• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Healthcare a "right" and should it have limits on how much is consumed and by whom?

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
How much more tax do you want to make those poor folks pay? Where I live, taxes comprise something like 36% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes.

Now I don't know about you, but great googly moogly.

........and it doesn't matter how high they raise the taxes on tobacco or alcohol; I'm a Mormon. I neither smoke nor drink...but 36% Seriously? ...and California is by no means the state with the highest taxes on this stuff.

Remember, these folks would be getting a $400/mo U.B.I. benefit, so they'd still come out way ahead financially after the additional tobacco excise taxes that'd pay.

The U.B.I. benefit would reduce poverty overall, so there'd be less poor folks. ...:)

Just curious, I thought the Mormon Church is now officially referred to as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; so then, if you belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, shouldn't you refer to yourself as a Latter Day Saint instead of as a Mormon?
 
Last edited:

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Two people. One makes $100,000 annually. The other 50,000.
Both buy $25,000 cars. Both pay 10.25% sales tax amounting to $2562.
For the first person, the tax is 2.5% of his income. For the other, it is 5% of his income. The impact of sales taxes is harder on people with less money.

The nice thing about my proposed national 4 percent sales tax is that it'd only apply to the sale of newly manufactures vehicles, of which mostly the well-to-do purchase. ...:)
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Remember, these folks would be getting a $400/mo U.B.I. benefit, so they'd still come out way ahead financially after the additional tobacco excise taxes that'd pay.

The U.B.I. benefit would reduce poverty overall, so there'd be less poor folks. ...:)

Just curious, I thought the Mormon Church is now officially referred to as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; so then, if you belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, shouldn't you refer to yourself as a Latter Day Saint instead of as a Mormon?

Y'know, when you add up the added income taxes, the added consumption and other sales taxes, etc., that more than takes care of any benefit they MIGHT receive. Just sayin'.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Y'know, when you add up the added income taxes, the added consumption and other sales taxes, etc., that more than takes care of any benefit they MIGHT receive. Just sayin'.

I've figured the one percenters would certainly pay more into my proposed UBI benefit system and universal Medicare A coverage, than they'd financially get back themselves from this; but anybody, who had made more than $460,000 of taxable income last year, should be happy to give back a little more to society in order to reduce poverty. Right?
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Is wikipedia right:
All Israeli residents are entitled to basic health care as a fundamental right
In Israel the universal healthcare is a requirement which is provided by choosing an insurance plan. Not a government tax based system. Similar to other required insurance, like car insurance. Freedom of choice and you aren’t required to pay for the insurance of others.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Paying taxes in my country doesn't bother me, I don't need to see pointless suffering or fear getting robbed. :) I can drink all the tap water I want and know it's safe.
So, just because you like paying taxes everyone else must too. :rolleyes:
Sounds like you get more out of the system than you put into it, or you like having others sponge off of you.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Then you must not be living in Israel because is you were they'd be taking everyone's tax money to pay for the national health scheme.
You are displaying a total lack of knowledge of how the Israeli healthcare system works. It is based on private insurance, not taxation.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
There is no right to health care. Rights are not bestowed by any government. Any purported healthcare right provided by any government can also be taken away by the government too. A government cannot take away something that truly is a right.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
In Israel the universal healthcare is a requirement which is provided by choosing an insurance plan. Not a government tax based system. Similar to other required insurance, like car insurance. Freedom of choice and you aren’t required to pay for the insurance of others.

you don't seem to understand how insurance works, the people that don't use the services pay for those that do.

Healthcare in Israel - Wikipedia
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
you don't seem to understand how insurance works, the people that don't use the services pay for those that do.

Healthcare in Israel - Wikipedia
I understand insurance just fine, although you seem to not. Insurance is a pooled risk sharing. In Israel one buys actual insurance, unlike other countries that have tax based systems which, although sometimes called insurance, are actually not insurance at all. Insurance - Wikipedia
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
In Israel the universal healthcare is a requirement which is provided by choosing an insurance plan. Not a government tax based system. Similar to other required insurance, like car insurance.
I don't know what kind of strange idea people have about taxes paying for healthcare, but it's exactly the same as having mandatory insurance. Everyone who pays for insurance is paying for someone who needs the insurance, unless you get sick you are paying for the care of others.

