|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Not so fast, BJWD. I thought it was free?
If it is not free, and, lo and behold!, if it is paid for by taxes, as you seem to suggest, then that would mean that what we are talking about here is different people in different political economies chosing to construct and reform in their own contexts their own tax systems and social policies as they see fit.
And if that is the case, do people not have a right to construct and reform tax systems and social policies that might not meet with approval from wholier-than-thou Canadians and Commonwealthers who are so enamored of their own tax systems and social policies (take Canada's so-called Employment Insurance, for example) that they flee their country to find the only meaningful and less-taxed employment they can get in places like South Korea or, say, Singapore...?
Waiting on the edge of my seat. I mean, "Are you f!@#ing kidding me???"
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sorry, but did I say it was free? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, you just said "nonsense." You also suggested "taxes," which conflicts with what everyone else from the Utopian Commonwealth states where everything is free seems to be suggesting.
And, if it is indeed paid for by taxes, as you seem to suggest, then that would mean that what we are talking about here is different people in different political economies chosing to construct and reform in their own contexts their own tax systems and social policies as they see fit.
And if that is the case, do people not have a right to construct and reform tax systems and social policies that might not meet with approval from wholier-than-thou Canadians and Commonwealthers who are so enamored of their own tax systems and social policies (take Canada's so-called Employment Insurance, for example) that they flee their country to find the only meaningful and less-taxed employment they can get in places like South Korea or, say, Singapore...?
Still waiting on the edge of my seat. I mean, "Are you f!@#ing kidding me???" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sleepy in Seoul
Joined: 15 May 2004
Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Sleepy in Seoul: you could start by going to the county hospital. At least several states that I have personal knowledge of laws exist making it mandatory that at least one hospital must treat (and then bill) indigent patients.
If you do not pay, you would get a bad credit mark and the county hospital would ultimately write the debt off. They would still have to treat you the next time you admitted yourself.
You could also apply for MedicAid assistance. |
Thank you for, at last, answering my question. How many states have these laws about having at least one hospital in a state that must treat patients regardless of insurance? All of them?
| Gopher wrote: |
| Also, your car-accident scenario is truly not the way to go -- based on what you seem to be wanting to argue here. Personal-injury firms take people on one-thirdish contingency, tend to pay their clients' bills while awaiting the settlement, and then issue them a six-figure or so check before parting company. |
What exactly do I want to argue about here? Please tell me as I don't seem to be thinking what you think I am. All of your assumptions are making me feel a bit dizzy.
In car accidents in the U.S., is everyone able to sue or to make a claim? What about the driver-at-fault (if there is one)? In Australia only the driver-at-fault is not able to make a third-party insurance claim, but all people involved would always be able to have treatment with no charge (other than that normally levied on the general public). In the U.S. if the driver-at-fault is not able to make a claim, how would s/he receive treatment other than at a free county hospital if they have no insurance?
| Gopher wrote: |
| So, then. Who pays for your healthcare system? |
It is paid for by general taxation and ACC (Accident Compensation Commission) levies from employers, PAYE tax, part of vehicle registration fees and part of the petrol tax. Essentially, the New Zealand healthcare system is funded by the taxpayer, and all of the taxpayers are more than well-aware of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
You need to get your anger issues resolved. And I don't mean that in an 'egg on the foaming nationalist' sense, but as in, you really need to get your anger issues resolved.
1) Why do you care what these Canadians et al think about health care in your country? I sure as sh.it don't care what you think of Canada, the commonwealth or anything else. Why do you?
2) Am I F$%$#5 kidding you in regards to what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sleepy in Seoul wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
Sleepy in Seoul: you could start by going to the county hospital. At least several states that I have personal knowledge of laws exist making it mandatory that at least one hospital must treat (and then bill) indigent patients.
If you do not pay, you would get a bad credit mark and the county hospital would ultimately write the debt off. They would still have to treat you the next time you admitted yourself.
You could also apply for MedicAid assistance. |
Thank you for, at last, answering my question. How many states have these laws about having at least one hospital in a state that must treat patients regardless of insurance? All of them? |
Medicaid is a Federal program. Those who need urgent treatment and cannot pay will be paid for by the government.
