154,700,000 people are holding a job right now, as compared to 9,500,000 who are unemployed.
Average income based on extrapolation of the 2008 QIII weekly earnings average figure is 31,720. As of my last Paycheck I had salaried wages of 31,608 and commisions of 703. For all extents and purposes this can be considered an average yearly salary. My total witholdings at this point for state and federal + SS + Medicare was $8,586.78. I generally get a small refund of a couple hundred dollars in the end, so we can call the tax load for the 32,000, $8,000. This will give us an easy number to work with as well.
Lets take the $8,000 and multiply it by the number of people working, since it is an average, it should come out near the total Income tax collected. We get 1,237,600,000,000. Now if we even wanted to do wealth redistribution, How much money would it take to get the 9.5 Million people to the average of $31,000? $294,500,000,000.
As we can see, this would still leave one trillion dollars to run the rest of the country, you would not need socialized healthcare, because everyone making 31,000 should be able to afford health insurance. So we have 1 trillion dollars to spend on SS and Medicare for the elderly and retired of the country. So for the remaining 1,000,000,000 we spend it on the elderly, the military, and pay the politicians a modest salary, one that is equivalant to the national average. 31,000.
Of course I really don't favor wealth redistribution, but if it was the goal, if thats what all these programs are trying to do, they are failing miserably. Why not just cut out all the beurocratic programs and pay the unemployed 31,000.
I guess this whole post is an open ended question, where the hell is all the money going? Why do we not hold the people accountable who spend in excess of 1.2 Trillion dollars a year of our money that we earned on our own through our sweat and blood and tears. Seriously, there are 154M of us versus a handful of them, Can't we all agree that the motherfuckers, all of them are not looking out for our best interests, or at the very least, are in way way way way over thier collective heads. We need to take our money away from them before they make more mistakes with it on our behalf.
it's not about be fair and equitable or creating a system that works. it's about creating winners and losers in an attempt to gain campaign money and votes from those that precieve themselves "winners".
There is no practicle reason to have the tax code we have or the multitude of social programs. They are created to get votes and create the illusion of winners.
The complexity is to create the illusion that a majority are benefiting. All the while most of us are much worse off because of these programs and their inefficiency.
While I agree in some levels of social welfare, our math doesn't matter. You and I could sit here all day and play with the numbers and we will always come out ahead. The government just likes to spend. It's not their money, why should they try to be efficient with it?
If you ran your own company, would you pay people for not working? Would that not reward people for a behavior that you would not want to promote? The same could be said for unemployment. Unemployment would probably be lower if the government taxed people for not working rather than giving them free money.
Health insurance is so expensive because government and big business have been subsidizing it for over 50 years and have insulated the consumer, you and I, from the real cost of healthcare. If government got out of the health insurance business,if businesses stopped providing health insurance and instead paid the cost of the premiums back to the employee, and market competition was allowed in the health insurance industry, health insurance as well as health care costs would plummet.
This is a big part of it. The gov't is much more involved than just this. Along with AMA they make sure you are forced to go a particular doctor for all your needs. The AMA with the help of gov't restricts supply of licensed doctors and then tell you where you can and can't go for the very basic services. This keep cost high.
You let people legally pay a nurse or other lower cost provider to check for basic illnesses, dress cuts or minor wounds, or administer vaccines, and you will see prices drop. Instead the AMA decides what you can pay a chiropractor for, what you must have a doctor with a particular certification do, or what you can pay a alternative therapist do.
Shouldn't this be an agreement between the provider of service and the customer? I don't need gov't or the AMA to tell me who I can pay to treat what ails me. If I want to get stitches from my plumber, I should be legally allowed to pay him for his serivces.
This is exactly my point, the govenment is not supposed to be running these types of systems. Take care of the transportation infrastructure, defend our borders, Help take care of the elderly, and get the fuck out of the way.
I was obviously being sarcastic when I said the government could do wealth re-distribution. I wholly believe that the government needs to do what it is constitutionally authorized to do and not one thing more. This would save people so much on taxes to begin with, that even if a few of the helping the disadvataged programs did stay on, no one would even mind, it would be so much better than it is now.
This is actually happening, docs don't give vaccines or dress cuts, LPNs, RNs, PAs and ARNPs do a lot of stuff in an office. The big problem is people going to ER all the time with the slightest injury or bruise or sneeze or fucking cold.
