Obamacare

[tadman95]

When Romney got ObamaCare passed in Massachusetts, I didn't like the mandate it contained, seemed too socialist to me. Still does a little.

The problem is people get sick, when they do they go to the doctor, or more likely the Emergency Room, and without insurance, the rest of us pay. Through taxes, or higher hospital rates, or higher insurance rates. Either way, we're going to pay.

So even with reservations, the mandate probably makes sense in making people more responsible for their actions.

I don't know all of the the nuances of ObamaCare, I'm sure there is good or bad.

Our health insurance industry is competitive in name only. Don't believe me, try to start your own insurance company, especially one that crosses state lines. Good Luck.

K1ssme1m1rish nailed it on pg 2. Congrats!

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

The problem is you can't separate the ones who brought it upon themselves and the ones who didn't. Every civilized country in the world takes care of its citizens. This country is decades behind the power curve.

Are the 12 milllion illegal immigrants people we must care for, too? Hell at this point...why have a job? Why work? Why exercise and eat healthy?

I'll go unemployed, get checks from uncle sam, stop running 20 miles a week, eat everything for breakfast, two burgers at lunch, and drive thru for dinner. When I need medical care I'll go to the doc or the hospital and say, "Hey, hey...don't send the bill to my house. Send it to uncle obama."

And anyone who questions me or denies me my "rights" I will label as mean, racist, and against the "middle class."

 

[IlovethehireofCoachKelly]

Either way, Michigan and USC still suck balls.

 

[GoIrish41]

The insurance company bureaucracy is definitely not worth defending... though I personally don't trust to gov. to fix anything in regards to proper, inexpensive or (especially) efficient health care… hopefully I’m wrong here because this is all leading towards single payer imo

I'd be interested in hearing about the healthcare experiences of those who were in the military. That system, at least when I was in, was 100% government-run healthcare. From my point of view, it certainly was not perfect but it was not bad either. In the years since leaving the military I have discovered that profit-driven healthcare has major issues. In my opinion, it is far worse than the system I was under in the military. The worst of these issues, IMO, is the unsettling thought that you have to deal with private companies who have a vested interest in paying for as little as possible for your care. I've had at least as much stress in the past 5 years in dealing with insurance companies as I have had with illness. There is something fundamentally wrong with that.

The arguments I'm reading on this thread about how costs will baloon out of control because of Obamacare leave me scratching my head. I've watched that happen for the past 25 years under the current system. I don't understand the mentality of keeping things as they are when they are so obviously bad. If things kept going the way they were going, heath insurance might have been completely out of reach for the avereage American in the next 20 or 30 years. Heck, it is out of reach right now for millions of folks.

This is all to say that I agree with your assessment that this country is headed for a single payer system. But, if I were king, I'd have the government fully take over healthcare -- run the hospitals, hire the doctors, the whole ball of wax. Cut the insurance companies out of the equasion completely. That would be much more like it was when I was in the military and didn't have to stress about any of this crap.

 

[Cackalacky]

Are the 12 milllion illegal immigrants people we must care for, too? Hell at this point...why have a job? Why work? Why exercise and eat healthy?

I'll go unemployed, get checks from uncle sam, stop running 20 miles a week, eat everything for breakfast, two burgers at lunch, and drive thru for dinner. When I need medical care I'll go to the doc or the hospital and say, "Hey, hey...don't send the bill to my house. Send it to uncle obama."

And anyone who questions me or denies me my "rights" I will label as mean, racist, and against the "middle class."

**** it, lets grab all the illegal immigrants's parents, orphans, mental instiutionalized patients, people with debilatating diseases, people over 285 lbs who dont play football, special education students, welfare recipients, single mothers, WIC card holders, elderly people who dont work, and any other person of non-working age who can't or wont contribute to the economy via job and taxes, give them weapons, televise it, and watch it for fun. See who comes out on top...

AM I NOT MERCIFUL!!!!

 

[ACamp1900]

My entire family outside of my wife and I are military... our experience is that the care is **** *** poor...I have a long family history of inproper care, misdiagnoses and near deaths (yes, indeed so) caused by terrible military hospitals. I'll leave it at that...

The problem is we seem to think this is an insurance company or singler payer thing and that there is no other option... and that those who oppose this bill somehow love the current system... remember, despite teh propaganda the right did put forth a number of health care bills that the majority left never gave the light of day to...

