It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I have a solution to Obamacare

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Rather than having middle class and rich class be forced to pay higher tax to expand medicaid to provide healthcare for all those who can't afford healthcare, there should be a new law in the repeal and replace that forces middle class or rich class individuals to pay for their family relatives who are too poor to afford healthcare.

This would make such aid personal rather than general. I wouldn't pay for the healthcare of strangers, but I would pay for the healthcare of family relatives. This way, there is less incentive for people to refuse to contribute to society and instead survive on welfare, because otherwise they would be a drag on their family relatives.

The law would also say, only in the case if someone who is too poor to buy healthcare and does not have any family relative in the middle or rich class would that person be provided with government medicaid. This way, medicaid can be used more efficiently.
edit on 22-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



+3 more 
posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   
I should get paid for every year I don't see a doctor instead of being lumped in w all you recessive gene bearers.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Please define family. Am I my brother's keeper?



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye


I must be losing it... Didn't you start this same thread earlier today? Thought I replied. There's so many.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
This is a marginal improvement over your previous eugenics-based healthcare idea.

Which isn't saying much. It's still pretty bad.
edit on -050009pm6kpm by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Family as in grandparents or parents or uncles or aunts or cousins or nephews or siblings or in laws. The law says Trump cannot nominate family members to exec positions. This is the definition of family members.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

No. This is my first on this solution.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:57 PM
link   
The idea is, we want low tax on the middle and rich classes, and we don't want the poor to think they should depend on welfare and not contribute. This solution kills two birds with one stone.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

OK.

Then I have to ask you - If you would pay for the care of family, then why is there a need to have a law to force this?



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:01 PM
link   
One of my brothers is a convicted child molester.
The only thing I'm willing to give him is a new rope to hang himself with.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: carewemust

No. This is my first on this solution.


OK, cool. At least you're offering a SOLUTION, instead of whining and complaining like Chuck Schumer's been doing all day.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   
We might ought to listen to Dr. Ron Paul, former medical practitioner AND congressman.


Ron Paul: How To Solve The Healthcare Crisis
edit on 22-6-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   
No thank you....i dont speak to ANY of my extended family



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

How about if no-one gets sick? Then you'd never need it.



... and what sort of twit would suggest that those who can afford it most, shouldn't pay a little more than the rest, some who can't afford it at all. Where do you think the money, that accumulates in those few lucky bank accounts, came from?

I think all tax should be proportionally based on profit.

If someone gets replaced by a machine and can't find a job, they are making no profit and cannot be taxed but the owner of the machine still makes a profit and can cover the unemployed's tax, so the government doesn't loose.

The owner of the machine is still profiting (by more than he would if he retained the employee) and the unemployed is not unfairly encumbered to pay what they can't afford.

If someone is employed in a low paying and small profiting job, they get taxed proportionally less.

It's still capitalist and doesn't dis-incentivise investment and profit, an all round winning compromise.

edit on 23/6/2017 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

God my brother in law is roasting in almost 300,000 dollars worth of medical bills.....if i had to pay that by myself im sorry but i'd be walkin him out to pasture.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Thank-you for that Ron Paul solution. Seems that the gist of what he's saying is that those who come in-between doctor and patient are big parts of the problem? Primarily Lawyers and Insurance companies.


I wonder if health insurance and malpractice suits went away, would a Heart Bypass surgery cost 70% less?



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 04:32 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

No just no.

So what happens with entire families who are just dirt poor and have no one to pay?

Would this mean that you would have to pay medical care for your 4th cousin?

How much money would you have to have before you have to start paying for your entire clan?

How would this actually work, who would pay for who?

How can you seriously think this is a good idea?



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

First we establish a "minimum standard" of health care to be provide for the people within an area. This would include check ups and would cover "pre-existing" conditions which are beyond the patients control. This would be paid for by a payroll deduction for everyone who works. Those who can't work are covered as well. Those who won't work are "encouraged" to find work, a little peer pressure may help here. Yes, this does amount to a single payer system, but only so far as to collect the monies from those who participate. Much like the current medicare programs.
There could also be a teared system for those who want a higher level of coverage but their premiums would be higher.
A private insurer would handle the monitary side and disperse the funding to the health care facilities involved. For each month the people with in the area are well, a set amount is dispersed. For that percentage of the people who are not well a deduction would be made in the funds distributed to the health care provider until these people are well again. This makes it a priority in the best interests of the providers for the people within their area to be maintained in a healthy manner; as their funding will now depend upon those who are well and not those who are sick.
I am well aware of the many "holes" in such a system, but we must start somewhere in order to find a system which will be to our benefit in the long term.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Obamacare increases incentive to not contribute and depend on welfare and decreases incentive to become rich, because of medicaid expansion and increase in tax on middle class and rich class.

My solution decreases incentive to not contribute and depend on welfare and increases incentive to become rich, because of being a drag on family members if too poor to afford healthcare and no tax on middle class and rich class.

So my solution is better.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If someone is too poor to afford healthcare and has no family relative who is middle or rich, then that person gets covered with ER or donation from people like Gates.

Or there could be a small tax on the ultra rich to pay for them. Their numbers are few. You'd be hard pressed to find someone that poor and not have any family relative who can afford healthcare.
edit on 23-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join