Learn some history. Healthcare/employer paid insurance IS A BENEFIT NOT A RIGHT

page: 1
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+22 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Ok I feel its time for me to speak up on this issue that has been thrust into the forefront by the Hobby Lobby ruling.

It is time to strip away all the talking points, emotion, religious, points and go back to the cold, hard facts. As unpopular as they may be so some.

The first place to start is a history lesson.

If one looks into the history of heath insurance one finds that in the private sector (to which this whole debate of employer funded healthcare falls) that it did not start with the unions, government mandates, or even employer charity.

It started out as an economic necessity or put in simpler terms THE EMPLOYER WANTED TO DO IT FOR A REASON.

It started in world war two american manufacturing.

In world war two there was an extreme shortage of manpower to work in war production.
So to entice workers to come work for XX company they started BENEFITS.
These were such things as in house food services, bonuses, employee clubs, and HEATHCARE.

Now not saying there MAY have been an employer that had MAYBE one of these benefits. But as a whole they were unheard of.
Even the unions did not have an agenda of healthcare. They concentrated on wages and safe working conditions.

Now this history I did not know at first until I read the time life series WORLD WAR TWO in the HOMEFRONT book.

Now that we see the history of where it started, one must now face the cold and unpleasant truths than now follow with the LOGICAL looking at this topic.
Versions of this may appear in other threads but let me list them (In no particular order of importance) in one list with minimal comment.

1. Heath insurance is a BENEFIT.

2. An individual can CHOOSE to work for a company given their benefit package (including or not including healthcare).

3. An employee can CHOOSE TO QUIT over the benefits they don't like.

4. The company can choose NOT TO PROVIDE a particular healthcare plan or choose none at all since ITS THERE MONEY NOT YOURS.

5. The companies reason for not providing a particular plan or benefit (ex morning after pill) is in reality NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS AND IRRELIVANT. They can choose it for religious, monetary, or no reason at all. JUST AS YOU CAN CHOOSE TO QUIT for any reason you choose.

6. A group of employee's can unionize and negotiate for healthcare as a benefit. But note in this case it is a MUTUAL DECISION.

The next two I think are MAJOR FACTS.

7. There is no constitutional amendment that REQUIRES AN EMPLOYER TO PROVIDE YOU WITH ANY HEALTHCARE.
If there is such an amendment that SAYS THIS SPECIFICALLY then point it out.

8. Before this employers routinely had policies that discounted some medical proceedures and/or drugs.
I personally have worked for 2 companies that did not provide organ transplant insurance, two that did not provide any birth control, and all that had something or limits that DIDN'T CARE WHAT I THOUGHT I SHOULD HAVE.

And now the biggest point that those who support obamacare don't like because it torpedo's one of their screaming points.

9. Any item the employer does not want to cover or provide no coverage of all ARE STILL LEGAL PROCEDURES AND DRUGS. NO ONE IS DENYING ANYTHING OR MAKING IT ILLEGAL FOR (MOST QUOTED EXAMPLE) RELIGIOUS REASONS.

The COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE TRUTH is THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR IT FOR YOU.
Its STILL LEGAL, its STILL BETWEEN YOUR DOCTOR AND YOU, and YOU CAN STILL GET IT.

So lets recap the cold truths.

You (the person) can choose to find a better job that pays for what healthcare you want.
You can unionize and try to get a contract with heath insurance in it.
You can try to change the constitution for mandatory healthcare.
Those procedures and drugs are STILL LEGAL.
You can PAY FOR IT YOURSELF.

You can (if you can get enough people to do this) as a group refuse jobs with XX employers until its in their benefit for hiring to add heathcare insurance.

Or even follow the lesson (minus the war, lets not get stupid) create an economic climate that has so much work that the companies will provide things that will entice workers to come (and stay) with them. This would not only be heathcare but increased wages and better working conditions to boot.

The last thought I will leave you with is the outright hypocrisy I see with the supporters of obamacare and "cover everything if needed or not" heathcare by employers.

You all scream "keep religion out of it", "your religion is denying my heathcare rights" , "you are letting religion hurt women", ect.

But by demanding what YOU THINK IS MORAL OR RIGHT is using a personal faith, opinion, or (dare I say it) religious type argument(s) for what you want paid for?

So how again are your arguments any better or be different that hobby lobby?



+11 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 02:32 AM
link   
Very well said mate. I am going to get flamed for this, however, health insurance is NOT a right, the laws on the books already state that you cannot be denied emergency medical care anywhere (you still have to pay for it, just like any other service). However just because one is lazy (yes and I do say lazy because that is what it is) to get a better job or education to get a better job, heck even work 4 jobs at a time to pay for what they need (and yes I have done that, it is not fun but doable) but it is NOT my responsibility, the USG or your employers responsibility but YOURS. Also for the record, one reason for healthcare costs to be off the charts expensive is, when someone does not pay, they recoup from those that can, and it drives the cost even higher. If you do not want to pay for healthcare insurance, then by all means do not get any, but do not expect anyone else to pay it for you as well.. YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO IT.

