SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (60010)8/2/2009 6:39:49 PM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
It sounds like you don't have a clue what I am talking about nor bothered to read it or understand it. It doesn't take a degree in english to understand what I wrote.

as to this...

But you can also turn this around: why don't you tell some person who has a terminal condition that sorry, we can't afford to find a cure for their disease?

that is a joke and a complete fear-based reading of healthcare for all. That is what the rw is trying to sell to people and it will not fly, as your suggesting because I suggested that if people don't want universal healthcare, then consumers should no longer substidize employer care for employees thru higher costs of items, ergo... no healthcare thru your employer. you want it? you buy it.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (60010)8/2/2009 6:43:56 PM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
this is quite simple - all employer paid healthcare is passed on to the consumer - that is no different than taxes used to pay for govt employee healthcare or medicare or universal care - it is all money out of pocket to me. so if we don't have universal care, why should the unisured be paying thru higher prices on goods and thru taxes to insure others?