Freedom of choice and you aren’t required to pay for the insurance of others.
Mandatory choices aren't really hoices. So either they don't have universal healthcare or their freedom of choice is illusory. An insurance company is just a middle man for the service. If you think middlemen are better then you pick an insurance model.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
So, just because you like paying taxes everyone else must too. :rolleyes:
Well you get a lot for the package, so why would I be complaining? People in my country are the happiest in the world, competing with other Nordic countries that have the same system. If I'm an average worker I can afford to travel to Thailand every year for two weeks, go skiing for a week and visit friends and relatives on Christmas. I heard many Americans can't spend so much time on holidays even with their lower taxes. So what are you working for...

Sounds like you get more out of the system than you put into it, or you like having others sponge off of you.
Sounds more like you don't get it. Here I am enjoying the fact that I can go out any time of the day and not get robbed, have pure clean drinking water, safe high quality food. I can trust the police, the doctors and the firemen.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I don't know what kind of strange idea people have about taxes paying for healthcare, but it's exactly the same as having mandatory insurance. Everyone who pays for insurance is paying for someone who needs the insurance, unless you get sick you are paying for the care of others.


Mandatory choices aren't really hoices. So either they don't have universal healthcare or their freedom of choice is illusory. An insurance company is just a middle man for the service. If you think middlemen are better then you pick an insurance model.
No. When you pay for insurance you don’t pay for others. What you pay for is coverage for a particular risk. The insurance company pays for those that have claims, just as they profit from when policy holders who do not make claims. You are misunderstanding how insurance works.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
No. When you pay for insurance you don’t pay for others. What you pay for is coverage for a particular risk. The insurance company pays for those that have claims, just as they profit from when policy holders who do not make claims. You are misunderstanding how insurance works.
It's the same thing with taxes paying for universal healthcare. Both are forms of collective risk sharing.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It's the same thing with taxes paying for universal healthcare. Both are forms of collective risk sharing.
No, there are fundamental differences. A government system is involuntary and supported by the coercive powers of the government including taxation and use of force. Furthermore government are naturally more wasteful than private enterprises. Government programs should only be reserved for things a free market can not do (i.e. the common defense). Healthcare is not such a thing. It is better handle through private enterprises.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Participation in the Israeli scheme is mandatory, Shaul doesn't seem to get this!!
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
No, there are fundamental differences. A government system is involuntary and supported by the coercive powers of the government including taxation and use of force. Furthermore government are naturally more wasteful than private enterprises.
Your government is more wasteful than ours. So maybe you're right in your country and I'm right in my country. Shrugs.

I used to believe in all private healthcare too when I was young. I gave the dentist example where the private healthcare was giving me unnecessary operations, so they could make more profit. I'd say their profit motive was opposed to my own interests. I'm pretty glad that I switched back to public dentistry after that.

Government programs should only be reserved for things a free market can not do (i.e. the common defense).
It's an opinion. I guess common belief with people of your political party.

Healthcare is not such a thing. It is better handle through private enterprises.
So you believe. Seems to work better in my country than yours, so I don't see a reason to switch to a system like you have.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well you get a lot for the package, so why would I be complaining? People in my country are the happiest in the world, competing with other Nordic countries that have the same system. If I'm an average worker I can afford to travel to Thailand every year for two weeks, go skiing for a week and visit friends and relatives on Christmas. I heard many Americans can't spend so much time on holidays even with their lower taxes. So what are you working for...


Sounds more like you don't get it. Here I am enjoying the fact that I can go out any time of the day and not get robbed, have pure clean drinking water, safe high quality food. I can trust the police, the doctors and the firemen.
As you could without a tax supported government healthcare system. Comparing necessary public safety services with waste ladened wealth redistribution government schemes masquerading as “healthcare” is a false equivalence.

Taxation is not a recipe for prosperity. But some still think you can get “something for nothing”. Good luck.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
As you could without a tax supported government healthcare system. Comparing necessary public safety services with waste ladened wealth redistribution government schemes masquerading as “healthcare” is a false equivalence.
You believe what you will about "wealth redistribution schemes"... while I enjoy the benefits living in a safe country with low crimerates.

Taxation is not a recipe for prosperity. But some still think you can get “something for nothing”. Good luck.
Your beliefs on what we have are guesses. They're great for political slogans, not so great for how things really work.
 
Top