So instead of paying 50 bucks to THEIR doc/clinic, they pay at least 1000 to the ER. And let me correct myself, they don't pay, we end up paying for it (Medicaid/care, Hospital writing the charge off but charging the PAYING customers more to cover their losses and so forth). If you only knew how many unnecessary ER visits all over the country.
I don't think anybody would stop you OR him (as long as he doesn't misrepresent himself as a health provider) from doing so. But I doubt you would want that.
This is actually happening, docs don't give vaccines or dress cuts, LPNs, RNs, PAs and ARNPs do a lot of stuff in an office. The big problem is people going to ER all the time with the slightest injury or bruise or sneeze or fucking cold. This is starting to happen a bit but not enough. You can go to day clinics at the local pharmacy but they are very limited in what they are allowed to do. Just like Chiropractors are. This is the game the AMA plays. They call it licensing. In other industries it would be called collusion, price fixing, or a monopoly.
Also, why am I paying the same office visit charge if I don't even see the doctor? The point would be to let others set up a business offering services they want to offer at price that they feel is competitive. I don't need anyone outlining who I can see and at what cost. This should be between me and the person offering the service.
This is the beauty of the third party system.
I could not legally do this. Hell you can't even cut hair without a fucking license. The same thing happen in transportaion, Legal services, construction, etc. There are an insane number of examples.
Electrical wiring - I can do it myself or hire a licensed electrician. Even I am not licensed, I cannot hire someone else that is not licensed. Same thing with any construction.
Legal Services - I can prepare my own will (or any legal document) or I can hire a licensed legal professional. Even though I am not a legal professional, I cannot hire an unlicensed legal professional.
Education - I can teach my own childeren or send them to a licensed teacher. Even though I am not licensed, I cannot pay a non-licensed teacher to teach them.
Hair cut - I can cut my own hair or go to a licensed barber. I am not a licensed barber but I cannot go to an unlicensed barber.
Oil change - I can change my own oil in my garage, or I can go to a licensed garage that complies with OSSIA. My garage is not license nor does it comply with OSSIA, yet I cannot to an unlicensed machanic in a garage that does not comply with OSSIA.
Chiropractors are allowed to do whatever they want within the scope of their training and speciality. So what else would you allow them to do? Surgery? Treat diabetes? Heart disease?
They better regulate who provides health care. There is a big difference in changing your own oil or fixing a leaking faucet. Anybody could learn in a minute or so the way to do it. And, on top of that, even if you screw it up the worst it can happen is you get all dirty or wet. Whereas it takes years of studying AND practice to be a doc. Same with midlevels.
The idea of having just a clinic of nurses or midlevels for minor stuff is nice but impractical. On one hand, who decides they have the expertise to treat whatever comes their way the right way? They might miss serious stuff that might be very difficult to undo later. Or they might just send you to the local ER when they are not comfortable dealing with your problem. This would add to your cost. On the other hand, their services wouldn't be any cheaper than in a regular office. See below.
You are wrong when you say you pay the same as if you were seeing the doctor. You are not. But if you are, that is fraud. What one needs to understand is what goes in his office charge. Not all the money goes to the doctor. Most of it is to cover the expenses (overhead). In many instances the charge won't even cover the costs. The price is more or less tied (read fixed) to the Medicare reimbursement for a certain diagnisis/procedure. And they pay shitty money anyway. The nurse or midlevel seeing you would still be required to charge to cover the cost of their service (granted, less than a doc) AND the overhead (which is the same as for the doc, i.e. they use same gloves, needles, sutures, gauze, light, AC, heating, paper, office etc.). I know of many offices where minor stuff is dealt with by midlevels or nurses. And their charges are lower. But you would be better off seeing a doctor for more serious stuff.
we are taking conceptually here, try and follow along. Who is going to decide what services me and my chiropractor can agree to legally. Who's to say what his specialty is? If I want to have a chiropractor check my prostate I should be able to legally. If you want to go to a proctologist for the same thing, go ahead. My objection is not with the licensing or the fucking piece of paper on the wall, it's the fact that some arbitrary dick head is telling me where I can and can't spend my money. We can argue all day which doctors should provide what services and not get anywhere real quick. That's the point. It's arbitrary. Consumer and provider should be able to figure those things out on their own.
