in funding. These could include performing such jobs as car-washing, oil changes, light assembly, constructing basic solid wood furniture, operating thrift stores, a barber shop, etc.

I've been pegged as a liberal on this site but it amazes me how many conservatives will balk at this idea. If they think they have a better one I'd like to hear it. They always want to cut government assistance; well here's a way to do it.

Three hots and a cot, job training, people off the street and off the dole. All for less than we are spending now. It accomplishes all the goals of reducing poverty and reducing government spending.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 9/4/2013 5:50:42 PM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 5:02:07 PM

But their parents are not teaching these lessons because the parents never learned them. Still, these kids are thrust into our world. How to deal with that? We must teach these things in our public schools. We have to take up the slack where the parents are failing. Like it or not our government is the only entity which can do this.
---------------------------------------
Tru:" Sorry, still the parents responsibility...they need to be held accountable...besides they don't even teach kids in schools anymore..."

--How do you propose to hold parents accountable? And what good will it do if they can't teach the lessons they never learned themselves?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 3:12:11 PM

Tru2psu2 - "Teachers can be agents of change-but they either don't want to or are afraid..."

... of getting fired for not acting the way the administration and school board want them to.

Making waves can be dangerous.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 3:10:38 PM

Tru2psu2 - "You wanted specifics-try this one"

Except we were talking about 19th century farmers, to which your response was "I know of folks who lost fortunes more than once and came back to success...".

She doesn't seem to fit any of that.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 2:45:26 PM

Agreed, though much of the problem can be attributed to the school administration and the school board.
-------------------------------------------
Teachers can be agents of change-but they either don't want to or are afraid...
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 2:44:31 PM

http://dailynightly.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22303758-the-mayor-who-rose-from-poverty-to-transform-a-georgia-town?lite
---------------------------------
You wanted specifics-try this one
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 1:03:24 PM

Tru2psu2 - "My wife is a substitute teacher and she is appalled by what she sees out there....from the teachers!"

Agreed, though much of the problem can be attributed to the school administration and the school board.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 1:00:00 PM

--But their parents are not teaching these lessons because the parents never learned them. Still, these kids are thrust into our world. How to deal with that? We must teach these things in our public schools. We have to take up the slack where the parents are failing. Like it or not our government is the only entity which can do this.
---------------------------------------
Sorry, still the parents responsibility...they need to be held accountable...besides they don't even teach kids in schools anymore...

My wife is a substitute teacher and she is appalled by what she sees out there....from the teachers!

[Edited by: Tru2psu2 at 1/16/2014 12:59:20 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 12:58:02 PM

Don't make general statements...give us the facts.
-------------------------------------------
Better check that mirror...seems to be your downfall
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 12:57:09 PM

BTW, we were talking about what happened in the 19th century.
------------------------------
Still applies today in the USA...
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 12:18:09 PM

That program DOES look worthwhile, sgm4law.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,536
Points:2,707,940
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 11:44:09 AM

This looks like it might be a step in the right direction.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2014 1:14:49 PM

tru: "We must teach our youth what this country is all about-what generations before were taught and what others (non-citizens) have come to long to become U.S citizens.

Our youth needs to get up off of the backsides and apply themselves. Have a dream and the desire to follw it through... "

--But their parents are not teaching these lessons because the parents never learned them. Still, these kids are thrust into our world. How to deal with that? We must teach these things in our public schools. We have to take up the slack where the parents are failing. Like it or not our government is the only entity which can do this.

If we do this we can move the ball forward, improve our nation, produce a more motivated citizenry.

If we don't?

More of the same.

More than before.

In greater numbers because they multiplied.

It takes no brains or wisdom to reproduce.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2014 1:05:41 PM

Tru2psu2 - "I know of folks who lost fortunes more than once and came back to success..."

Don't make general statements...give us the facts.

BTW, we were talking about what happened in the 19th century.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2014 12:46:14 PM

Many others worked hard and went bust.
--------------------------------------------
Don't make general statements...give us the facts-specific instances of those that went bust-along with where they went wrong!

I know of folks who lost fortunes more than once and came back to success...
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,662
Points:1,876,905
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2014 12:43:19 PM

We must teach our youth what this country is all about-what generations before were taught and what others (non-citizens) have come to long to become U.S citizens.

