Topic: . - page 33. (Read 46178 times)

So... the government won't be able to afford collecting taxes from you? How do you expect the government to go broke BEFORE they're rendered unable to collect property taxes?

And what about the public? I doubt they'd just put up with some guy using up space and not offering anything in return. Especially once you fought off the cops, you'd have molotov cocktails flying in your window. Without police protection you'd need to pay the people off, which effectively functions as a tax. Remember, the poor people will have Bitcoin too and it's a lot cheaper to attack than defend.

In any system, statist or anarchist, you simply will never get away with using scarce natural resources for free.

whew, well it will all work out then. We will only need the majority of about 2.2 trillion.  Oh, that's per year.
Can I get mine upfront? I may only need less than $1mil. Please give me the first million now and I will get back to the charity if I need more. TY!

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Annual+healthcare+cost+in+US

The theory is that the poor can depend on charity. 

One of the "problems" I see with th healthcare debate is about the private sectors role. Many tout a free market approach and want the government to stay out of this market. This position assumes that there is a profitable market in the first place.
Why would there be profit in caring for the sick and poor? I don't think there is. Like education, these things cost money and come with no guarantee of payoff.  Sure, if you limit yourself to only rich patients you will make money. Sick people will give anything to not die. But a poor person who needs expensive surgery or drugs will never pay you back. A pure free market would likely see the majority of us die penny-less, having only received a tiny percent of needed treatment before running out of cash. Is that what we want? Maybe we do. But know that you are one illness away from impoverishing your family.
Could anyone explain how for profit businesses are going to give poor sick people money at a profit, cause I don't see how?

It's so easy to predict your responses. But actually, I was hoping you were smarter than that. Oh well.

Tell me now, as you have two choices:

1. One security firm per city or region, in which case, you only have one choice.

2. Multiple security firms per region, but at reduced density per firm. That of course means a slower response time.

In your example, we have ~20% the density. That would be a slower response time, as the location of events to respond to is random and unpredictable.

So you did.  I agree with everything you said; allowing patent monopolies to drug companies without price control is why they have margins of over 20%.

My mother-in-law needed a heart bypass a few years ago, and since she has been disabled since birth (blind) and not yet 55, she is not eligble for medicare or medicaid.  She's covered under a SSI (Social Security Income, it's a seperate program) but they don't cover life threatening issues like that.  Don't ask me why a government funded program for the health of disabled people wouldn't cover life threatening issues, but it didn't.

She got the bypass, paid for by a charity that the heart surgen belonged to.  The heart surgen did it for free, while the charity paid for everything else in the surgery room.  The only thing that she has to pay for is her follow up visits, because the SSI won't even cover that.

My wife & I paid for those ourselves.

So even under federally funded social health care, the poor could happily die and the government not care about it; but a private charity ran by actual doctors will make up the slack for government fail.

I have no faith that Obamacare will be better, or cheaper.

To be fair, already stated my position about healthcare reform on page 2.  Figured if we were talking about healthcare on a bitcoin forum, I'd fantasize about how this would affect a bitcoin world.


Under that assumption, all industries would be prohibitively expensive because they would employ too many people.  It's probably more realistic to say it would be about the same size or less as the current police force (more efficient & not everyone would have insurance).  If each company covered 20% of the population, then each would employ ~20% of the former police force.

The same way the rich do, with a tiny corporation trust and a good corporate lawyer.

Of course, that generally costs more than paying the fine.

Lol.

There are only like three Americans in this entire thread.

The rest of you don't seem to know the first thing about Obamacare, and want to pretend that it's some kind of single-payer socialist utopia.

nevafuse - you do realise that you are describing a fantasy world but Obamacare is something that happens in the real world? 

You are correct - that is how insurance works.  I'm not arguing how insurance works, I'm arguing for choice.  I want to be able to choose the price & quality or the option to choose nothing at all.  I can't do that with government mandated monopolies.


Who is going to seize my property?  I'll just have my bodyguard service prevent anyone from stealing my property.  Besides, there will be no one to do the seizing because the government will have gone broke by this point.  This wasn't possible before because accounts can be frozen & cash can be stolen.  With brainwallet, there's no bank account, hidden stash under the mattress, etc.  I can take it with me anywhere without worrying about anyone stealing it.

And how do you expect to hide any land and buildings you might own? If you don't pay property taxes, they can just seize your property. Likewise with VAT, they can monitor where natural resources are being extracted and refined.

I'm European and as far as i know current USA health system is fail, if you can pay and you have an insurance then you are fine but if you are poor and without insurance then you can happily die that more or less no one care about you.

So if the new system improve the public health system then it is a good thing.

Here in Europe the public system is very good and works.

He sure as well will pay for you.

Consider:

Option #1: You pay on a per service basis. Each time you call for service, you'll be billed. If you're unlucky with crimes committed against you, you'll go broke. Thus, you'll prefer option #2; see below.

Option #2: You'll pay a premium (as in insurance), and you'll get all the coverage you need per year. If you're unlucky with crimes committed against you, you won't go broke even though the cost of servicing you exceeds the premium you pay, as the premium cbeast pays will go towards the services rendered for you.

National Health Care/Insurance has always been propagandized to The People as being about Citizens being able to afford quality health care, to; not only prolong their lives; but to enrich and enhance them as well in quality of life improvements. That is pretty much the bottom line for any type of social program on its surface disseminated to The People for their approval... or silent opposition or neutrality, notwithstanding the controlled occasional outbreaks of dissent.

The Supreme Court has investigated Obamacare fully and came to a different descriptive conclusion. It is no longer about what we can affordably gain as a people, as citizens, as the supreme sovereigns in our own rights, as Lord of our Manor's,  as paying tenants masquerading as property owners, and employers of those making the decisions supposedly to only be based on the will of the people and an oath to preserve and protect (interpret?) the Constitution... but instead, it is only about the wealth they government says that government is allowed to steal from us regardless of its affordability or availability. Nay, nay I say. This should not be. It is now illegal to be living without being indebted to the state... our employees...

The Supreme Court has Held that Obamacare is a tax and it is Constitutional.

This is not what we were told or sold. We were also told health care costs would decrease, not increase, and many more lies to get this thing through.

We are being defrauded, lied to, and stolen from... everyday. Then they say its legal when we stand up to complain, and make it as expensive, time consuming, painful, dangerous, and difficult as possible to redress our grievances, just to have 9 of them say screw you guys, we love this system and your money, and we are bringing back the debtors prisons that the judicial bench warrant system didnt already take away.

This cycle repeats itself time and time again.

More and more stuff is being made illegal with criminal records being labeled and applied to the people who stand up for what is right and just... making it more difficult and sometimes impossible to have a gun.

We can only take from this that the people who refuse to listen to government wont be armed the day being armed will be needed to truly defend this nation for threats both foreign and domestic.

We pay and often beg them for this.  

If I'm paid via bitcoin & pay for things via bitcoin, how will the government tax me?  Not only do they not know how much to tax me, they will have no means of procuring it from me (can't tell the bank to freeze my assets).


You don't need to pay for me.  I'll just pay for a bodyguard service w/ the former tax money.  Although it seems expensive now, it won't be when the police monopoly disbands & starts competing in the free market.

There was zero nonsense in my post. Your avoidance of the real point I made is telling, as you're trying to draw attention away from the oversight you made in your prior statements.

No. A for profit insurance corporation (as any such corporation) sole duty is to make profit for the shareholders and nothing else. Period. Covering claims is something they try to avoid as much as possible or they are in violation of their shareholders trust. Try to learn something about corporations before posting this nonsense.