Dude, turn your brain on for just a second, we're about to get deep. I can go to any number of websites or read any number of books by kook herbalists to diagnose an illness. I can then go to walmart to buy a bunch of herbs or drink a gallon of laundry detergent to self treat. How is this any diffent than choosing who I go see to seek treatment? Other than the legality. I can butcher up any nubmer of treatments on myself legaly but can't pay someone else to do it. Make sense to you? I can ask you any medical quesiton I would like and then seek self treatment based on that advise. Why is it any diffent if I pay someone not certified by the AMA to do the same?
This is very disappointing. Who's says it's impractical? If I say it's practical and the provider says it's practical why on earth would it be illegal for us to make the transaction? How on earth do you know that prices wouldn't fall if competition was allowed to enter the market? Don't even answer that, I don't even want to hear you logic on this one.
Jesus Christ, you are missing the entire point of this whole argument. Who gives a shit about office visits or specific charges. I was trying to illustrate a point. You may be dissappointed to know that I have not conducted any research of office visits and the various change that I might find. I have not approached Geraldo to do an expose either.
THE POINT - PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART.
I don't need some anonymous jack or joe deciding who I seek for treatment or any other services. It's my money and I should be able to pay anyone I like for service that I seek. We are not talking about fraud or someone misrepresenting themselves. I am talking about me making the conscience decision not to give two shits about an AMA certificate or any other license when I purchase goods and services that I need. If they want to creat a certification for 12 year olds to cut grass, fine. I just say it shouldn't be illegal to cut grass without a license or pay someone without a license.
apparently you need that, otherwise you would pay your chiro to check your prostate
it's not fucking arbitrary, it's based on their training
dude, are you listening to yourself? the charges are not pulled out of somebody's ass, they are calculated to include the COST, WTF are you high or what?
it's not illegal to mow the lawn without a license, your examples are poorly chosen
OK, now pull your head out of your ass and PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART:
you are free to do whatever you want with your own body and property. Want to drink detergent and herbal shit from Walmart (one of your stupid analogies)? Go ahead, do it. Want to cut your nose? Just do it. Break your TV? Fine. These things should not be regulated as they would infringe on your liberties, if you want to do them then so be it.
But what one's allowed to do onto himself is one and doing it onto others is something else. You look at things from your selfish perspective. You might be able to discern between the good and the bad choice. But most people won't. Everybody would be looking for a deal and shopping around. Therefore the prices for a certain service would drop to the point where a 'licensed' person might not be willing to perform the said service. And this is where the 'unlicensed' one would come into play, accepting a price that a legit, honest professional would not accept. And, of course, cutting corners and providing a service of questionable quality. So the quality of everything around you would start to drop because nobody would be held to any standards, the only benchmark being the price for the service.
People without the proper qualifications should not be allowed to do things that might jeopardize another one's health, property or even life by misrepresenting their abilities. And there should be an authority in that particular field of expertise to certify that the said service provider is legit and meets some minimum knowledge and requirements to perform the job one would entrust him to do.
So the law might not protect you, but definitely protects most of us. We don't always get the quality of service we want DESPITE all the regulations. Think what would be if there were none.
What kind of weird licensing laws you got in Minnesota?
I can hire whoever I want to do my electrical as long as it's done to code.
There a many private school teachers that are not licensed
I can go open a barber shop tomorrow without a license. Of course there may be problems getting insured without licensing. Maybe that's what you're getting at here. But that's the evil of insurance companies. FUCK insurance companies.
I'm building an addition right now and did the wiring myself. I cannot hire someone not licensed. The inspector will ask who did the work. The only two correct answers are you did it yourself or a licensed electrician did it.
not here. my sister is a teacher in TX and wanted to move back up here but would have not only had to get relisenced, but take a bunch of courses over.
The point you're trying to make is easy to grasp. It's my point you don't understand so reread my post, the answer is there. As I said, you look at things from your own (selfish) perspective, but regulations are there to protect the customer from being tricked into hiring solely on price. It's not my law, so stop barking at the wrong tree. I don't necessary say you were wrong, just giving you a different perspective on the same issue.
I got into this discussion because of your poorly chosen examples (the plumber putting sutures, the chiropractor doing the rectals :)) which you now say were just 'extreme', trying to 'illustrate' your point. You keep saying the VOLUNTARY agreement. But not all voluntary associations are legal: having consensual sex with a minor, conspiracies to murder and so forth (just extreme examples, illustrating a point).
There's nothing to add to my previous post so I'll bow out. Cheers.
Legality has nothing to do with it. He is saying all voluntary associations should be legal no matter what they are. If you want to protect people use your own money and hire a nanny to look after them and leave the rest of us alone.