Our youth needs to get up off of the backsides and apply themselves. Have a dream and the desire to follw it through...
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2014 12:37:37 PM

Part of the problem is this old saw:

What's the most confusing holiday in Baltimore?

Father's Day
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2014 12:19:05 PM

OK, here's an idea.

Why don't we teach some living smarts in schools? Teach kids how to be responsible adults?

Tell them over and over while they are young the three most important decisions they will make as they become adults and the consequences of what they are deciding.

1. Your career.

2. Who you marry.

3. If and when you have kids.

Also add things such as taking up smoking, why the ability to manage a budget makes all the difference in quality of life, why being serious about saving should be a life-time habit, how humans are creatures of habit and that we can take control over our habits, that we possess the ability to make or break habits, the importance of delayed gratification, etc etc etc.

Obviously not enough kids are getting this message from their parents. Heck many of the parents are not teaching it because they never learned such things!

If we want to turn this country around it is up to government to take the lead on this. That is the only way to take what we have now and change it for the better. It is up to we the informed to pressure our government to do these things.

The rich and powerful who have the most control over government are not going to do it! (because it doesn't make them immediately richer).
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2014 9:27:54 AM

""We must break the cycle of kids learning govt dependence from their parents if we want to reduce poverty and govt debt.""

Exactly.
I know of a mother of 5 ( 5 different fathers )on welfare ,whos oldest ( now 18 ) had a kid at 16 & she is on welfare. They both are getting child support from any of the fathers ( they know of ) & are getting section 8 housing. Both have boyfriends living with them. ( AND YES... the government & courts have been notified ...they do nothing )
It is too easy to just game the system ...way too easy.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2014 5:22:57 PM

We must break the cycle of kids learning govt dependence from their parents if we want to reduce poverty and govt debt.

My idea is in the OP.

Tough love.

What we are doing is not sustainable.

Support my plan or suggest a better one.

What will it be?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2014 1:34:03 PM

PopcornPirate - "Government OVER Regulation stifles businesses."

Exactly. And too little regulation causes its own problems.

Balance is everything.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2014 1:33:02 PM

SoylentGrain - "You made that up."

Nope.

"My grand father settled in Iowa in the 1850s, before Iowa was even a state. He started out as hired labor. No minimunm wage back then. When he died, he owned 1,200 acres and was worth over $20 million in present day dollars. Rural folks did very well 150 years ago, ifvthey were willing to work."

SOME rural folks did very well. Many others worked hard and went bust.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2014 10:06:50 AM

PPirate you said there was too much government over regulation so I was just wondering how much government over regulation was the right amount in you view.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2014 10:00:56 AM

Government OVER Regulation stifles businesses.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 9:46:10 PM

"And a much higher risk of failure 200 years ago, due to your "lower risk of government regulation"."

You made that up. My grand father settled in Iowa in the 1850s, before Iowa was even a state. He started out as hired labor. No minimunm wage back then. When he died, he owned 1,200 acres and was worth over $20 million in present day dollars. Rural folks did very well 150 years ago, ifvthey were willing to work.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 6:22:12 PM

SoylentGrain - "So what. Risk is part of business ownership. The key to successus is risk management. No different now than 200 years ago, except for lower risk of government regulation 200 years ago."

And a much higher risk of failure 200 years ago, due to your "lower risk of government regulation".
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 3:16:37 PM

"Especially considering that it often didn't work then. One bad season could wipe out the livelihoods of hundreds of families."

So what. Risk is part of business ownership. The key to successus is risk management. No different now than 200 years ago, except for lower risk of government regulation 200 years ago.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 2:56:49 PM

PopcornPirate - "Because the government is taxing & over regulating businesses too much."

--How much over-regulation is the correct amount?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 2:56:30 PM

AFSNCO - "Poverty was relative at the time. More people lived off the land more so economically people were not well-off but for many, it was rough living, but they did not have to rely on someone else for a paycheck."

Which would work so well these days.

Especially considering that it often didn't work then. One bad season could wipe out the livelihoods of hundreds of families.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 2:54:02 PM

PopcornPirate - "Because the government is taxing & over regulating businesses too much."

And you missed the point. Private enterprise has never done well at much of anything that didn't show a profit.

That leaves an awful lot of things undone.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:17,655
Points:1,583,940
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 12:08:58 PM

"And poverty levels were high. Wages were low and businesses had few limits on what they could do.'