Grim



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

First of all, access to health care is a basic human right. It's simply inhumane to allow someone to die or suffer because they don't have money. Should it be the responsibility of employers to provide health care benefits? Absolutely not, the responsibility lies with the entire population and it's government.

We pay taxes to repair and build infrastructure, pension plans, a military, and government programs. None of these are as important as providing health care to people. You can complain all you want about government sponsored health care, and give the excuse that government can't run anything right, but when it comes down to it, having private insurance companies run healthcare when they're in the business to make a profit is like having the fox guarding the hen house. Insurance companies are literally controlling and making decisions on how doctors can treat a patient. The last thing I want is a corporate entity deciding what treatment they will allow or cover for me or my kids. Ask any doctor in the U.S. and they will tell you how insurance companies control their treatment of a patient, and the ridiculous guidelines they have to follow on a day by day basis.

It's the politicians and government as a whole who have no public oversight to make sure taxes and government programs are ran efficiently and are benefiting the public. Social Security has been a life savor for many until politicians decided to include it in the general fund and robbed from it.

There are critical resources needed everyday by the public which should be controlled by a non-profit entity-government. That is Health care, energy, infrastructure and homeland defense. Everything else should be provided by the private sector.

We really need to have a national review of government's role in society. The purpose of our Government should be to provide critical everyday life services for it's citizens. If the government can dictate and draft any citizen into defending and sacrificing their life for their country, you better believe they have the responsibility to provide for the health and care of every citizen.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:45 AM
link   
In 45 years of working i have noticed that companies the don't have health insurance for employees have lax job site safety.

Companies with health insurance for employees have a monetary reason not to skimp on job site safety.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 04:10 AM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

Well said. The pervasive sense of entitlement has totally changed what our expectations and responsibilities are.

We used to take care of ourselves. We used to see healthcare as an option that we would choose on an individual basis. Rising costs in healthcare have driven much of this change though.

Perhaps the rising costs (if you want to tinfoil-hat about it) were artificially driven to encourage us away from an individual nature and force us to a collective hive-state where we end up relying on the state to care for us.

Either way, we now find ourselves arguing about what are rights and what are benefits and the lines are getting very blurred by the same leaders who job it is to define those lines!


+7 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 06:12 AM
link   
After thinking about it for a while, I like the Hobby Lobby decision by the Court. I believe it is one more push toward single payer/medicare for all system. Health care is a right, rich or poor. We have the right to pursue happiness. Excluding millions of people and children from going to a doctor because of cash, is inhumane.


+10 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
After thinking about it for a while, I like the Hobby Lobby decision by the Court. I believe it is one more push toward single payer/medicare for all system. Health care is a right, rich or poor. We have the right to pursue happiness. Excluding millions of people and children from going to a doctor because of cash, is inhumane.


You have the right to pursue happiness.

The government has no obligation to supplement that right.


+7 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

When private enterprises or corporations fail to provide needed services, it is the responsibility for us to step in.


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 07:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: beezzer

When private enterprises or corporations fail to provide needed services, it is the responsibility for us to step in.


Us. Yes.

Government? No.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Completely disregard the fact that medical services are way too expensive for most to afford without having a "socialist" insurance plan....Pursuit of happiness?....I believe you have a somewhat simplistic view on how things are disguised as working when they simply "Don't work".

I trained for a job in the medical fields and never took up a job in the medical fields because of the things that are done to people in the name of the almighty dollar.

I don't have to take out malpractice insurance to bend and form metal....



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Thank you Beezzer.. That is exactly it, minus one other comment on it, they should not attempt to infringe on it wither with obtuse laws.

Grim



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimmley
Very well said mate. I am going to get flamed for this, however, health insurance is NOT a right, the laws on the books already state that you cannot be denied emergency medical care anywhere (you still have to pay for it, just like any other service). However just because one is lazy (yes and I do say lazy because that is what it is) to get a better job or education to get a better job, heck even work 4 jobs at a time to pay for what they need (and yes I have done that, it is not fun but doable) but it is NOT my responsibility, the USG or your employers responsibility but YOURS. Also for the record, one reason for healthcare costs to be off the charts expensive is, when someone does not pay, they recoup from those that can, and it drives the cost even higher. If you do not want to pay for healthcare insurance, then by all means do not get any, but do not expect anyone else to pay it for you as well.. YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO IT.

Grim



Of course it isn't a right. It is a service just like any other.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: scrounger

First of all, access to health care is a basic human right. It's simply inhumane to allow someone to die or suffer because they don't have money. Should it be the responsibility of employers to provide health care benefits? Absolutely not, the responsibility lies with the entire population and it's government.

We pay taxes to repair and build infrastructure, pension plans, a military, and government programs. None of these are as important as providing health care to people. You can complain all you want about government sponsored health care, and give the excuse that government can't run anything right, but when it comes down to it, having private insurance companies run healthcare when they're in the business to make a profit is like having the fox guarding the hen house. Insurance companies are literally controlling and making decisions on how doctors can treat a patient. The last thing I want is a corporate entity deciding what treatment they will allow or cover for me or my kids. Ask any doctor in the U.S. and they will tell you how insurance companies control their treatment of a patient, and the ridiculous guidelines they have to follow on a day by day basis.

