Quote:
Originally Posted by kazbates
That's it in a nutshell. The difference between people who think they should be "taken care of" and those who take care of themselves. That's really at the core of the healthcare debate here. I don't want the government to take care of me other than emergency services, education, and military. When my husband was out of work, we relied on my paltry teacher's salary and our savings. We paid for our own health insurance (by the way, I do believe that ALL insurance is a scam and that the insurance industry is what really has a strangle hold on this country) and took care of our own needs. We cut out everything that wasn't essential. That's what responsible people do.
|
The government wouldn’t be “taking care of you” – it would simply administer a plan using tax dollars – that’s it, in a nutshell. Instead of paying an insurance company, your “premium” would be paid in the form of taxes. This is a simplification of course, but so is the idea that a government administered healthcare system is some sort of giant freebee handout to deadbeats. The government isn't “giving” you healthcare, any more than it is giving you free roads and bridges.
If you and others are so distrustful of government, might I suggest a move to Somalia? There you will find a delightful little example of what it’s like to live without all that dastardly government interference, and all those freely available, government “handouts.”