Poverty was relative at the time. More people lived off the land more so economically people were not well-off but for many, it was rough living, but they did not have to rely on someone else for a paycheck.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 10:13:15 AM

The government should be doing all of those things and more. Its all part of promoting the general welfare.

What it should not be doing is providing hand-outs to the lazy.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2014 9:46:43 AM

""Yeah, the government isn't doing any of those things much better than the private sector was doing. ""

Because the government is taxing & over regulating businesses too much.

There is an old saying that is 100% true

"Put the Government in charge of the Sahara Desert & in less than 2 years there will be a shortage of SAND."
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 4, 2014 12:31:33 AM

PopcornPirate - "See the difference?"

Yeah, the government isn't doing any of those things much better than the private sector was doing.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 4, 2014 12:30:20 AM

SoylentGrain - "What are you talking about? The US was a heavily rural economy in the 19th century."

And poverty levels were high. Wages were low and businesses had few limits on what they could do.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 3, 2014 10:56:47 AM

""--Hahahaha. What part massive debt from military overkill is getting govt out of our lives? ""

This is the point.
The federal governments job is the protection of the country.
Upkeep of Federal roads & land.
Running the Government.
Relations with foreign governments

It should not be in the housing business.
It should not be in the job creation business.
It should not be in the flood insurance business.
It should not be in the banking business.
It should not be in the energy business.

See the difference?
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 3, 2014 9:37:07 AM

"There's a balance that we need to maintain between too much regulation and not enough."

What are you talking about? The US was a heavily rural economy in the 19th century.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 2, 2014 6:21:27 PM

"Get govt out of our lives"

--Hahahaha. What part massive debt from military overkill is getting govt out of our lives?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 2, 2014 3:42:53 PM

SoylentGrain - "A significant portion of Republican legislators vote to get government out of our lives."

And, as in the 19th century, let big business rule our lives.

There's a balance that we need to maintain between too much regulation and not enough.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 29, 2013 8:39:35 AM

"There are perfectly legal ways to purchase legislation. Both parties do it."

Get real. You know darned well the majority of the Democrat party will trade every ounce of independence for a vote or campaign contribution. While some Republicans will as well, that's a minority. A significant portion of Republican legislators vote to get government out of our lives.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2013 6:42:07 PM

There are perfectly legal ways to purchase legislation. Both parties do it.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2013 6:17:29 PM

"Their attitude is the poor are poor because of their own bad decisions and laziness; so they should bear the brunt of their foolishness. If that means death then it's their own fault."

Just got back from Madison Wisconsin. Was visiting my wife's sister in a nursing home. She is dieing of throat cancer. Weighs 65 pounds, breaths out of a hole in her neck, and is close to death. She's 54 years old and, yes, chose to work part time, smoke cigarettes, and consume alcohol in excess every night. Those were all her choices.

" Enough for everybody if only the people would put off urges of instant gratification such as having a family or enjoying life, for instance, and get an education (on credit, I presume)..."

You forgot public grants. The single parent of the single parent mentioned above is in a Spanish PhD program all funded by public grants: school tuition, housing, childcare, the works all on taxpayer money.

On the other side of the coin, I worked in a corporate business environment. I paid for my education. Seems to me choices do have consequences.

"insomething that is in demand (like creating exotic Wall Street trading schemes) and apply themselves toward the all-American dream of getting rich by any means legal. "

Got nay examples?

" Once they are moderately rich they will also gain the perk of being able to make questionable things legal by paying off government officials.?"

Payoffs are illegal and people have gone to jail for such. If you search the records, 80% of the jailed politicians have been Democrats, over the past 50 years.

[Edited by: SoylentGrain at 12/28/2013 6:17:33 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 27, 2013 1:07:20 PM

"Starving leads to death, are you suggesting someone wants to decrease the surplus population?"

--No. I'm saying they just don't care.

Their attitude is the poor are poor because of their own bad decisions and laziness; so they should bear the brunt of their foolishness. If that means death then it's their own fault. Apparently conservatives feel there are plenty of good high-paying jobs out there. Enough for everybody if only the people would put off urges of instant gratification such as having a family or enjoying life, for instance, and get an education (on credit, I presume) insomething that is in demand (like creating exotic Wall Street trading schemes) and apply themselves toward the all-American dream of getting rich by any means legal. Once they are moderately rich they will also gain the perk of being able to make questionable things legal by paying off government officials.