It's the politicians and government as a whole who have no public oversight to make sure taxes and government programs are ran efficiently and are benefiting the public. Social Security has been a life savor for many until politicians decided to include it in the general fund and robbed from it.

There are critical resources needed everyday by the public which should be controlled by a non-profit entity-government. That is Health care, energy, infrastructure and homeland defense. Everything else should be provided by the private sector.

We really need to have a national review of government's role in society. The purpose of our Government should be to provide critical everyday life services for it's citizens. If the government can dictate and draft any citizen into defending and sacrificing their life for their country, you better believe they have the responsibility to provide for the health and care of every citizen.


Except the truth is that everyone already has access to healthcare and the same right to engage in this service as anyone else. The true issue, and the one that is disguised by such verbal smoke and mirrors, is that people want someone else to pay for it and therein lies the debate.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   
To provide for the general welfare seems to be leaning toward guaranteeing we have the option to pursue happiness, doesn't it?.

I am not talking about welfare or assistance either, I'm talking about trying to assure that it is even it possible for people to get what they need so long as they are willing or able to go out and get it, it's about preserving the option.

Voting won't change anything, the corporations that dole out your happiness are not elected, they are godlike and immortal, they are only accountable to a point.

Step in and fight an LLC all you want, it won't change a thing, and if it does it won't next year because they will simply change the laws.

Better still and most often, they won't do business with you without you signing away some of your rights in the "terms and conditions" or "policy" which is just another word for "contract".

Nothing like trading negotiable instruments for something less negotiable.

a reply to: beezzer

edit on 2-7-2014 by MyHappyDogShiner because: neg



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

This is true. I currently am in the medical field, and see this first hand all the time. The fastest way to cut a lot of the costs is to limit malpractice litigation and stop all these frivolous law suits to make a quick buck, by suing MD's and RN's, and stop Big Pharma from pushing all these unnecessary prescriptions would be a big boost too.

Grim



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

The only group that has a "Right" to free or at the very least low cost (albeit I think it should be free) is the military and our vets, they earned it with blood, sweat and tears.

Grim



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   
I know it all seems so very simple. Pretty much everything on ATS does to some. But the fact is, things are more complex than many here want to believe. Or perhaps need to believe. There are all sorts of nefarious forces at work that drive up the cost of healthcare: insurance, lawyers, pharma, fraud, to name just a few. That has driven the cost of healthcare out-of-reach for most employers and average people. At the end of the day the buck stops with the hospitals. Face it, we need hospitals. We all need hospitals. But they have been driven to bankruptcy by the huge increase in unrecoverable services caused by the uninsured for whom hospitals have become the provider of last resort. Many have been forced to close, scale back services, and lay-off clinical staff. Manageable and comparatively inexpensive conditions are allowed to deteriorate because people have no care. What was an early stage diabetic now becomes a hospitalized amputee. Whether you feel people have a 'right' to basic healthcare or not, our medical infrastructure --- the one we ALL rely on, insured or not --- is at-risk. There are huge societal economic costs associated with allowing large numbers of people to descend into medical morbidity. One way or another we will end up paying for it. A stitch in time saves nine sort of thing. But don't be fooled. Whether care for the uninsured is paid for through the ACA, welfare, or skyrocketing fees for those that ARE insured levied by hospitals needing to recover what they cannot from the uninsured, WE will pay one way or another. Even if we kick those who cannot pay to the curb we will pay. That's reality like it or not.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
To provide for the general welfare seems to be leaning toward guaranteeing we have the option to pursue happiness, doesn't it?.

I am not talking about welfare or assistance either, I'm talking about trying to assure that it is even it possible for people to get what they need so long as they are willing or able to go out and get it, it's about preserving the option.

Voting won't change anything, the corporations that dole out your happiness are not elected, they are godlike and immortal, they are only accountable to a point.


Let me stop you right there.

This is where I see a problem.

You call corporations godlike, immortal. Many accuse them that they aren't "people" and have no rights.

Yet everyone states that government "cares".

Government is just another god-damned corporation!

The only one you can count on is yourself. Maybe other like-minded people.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Uh huh.

Claiming business losses is an excellent way to save paying taxes, and raising rates means you can rake in even more at tax time.

Everybody does it.

There are bigger problems here than some even fathom, but hey, it's only business....

a reply to: NavyDoc



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: beezzer

When private enterprises or corporations fail to provide needed services, it is the responsibility for us to step in.


No it isn't. If I, through lack of planning and poor choices come in to difficulty, it is not your RESPONSABILITY to bail me out and you should not be coerced to do so. If you want to, out of the kindess of your heart, that is noble and an example of a good neighbor, but if someone else goes into your garage and takes your stuff to give to me because they feel bad but don't want to help me personally, that is not noble.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join