General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf the younger group do not think they should have to purchase health insurance because
there might be a larger amount of funds paid to the older citizens then my question is why should the older group allow the younger group to use our roads, utilities, etc since this has already been paid for by the older groups.
Drale
(7,932 posts)Old Fat White Republicans tell people that young people think that, to try and make them hate the ACA.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)there might be a larger amount of funds paid to the older insurance executives then...
Good for them!
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Anyone under thirty is just cast out of society.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)already paid. I do not want to cast any group out but facts are facts.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)They degrade and need work all the time. New ones are being built. Infrastructure is being upgraded. Towns that grow need bypasses.
The US wasn't done building roads 50 years ago anymore than they were done taking care of people's health needs
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Thanks for kicking it all in so we young people can live free
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Was the road beds property was purchased before the younger ones was born, paid for tb those who are older. There are many things other than roads, it was just a simple example of something we all use, young and old. If the assumption is the young feel like nit purchasing health insurance because they may nit need the coverage at the moment, this could change suddenly. Health care for all, roads for all, the system works best if all contribute, and are not so greedy. Our defense, police, fire departments are for all to have access to use, cost has to be shared.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)From each according to our ability to each according to their need. That is really the philosophy behind tax funded services that benefit the people.
Now, being that health insurance is still a free market piece of shit, and traditional liberals abandoned their principles to pass it, that whole argument becomes murky. That's why shitty arguments about why "the young" shouldn't have to pay don't sound so shitty, and you have to wrap yourself up in a pretzel to justify it.
The bottom line is that the state should be funding these programs for everyone, and the rich (not young or old) should pay a higher proportion of their income to fund it.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Expenses which does not have anything to do with providing health care such as large salaries going to CEO but this is not what has passed. A friend broke her ankle while visiting in France, in three hours after arriving in a medical facility she left after seeing a doctor, had xrays and referred to orthopedic which placed her leg in a cast within three hours and at a cost of $35. If she would have been a French citizen it would have cost $8. In France a citizen can get health care for $10 a month and $30 a month for a Cadillac policy. No lines in France but she had to wait for twelve days to get a referral to an orthopedic in the US, the lines the GOP talk about is in the US.
former9thward
(32,028 posts)Young people do pay for their utilities. Should Bill Gates have exclusive road use because he has pays more taxes in a month than you will in your lifetime?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)When many of the roads was constructed these younger folks who do not want to purchase health insurance was not born. I did not say road use should be based on taxes paid by the individual, and if the younger group lives long enough then the younger group will be paying towards the health care of themselves. I have paid for health insurance during my life, it was the smart thing to do. I wish we had a national health insurance but it did not happen.
JVS
(61,935 posts)out of China's way.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)What about the fact they may already be paying taxes for public infrastructure and utilities? Young people do pay local sales taxes, property taxes, state income taxes when appropriate, federal income taxes, etc. Your argument could also be turned against the poor who may pay low to no taxes after credits, government assistance and whatnot.
Perhaps a different line of argument would be better.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)The young (who have little wealth normally) and the fixed-income elderly should both be paying next to nothing for their health care IMHO.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)because for the most part they are very healthy and can't imagine needing it.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)madville
(7,412 posts)I always just figured if something catastrophic happened I would rack up a bunch of bills and then declare bankruptcy.
Of course now 20 years later and having a house, family, good credit and building retirement/savings that seems like a horrible idea.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I think the vast majority of us thought we were invincible when in that age group ... by the time we hit our 40s and (gasp) 50s we knew that there wasn't anything even approaching invincibility.