Look to tadman's post if you want to see the main issues with insurance companies... that has as much to do with gov. and it does the insurance cos... I believe the fact that competition is not really a factor currently is a major issue... cutting out ALL competition will certainly not help when it comes to costs imo... I could go deeper but what's the point?? We are headed where we are headed,... I'll bank my retirement that most will regret it...

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Here I am....

Let's clear one thing up...insurance rates go up because Americans do not want to be healthy. They like eating food that could be considered a chemical sh!t storm, they don't like to be active, and if anything is wrong with them, they will take a pill for whatever is wrong with them. Americans want things to be wrong with them. Right now, I'm working in endocrinology with diabetic and hormone disorder patients. Everytime I tell someone their thyroid is not the cause of their fatigue, 4 out of 5 will BLOW UP on me about how stupid the doctor is, and they want second and third opinions. Blood doesn't lie. Also, we drink crap like Monster and Red Bull, then take ambien so we can sleep. We get depressed? Take a pill. High cholesterol? God forbid you change your diet, take a pill. Got diabetes? Don't lose weight, or watch what you eat, just keep titrating your insulin on your own against your doctors orders. Your kid is a brat? Shove some Adderall down his throat instead of whooping his ***. You like to smoke? Go ahead. But when you get lung cancer, don't throw benefits to help you pay your medical bills, you did it to yourself. Can't handle being born white? Lay in a tanning bed and bake yourself into melanoma. THESE are the reasons health care costs are through the roof.

Come on, sitting here blaming the government for reforming health care is ridiculous. The United States is the greatest country on Earth but the problem is not our government. The problem is, if something is broke we don't fix it, we throw it away. If we are not happy about something we throw tantrums like a toddler, instead of using rationale and logic like adults. We don't control our diet, we don't control our weight, we don't control our kids.

I am glad the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. I am glad Obama finally gets a chance to be President instead of fighting with a bunch of elitist self entitled ninnies. That's just my two cents. Like it or hate it. It's true.

Talk about epic! WHAT! People can and will not be responsible for their health? WOW? 97% of what has been posted on this thread is bull shiit and the rest is golden, like above, and Cacalacky. Hell I could not read this thread and tell you who had something worth while to say.

So let's start dispelling myths and lies:

1) Americans today aren't rugged individualists, they are whiney self absorbed pussys.

2) The American upper middle class does not foot the bill for the poor. The poor pay for their own poverty. Martin Luther King stated that poverty was the worst form of violence. He got that from Gandhi. Let me illustrate. In 1832 America was going through a great Protestant Religious revival. (This provided much fuel to turn a disagreement between states about slavery into the bloodiest of shooting wars.) Everybody was holy as hell. And everybody had an issue about rolling up their sleeves and doing a little dirty work, especially if there wasn't a little extra in it for them. So America was in a position like it is today, it needed outside workers.

Since there were no immigration laws, it was just a matter of letting sailing ships dock; like the one from Ulster that docked in Philly. It sent 57 men to Duffy's Cut, mile 59 of the fledgling railroad. From the ship to the camp to the completion of tearing through the mountain, to their mysterious murder, took less than seven weeks. That's how fast they worked! They brought the contract in under budget, when no one else could, and they paid for it with their lives. Why? Because they were the poorest this country has ever seen. They didn't even have anyone who knew where they were or could care what happened to them. So don't tell me about your dollars. Talk to me about our responsibility.

More later.

 

[Cackalacky]

the problem is we seem to think this is an insurance company or singler payer thing and that there is no other option... look to tadman's post if you want to see the main issues with insurance companies... that has as much to do with gov. and it does the insurance cos... before the regulation, intervention and bureaucracy health care was a doctor and patient thing and much of our health care needs were cash payment deals... and for the most part affordable. ...

so we really don't need insurance companies at all? Thats, prolly a multi- billion dollar market right there. Boom, let's get rid of it. Then the government would not need to regulate for profit insurance companies who will deny you coverage because they dont feel like paying out....and because they can....

 

[ACamp1900]

97% of what has been posted on this thread is bull shiit

2) The American upper middle class does not foot the bill for the poor.

yep, a lot in this thread is bull shiit....

Boggs, I like you and respect your opinion... I just dont see calling differing opinions that agree with your stance for the most part, but differ on one or two points complete bullshit... beyond that have a good one, I don't see the point in tearing the board apart again and again... If you want to continue directly with me in PM I'm game...

aside from that take care, you're always one of my favs.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Insurance companies have arrangements with specific networks of doctors. They will only pay for claims that are submitted by those doctors. ...I've got news for you, the entire medical enterprise is a complete scam...