Conservatives can't understand why if it is so good being CEO why everyone doesn't do it.
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 25, 2013 10:50:21 PM

S.S.

Said

"Let the needy starve".
Starving leads to death, are you suggesting someone wants to decrease the surplus population?

Ba Hum Bug
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 12, 2013 2:54:07 PM

It appears that most conservatives here have washed their hands of this topic. So we won't hear from them on SG's plan.

It appears that while they favor reducing the federal outlay for the dole they do not favor setting up any new government institutions which might replace it.

btw, that would include "Congress could establish guidelines for a bare bones Medicaid type plan." (which we already have for some)

No. What most conservatives really want is to just cut off aid to the needy. They want to end unemployment insurance, food stamps, SNAP, everything.

Let the needy starve.

That's their plan.

And it's not that they have no compassion. The problem is they only have it for themselves.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 9, 2013 3:46:11 PM

Going back to "pregnant while on assistance", perhaps we could simply offer free sterilization.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 7:11:11 PM

Tie the interest rate to a reference, like the 12 month treasury note, with perhaps a rate cap. But, yes, just like in the real world, you could never pay back the entire amount. That is a real good incentive to get off the plan as soon as possible.

If it takes ten years for a person to get back on his feet, the amount is manageable. Keep in mind all those current payroll deductions would be gone. Ten percent from someone's check is a fraction of current deductions. Plus the individual is in control.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 6:52:12 PM

SoylentGrain - "Interest would keep on accruing on any balance. No exceptions."

That wasn't my question. Should the interest rate remain the same once you've started repaying the debt? What happens if the amount of interest you're accruing each pay period exceeds the 10% of your pay that you're paying back the debt with?

Wouldn't working, and still going further into debt, be a major disincentive to work?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,767
Points:2,536,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 6:51:31 PM

SemiSteve - "Whereever the limit is set many will make certain they reach it each month and simply assume they never have any hope of paying it back. This could act as a strong disincentive for working (at least on the books)."

That may be the wave of the future anyway. There aren't going to be any well-paying menial jobs, and what jobs there will be will require more skill and/or education than they do now.

And with increasing wealth disparity, it's only going to get worse.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
All-Star Author Illinois

Posts:931
Points:16,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 1:51:40 PM

"Since the prerequisites of your plan include scrapping the PPACA (I presume) then insurance companies are back to charging whatever outrageous rates they want to charge. And knowing that the poor will be reimbursed by the IRS (meaning: those who pay taxes) then what's to prevent them from jacking the rates up sky high to satisfy their greed? The only constraint appears to be the monthly limit you set.

So I ask again:

Is it enough to really afford health insurance?"

Congress could establish guidelines for a bare bones Medicaid type plan. Or if you really wanted to see competive insurance, let the free market compete. Yes, x dollars for a health insurance plan.

As far as the affordable care act, that has and will continue to drive insurance cost up. In my case for the past three years, our insurance company has been quoting us prices in the low three hundreds per month for a family catastrophic plan. We are in our latte fifths. That's affordable. Under the affordable care act, the insurance company can not sell us the plan we wanted. It's going to be $15,000 a year now. I don't know what you are reading. But, for the majority, insurance cost is going to double or triple. Free markets do work.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,589
Points:343,640
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 12:29:56 PM

Well it looks like your plan is a 'free health care for the lazy' plan. So despite coming from a conservative I don't think it will gain much support. It doesn't fix the problem. All it does is make a system of producers and takers more efficient as it also encourages taking.

I bet you'd have much stronger support for it from liberals than conservatives.

And you never explained the break-point for the monthly spending limit.

Is it enough to really afford health insurance?

Since the prerequisites of your plan include scrapping the PPACA (I presume) then insurance companies are back to charging whatever outrageous rates they want to charge. And knowing that the poor will be reimbursed by the IRS (meaning: those who pay taxes) then what's to prevent them from jacking the rates up sky high to satisfy their greed? The only constraint appears to be the monthly limit you set.

So I ask again:

Is it enough to really afford health insurance?

I still favor the poor houses. We'll take care of you but we're not giving you any money. And we'll make sure poor life sucks so you want to work your way out of it. And we'll penalize/sterilize you for having too many children.
Post a reply Back to Topics