We're not barbarians. The system is just inefficient and expensive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sleepy in Seoul
Joined: 15 May 2004
Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Unbelievable, this density.
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| going to the doctor is free in Canada. That means seeing the doctor and having surgery is free. |
Please clarify: you mean to say that no one pays for these services to exist? |
I think that what you seem extremely unwilling to concede is that when people talk about healthcare being free, they mean free of charge at the point of treatment, not magically requiring no funding whatsoever. I hope that you are just pretending to be this obtuse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sleepy in Seoul
Joined: 15 May 2004
Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Medicaid is a Federal program. Those who need urgent treatment and cannot pay will be paid for by the government.
We're not barbarians. The system is just inefficient and expensive. |
Who qualifies for Medicaid? Everyone? If not, where is the cutoff? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sleepy in Seoul wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
Medicaid is a Federal program. Those who need urgent treatment and cannot pay will be paid for by the government.
We're not barbarians. The system is just inefficient and expensive. |
Who qualifies for Medicaid? Everyone? If not, where is the cutoff? |
Here's the website.
| Quote: |
IMMIGRANTS AND NONCITIZENS
Immigration status is NOT a factor for Emergency Medicaid eligibility. Any person, regardless of legal immigrant status can be eligible for Emergency Medicaid if he/she meets income and asset limits. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gopher, if I looked up the phrase, "doesn't see the forest for the trees" in a reference book, I'm sure I would find your picture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sleepy in Seoul
Joined: 15 May 2004
Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sleepy in Seoul wrote: |
| Essentially, the New Zealand healthcare system is funded by the taxpayer, and all of the taxpayers are more than well-aware of it. |
And that is their prerogative. New Zealanders ought to be able to manage New-Zealand affairs, its political economy, its taxation system, and its social policy as New Zealanders see fit as played out in New Zealand's local, state, and federal elections -- or what-have-you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sleepy in Seoul wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
Unbelievable, this density.
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| going to the doctor is free in Canada. That means seeing the doctor and having surgery is free. |
Please clarify: you mean to say that no one pays for these services to exist? |
I think that what you seem extremely unwilling to concede is that when people talk about healthcare being free, they mean free of charge at the point of treatment, not magically requiring no funding whatsoever. I hope that you are just pretending to be this obtuse. |
Not at all. What you seem extremely unwilling to concede is that Americans may have decided through local, state, and federal elections through their history not to pay such taxes.
Maybe they should and maybe they should not. But however it may be it is not your fucking decision.
And, in any case, please do not come here and tell me that healthcare is free in Canada and the rest of the Commonwealth.
Americans do not enjoy the same "free" healthcare coverage Canadians do. But we do not see such a large percentage of Americans living on "Employment Insurance" or fleeing the country and its excessive taxes to find the only meaningful employment they can in South Korea and, in BJWD's case, Singapore.
That represents but one tradeoff among many. Are you honestly telling me you do not recognize such tradeoffs when comparing and contrasting America's political economy with Canada the rest of the Commonwealth's? Because I know for a fact that, inconceivably hypocritically, the hundreds of Canadians in my university who work on their doctorates (under American-funded programs entirely unavailable in Canada) do.
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:58 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| ...shall we try the next step? |
No, Lucy. I stopped responding to other posters' baiting games long ago.
If you evinced good-faith interest in the American healthcare system, I might. But you have made it clear that you do not. Not only that, but you cannot read "big words." Therefore you are here playing low-level vocab baiting games.
Not worth much more of my time on any score, I am afraid. |
yeah i am not interested anyway...you are right.
but i now know you are capable of giving you own personal opinion. that is all i was after.
so perhaps you learnt a lesson here and you'll be able to use it when a topic of mutual interest arises in the future.
and feel free to use big words as long as you aren't using them hide the fact that you don't have much to say at all.
btw, we share the same opinion of MM, so maybe we arent as different as you presume to think.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
And nobody is forcing America to do different. Criticism isn't force.
However, shouldn't the Iraqi's be afforded the same respect? Or Canada in regards to drug law? Oh, the list could go on and on. An American, a republican American at that, getting all upset when the policies of his country are slammed and then crying sovereignty is a bit rich.
If you think about that, you might then be able to fathom why the world pisses and moans about the United States so much. If you dislike even words about your country... Imagine.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