That's wrong. Insurance plans cover claims, and whether a claim is covered has nothing to do with the doctor who provides it. Provider types (in terms of network) only affect what you pay to your insurer for your covered claim (e.g., co-pays & deductibles).

Non-network providers are called "Out of Network" (it's not just a clever name). You have the same coverage of claim types, but you pay more for Out of Network providers because they charge insurers more.

Conversely, if your claim isn't covered under your plan agreement then it doesn't matter what doctor you're seeing, network or otherwise. Your plan won't pay a dime.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I found this article on Forbes titled "The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate". I thought it was well written and pretty balanced. It recounts the involvement of the Republicans and The Heritage Foundation in the individual mandate. It calls out the Republicans on some things but it also clarifies some misconceptions that liberals have pertaining to that history. It's a bit lengthy, but is an excellent read. I definitely have a better understanding of the "individual mandate".
The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate - Forbes

I think everyone agrees that there is a health care problem but obviously disagree greatly on how to fix it. The Democrats have historically supported solutions that require more government involvement to fix and manage the problem. Republicans have historically relied on solutions that are more market driven such as MSA's. I think the MSA concept has excellent possibilities but nobody knows whether it would actually result in a significant improvement.

In all honesty I don't like the individual mandate, but that's not my major concern. My major concern about Obamacare is the reliance on the government to manage another huge program that was initially touted as "cost savings" at the time to which that claim was greeted with major skepticism as it appeared to rely on lots of accounting gimmicks and slight of hand to achieve. I fear that this program will be simply mismanaged like so many other of our government programs to the point that the costs will balloon and simply accelerate our country's debt situation.

 

[Rhode Irish]

It's hard to imagine how a normal American citizen knows more about constitutionality than our own Supreme Court.

You don't. If this wasn't the most absurdly activist right wing court of all time, this would have been 9-0 under the commerce clause.

 

[Rizzophil]

What does this mean as far as funding goes now? I'm guessing that tax payers will pay for it but how else will we be affected? I guess only time will tell on some issues.

Obamacare is already taking $500million out of Medicare. You NEVER heard the liberal media reporting this fact.

Obamacare is going to drastically increase the national debt.

Government now has precedent to tax behaviors.

Tough day for American's. Only saving grace is that people are getting educated about the facts and they have one last chance...voting in November. Make sure all of your friends and family are registered to vote this November.

 

[Rizzophil]

I will try to find the heritage foundation document that states this and also a link to the proposed legislation for the individual mandate. I dont know what you are talking about with the fast and furious bush thing.

Bush's arrangement was Wide Receiver. Worked with the Mexican government, tracked guns, no one died.

Fast and Furious was meant to change the 2nd amendment. No one in the Mexican government knew any of it's details. No one in the US tracked the assault weapons. American and Mexicans died because of it. Worse than Watergate because American residents died.

 

[Rizzophil]

Lastly, I would encourage everyone on this board to look how many people in England are allowed to die every year under their social medicine. In other words, how many Brits could have their life extended but do not get treatment because it's cheaper to let them die than to live.
**Hint, it's more than 10,000**

 

[GoIrish41]

That's wrong. Insurance plans cover claims, and whether a claim is covered has nothing to do with the doctor who provides it. Provider types (in terms of network) only affect what you pay to your insurer for your covered claim (e.g., co-pays & deductibles).

Non-network providers are called "Out of Network" (it's not just a clever name). You have the same coverage of claim types, but you pay more for Out of Network providers because they charge insurers more.

Conversely, if your claim isn't covered under your plan agreement then it doesn't matter what doctor you're seeing, network or otherwise. Your plan won't pay a dime.

I stand corrected on the point of network vs. non-network claims. However, your explaination furthers the argument I was making in the first place. This system is set up so insurance companies funnel you to the right doctors to get the right medications to make all three pieces of this system rich at the expense of the patient. The fact that it costs more for the same treatment at the "wrong" doctor demonstrates how broken the system is.

 

[k1ssme1m1r1sh]

I love how you all think Medicaid is the greatest thing since pockets on t-shirts. I work with it everyday, and it is terrible. I've been trying for 2 months to get my BLIND diabetic patient a talking meter so she can check her blood sugars and maintain her Type I Diabetes so she doesn't die. Yesterday the Medicaid lady said "we need more proof" and I said what other kind of proof do YOU need? You have her endocrinologist telling you she's blind in his chart notes, her report from her eye doctor saying she's 100% blind, what do they want? Me to drive to Indy and hit them in the head with her white cane?

Another thing that would help keep costs down, is QUIT using the ER for BS. The emergency room is for emergencies, not a sinus infection. Secondly, pay your co-pays! The co-pay is the agreement you made with your insurance company, and no, we cannot bill you for it. Your $20 co-pay costs us about $12.47 to bill you. If we give you a lab order or a script, how about be a responsible adult and keep track of it, I have some patients who call and ask 5 or 6 times for us to mail it, fax it, or whatever before their next appointment. That costs your doctor's office money. Stop no-showing your appointments, that takes time out of our day that we could be seeing someone else if you had the courtesy to cancel. Be on time. 99% of doctors run behind because their patients mosey in whenever they feel like it.

I could go on and on forever. I love my job, but there are some people and certain behaviors that make you lose faith in the human race. The way people treat medical staff is pretty bad at times. But mostly, if you do what you are supposed to do, and what you need to do, you don't cost your health care facility money, in turn, they won't charge you through the nose, because they'll be breaking even.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Lastly, I would encourage everyone on this board to look how many people in England are allowed to die every year under their social medicine. In other words, how many Brits could have their life extended but do not get treatment because it's cheaper to let them die than to live.
**Hint, it's more than 10,000**

Maybe you could remind me how England's life expectancy compares to ours?

**hint: it's not pretty for your argument**

 

[ab2cmiller]

I stand corrected on the point of network vs. non-network claims. However, your explaination furthers the argument I was making in the first place. This system is set up so insurance companies funnel you to the right doctors to get the right medications to make all three pieces of this system rich at the expense of the patient. The fact that it costs more for the same treatment at the "wrong" doctor demonstrates how broken the system is.

I know you believe this GoIrish, but it makes zero logical sense how it would benefit the insurance company to have an increase in claims or pay out inflated claims. By definition this is costing the insurance company, it is money out of their pocket.

The only way that makes any sense is if you are claiming that insurance companies are not only price fixing but they are also receiving undocumented under the table kickbacks. Once again, if that is what you believe, there is nothing that I can say to change your mind.

 

[GoIrish41]

Rizzophil. Although I'd normally be irritated by someone posting thee times in a row, I'll cut you some slack. You needed all the room you could get to summarize last night's Fox News prime time programming.

 

[95NDAlumNM]

Obamacare is already taking $500million out of Medicare. You NEVER heard the liberal media reporting this fact.

Obamacare is going to drastically increase the national debt.

Government now has precedent to tax behaviors.

Tough day for American's. Only saving grace is that people are getting educated about the facts and they have one last chance...voting in November. Make sure all of your friends and family are registered to vote this November.

Government is already doing this. Someone who has kids gets taxed at a lower rate then those that do not. Someone who has a mortgage on a house gets taxed at a lower rate then those that do not. etc. etc. This is no different. Someone who has health insurance will pay less tax then someone who does not. That is all this is.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

Here I am....

Let's clear one thing up...insurance rates go up because Americans do not want to be healthy. They like eating food that could be considered a chemical sh!t storm, they don't like to be active, and if anything is wrong with them, they will take a pill for whatever is wrong with them. Americans want things to be wrong with them. Right now, I'm working in endocrinology with diabetic and hormone disorder patients. Everytime I tell someone their thyroid is not the cause of their fatigue, 4 out of 5 will BLOW UP on me about how stupid the doctor is, and they want second and third opinions. Blood doesn't lie. Also, we drink crap like Monster and Red Bull, then take ambien so we can sleep. We get depressed? Take a pill. High cholesterol? God forbid you change your diet, take a pill. Got diabetes? Don't lose weight, or watch what you eat, just keep titrating your insulin on your own against your doctors orders. Your kid is a brat? Shove some Adderall down his throat instead of whooping his ***. You like to smoke? Go ahead. But when you get lung cancer, don't throw benefits to help you pay your medical bills, you did it to yourself. Can't handle being born white? Lay in a tanning bed and bake yourself into melanoma. THESE are the reasons health care costs are through the roof.

Come on, sitting here blaming the government for reforming health care is ridiculous. The United States is the greatest country on Earth but the problem is not our government. The problem is, if something is broke we don't fix it, we throw it away. If we are not happy about something we throw tantrums like a toddler, instead of using rationale and logic like adults. We don't control our diet, we don't control our weight, we don't control our kids.

I am glad the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. I am glad Obama finally gets a chance to be President instead of fighting with a bunch of elitist self entitled ninnies. That's just my two cents. Like it or hate it. It's true.

well said. bravo!

 

[GoIrish41]

I know you believe this GoIrish, but it makes zero logical sense how it would benefit the insurance company to have an increase in claims or pay out inflated claims. By definition this is costing the insurance company, it is money out of their pocket.
The only way that makes any sense is if you are claiming that insurance companies are not only price fixing but they are also receiving undocumented under the table kickbacks. Once again, if that is what you believe, there is nothing that I can say to change your mind.

This isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the insurance companies are giving patients a financial incentive (or the avoidance of a penalty is probably more accurate) to go to the doctor they choose for you. Those doctors have deals with drug companies to prescribe their drugs to patients. All three of these pieces work together. In an earlier post I described the medicine I have been persribed and how much my insurance company pays and how much it would cost me to buy it without insurance. It is thousands of dollars differece every month. Over the course of the year, my insurance company pays $29,900 instead of $99,450. Why are they charging ANYBODY an extra 70K for their product?

I have a doctor friend who has been on numerous trips to the Carribean on the dime of drug companies who want him to prescribe their medications. Is this a bribe? Of course it is. Do you think if they are bribing doctors to prescribe their drugs they are somehow beneath tossing something in for the insurance companies to sweeten that pot? I don't. I'll even take it a step more cynical. Throw the politicians into the system as well, because they are accepting massive contributions from the drug companies and the insurance companies to legislate in their favor. It is a rigged system and we are all the losers.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Maybe you could remind me how England's life expectancy compares to ours?

**hint: it's not pretty for your argument**

The U.K's life expectancy is 80.05 versus ours of 78.37...Not exactly huge support for switching to socialized medicine based on country 1/10 the size of ours...

List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And 5% of our population dies from accidents, versus about 3.5% of their deaths being due to that cause. (The U.S. having so many more roads and drivers and such). So at the end of the day these numbers are probably pretty close.

 

[ab2cmiller]

The U.K's life expectancy is 80.05 versus ours of 78.37...Not exactly huge support for switching to socialized medicine based on country 1/10 the size of ours...

List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And 5% of our population dies from accidents, versus about 3.5% of their deaths being due to that cause. (The U.S. having so many more roads and drivers and such). So at the end of the day these numbers are probably pretty close.

I'd say that you would have to consider other factors as well, the most significant being a US obesity rate of about 33% compared to the UK rate of about 23%.

 

[ACamp1900]

Many seem to be loving the following thoughts:

1.)People mess their own health up and make poor decisions, that's why health care is so bad these days... they're not being responsible enough.

2.) Others need to pay for these bad choices and lifestyles rather than taking a shape up or ship out mentality with those who damage themselves... it's our collective responsibility, not the individual's.


I must be missing something in the dialouge/electronic transfer here... I fail to see how those to lines of thought can co-exist/ become popular. If you think people are doing it to themselves and messing the system up for everyone why further subsidize the lifestyle and celebrate doing so?

 

[NDFan4Life]

Interesting write-up in Slate about today's decision:

Roberts health care opinion, Commerce Clause: The real reason the chief justice upheld Obamacare. - Slate Magazine

 

[ab2cmiller]

This isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the insurance companies are giving patients a financial incentive (or the avoidance of a penalty is probably more accurate) to go to the doctor they choose for you. Those doctors have deals with drug companies to prescribe their drugs to patients. All three of these pieces work together. In an earlier post I described the medicine I have been persribed and how much my insurance company pays and how much it would cost me to buy it without insurance. It is thousands of dollars differece every month. Over the course of the year, my insurance company pays $29,900 instead of $99,450. Why are they charging ANYBODY an extra 70K for their product?

I have a doctor friend who has been on numerous trips to the Carribean on the dime of drug companies who want him to prescribe their medications. Is this a bribe? Of course it is. Do you think if they are bribing doctors to prescribe their drugs they are somehow beneath tossing something in for the insurance companies to sweeten that pot? I don't. I'll even take it a step more cynical. Throw the politicians into the system as well, because they are accepting massive contributions from the drug companies and the insurance companies to legislate in their favor. It is a rigged system and we are all the losers.

I understand what you're saying better now. It does work against the consumer, but you seem to be implying the insurance company is in the middle of it, orchestrating it all. The insurance company has a network of doctors (the financial incentive that you spoke of) that they have contracted with. The reason they have the network is because they were able to negotiate a lower agreed upon billing rates, thus saving the insurance company money. The fact that those doctors then prescribe medications for which they've received "benefits" is the real problem. The insurance company wishes they would NOT prescribe the expensive medicine as it comes out of their pocket and they make less money.

I agree with everything else that you said. I believe the only way to gain real cost control is to make the patient a vested participant, where they are impacted financially for various medical decisions. Forcing the patient to ask additional questions to make sure that the best cost/benefit choice is made.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

yep, a lot in this thread is bull shiit....

Boggs, I like you and respect your opinion... I just dont see calling differing opinions that agree with your stance for the most part, but differ on one or two points complete bullshit... beyond that have a good one, I don't see the point in tearing the board apart again and again... If you want to continue directly with me in PM I'm game...

aside from that take care, you're always one of my favs.

See, the difference ACamp, and it is why we have always gotten along; because neither one of us spews shiit. Shiit spewers are like the example I gave of my Grandpa, calling Truman and Reagan names. He didn't know what he was saying. He did have valid points about both. Getting back to you and me. Of all the people on this board, you are one of the last that hauls off and calls people names or makes assertions that you cannot back up. Now look at the early posts on this thread. Before you or I said anything. There is some pretty stupid shiit. People making assertions and predictions that the CBO can't. People that just want to be pi$$ed and take it out on someone. Those side almost always seem to be reactionary. You don't know how much respect I have for you because you have a conservative view and you are not like that. I can and do enjoy learning from you, (and others like you). And I do enjoy the company of honorable men.

But I do disagree with your point about footing the bill. The hidden costs the wealthy are breaking your backs with have little to do with the poor man, or even the uneducated man. It is a fallacy. If things are done right, and people are taken care of, it is always less expensive. We are living in a world where everybody being taken care of is cheaper.

I mean we could have a long conversation about the validity of zero-sum gamesmanship, but who cares. Every example I show you can be documented in history. To give you a historical example of what I am speaking, a hot topic from last week:

In economics, the lump of labor fallacy (or lump of jobs fallacy) is the contention that the amount of work available to laborers is fixed. It is considered a fallacy by most economists, who hold that the amount of work is not static. Another way to describe the fallacy is that it treats the demand for labor as an exogenous variable, when it is not. It may also be called the fallacy of labor scarcity, or the zero-sum fallacy, from its ties to the zero-sum game.

"Historically, the term "lump of labor" originated to rebut the idea that reducing the number of hours employees are allowed to labor during the working day would lead to a reduction in unemployment. In modern times, economists often use the term in other contexts – often to highlight errors of reasoning when ceteris paribus assumptions are counterfactual.[clarification needed] The term has also been used to describe the commonly held beliefs that increasing labor productivity and immigration cause unemployment. Whereas some argue that immigrants displace domestic workers, others believe this to be a fallacy, arguing that such a view relies on a belief that the number of jobs in the economy is fixed, whereas in reality immigration increases the size of the economy, thus creating more jobs."

You don't have to take anything away from anybody, for everyone to succeed.

 

[ACamp1900]

I understand your post and it's intent interms of job market fluctuation and a lack of zero sum games... but that has little to do with my point... when you have 45% of the country contributing nothing to the tax base and a large portion of that percentage not paying for their own rent/food costs/medical costs/clothing/entertainment and so on, but instead having those costs covered from the overall tax base, then someone else is picking up the bill...

no??

That's why I inserted earlier that maybe it's a region thing/ what we see... because I can assure everyone that in the majority of my area of So Cal... (some other posters live in my very city, forget who exactly, but hopefully they'll see and speak up)... the poor more often than not actively choose to be so and happily live off the backs of the tax payers without comtributing anything, working as a produce clerk for a major food chain and working in education in this area definately proven that to me. This one point has nothing to do with job markets or economic theory.

That's simply the mentality I am referring to in terms of some, like myself, being upset with. This seems more philosphical to me... does your code of ethics say it's our duty to carry the dead weight when the dead weight chooses to be so??... that kind of thing.