|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 01 2013 15:29 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 14:48 Jaaaaasper wrote:On October 01 2013 14:43 oneofthem wrote:
mint that 1 trillion dolla coin The first time it was suggested I thought it would be a classless move, but after some of the tea baggers demands I'm fairly certain I would support that. Could they put ted cruz's head on because reasons? Printing more money doesn't solve the issue at all. It just serves to devalue it, which is in turn followed by massive inflation and all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like printing money in this form for every-day use by the citizens: + Show Spoiler +A roll of toilet paper in Zimbabwe costs $145,750, which is about 69 American cents.
Yeah I was making, as I would hope the face for the coin I suggested would show. When it gets this stupid, not much to do other than try to laugh about it. On the bright side they can't give out parking tickets in dc anymore, so thats something.
|
On October 01 2013 15:17 Thrax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 15:02 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:29 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 01 2013 14:27 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:20 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 14:15 MarlieChurphy wrote:I don't see any such button. On October 01 2013 13:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote:
Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?)
I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. 3 basic parts: -No one can be denied healthcare or charged more due to preexisting conditions, lifetime caps, etc, and all healthcare plans have at least a minimum standard of benefits -Everyone must get healthcare or be fined. Nothing changes if you already have healthcare. -There are subsidies to buy healthcare on exchanges here for low income families that can't afford it. Some plans are as cheap as $100 a month. Currently I have no job and am broke, and don't have any conditions or care about insurance. What do/should I do? PS- I see a bunch of people on fb complaining right now they aren't going to be paid for the next 2 weeks or something. I think they all work for the TSA or airport or something? They aren't being very receptive to my questions, what are they bitching about? What you should do is go to https://www.healthcare.gov/ and after answering a few questions, it will tell you the price of health insurance and whether you are eligible for subsidies. And then decide for yourself whether you want to buy it. Shit happens, you might be in a car crash, randomly becomes sick etc, and then you'll need healthcare. Yea, in the past if something ever came up. I just went to the hospital and either a family member or myself after the fact just went to a hospital social worker or whatever and filled out a bunch of forms and I don't think I paid anything. What is the difference from that? Like I fail to see what ACA even does. There is/was already MSI and stuff like that anyways. Going to the hospital to get basic health care costs SIGNIFICANTLY more than if you were to just go to the doctor. You're not paying for your treatment so other tax payers have to pay for it, the hospital is going to get its money at the end of the day. If you can actually go to the doctor before something gets too far out of hand it costs less and has better results. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" I don't just randomly or regularly go to the doctor at all. I only go when there is an emergency. Examples of the last 5 times I've been to the doctor/hospital over the course of like 10 years: Appendicitis, Back Sprain, Tonsilitis, Hairline Fractured Ankle, A silver nitrite? suture (had a small cut on my back that wouldn't stop bleeding). So again, I see no use for health insurance for me and it makes no difference to me. You can call me fortunate, or selfish but I still don't see how MSI or Medical or whatever is different than ACA. Do you think the care you received is free? It's basically sheer luck that you haven't had to pay for those services. Many (uninsured) people have been bankrupted by healthcare fees. You don't seem to understand the concept of insurance. The whole point of insurance is risk management. Insurance is there so next time you fracture your ankle, your costs are covered. Obviously, you always have the option to play the roulette. You can hope you don't get sick or hope you won't have to pay for any healthcare services you receive in case you do get sick.
No, it's not luck. It's because there is MSI/Medical and other similar programs that have always been around (at least where I live in the US). Even if there wasn't, there is still free clinics, County hospitals, and colleges where you can get free services at a cost of time. That's my point, how is ACA going to affect anything or change anything when we have already had this affordable care for decades (this is a rhetorical question)?
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
On October 01 2013 15:25 KwarK wrote:
Charlie, this is just you not understanding how the world works again. You need to stop posting and read some wikipedia.
I understand it's a lot of nonsense, I might read the wiki later on. peace.
|
|
|
On October 01 2013 15:29 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 14:48 Jaaaaasper wrote:On October 01 2013 14:43 oneofthem wrote:
mint that 1 trillion dolla coin The first time it was suggested I thought it would be a classless move, but after some of the tea baggers demands I'm fairly certain I would support that. Could they put ted cruz's head on because reasons? Printing more money doesn't solve the issue at all. It just serves to devalue it, which is in turn followed by massive inflation and all sorts of ridiculous stuff, like printing money in this form for every-day use by the citizens: ![[image loading]](http://www.fleur-de-coin.com/images/Thumbnails/zim-currencySIZE388x200.jpg) On 1 August 2008, the Zimbabwe dollar was redenominated by removing 10 zeroes and ZWD 10 billion became 1 dollar after the redenomination. On 16 January 2009, Zimbabwe issued a ZWD100 trillion bill (100,000,000,000,000 ZWD). A roll of toilet paper in Zimbabwe costs $145,750, which is about 69 American cents.
I know where your heart is in this matter, but you're simply wrong. It all depends on where that money goes. Imagine if I was given sole power by Congress to print unlimited amounts of money for myself, but I only used it to buy 1 trillion green M&Ms. The prices for green M&Ms (and other colors as well) would probably go up bit, and maybe the ingredients that make them, but it wouldn't ripple through the economy to nearly the same effect as if I spent the same amount of money and gave it out to poor people.
This is essentially what has been happening to Fed dollars and all their expansive monetary policies as of late. It all gets funneled into a few small areas (mainly bank reserves/capital), making stabilization much cheaper. In this scenario, stabilization represents the M&Ms, and the small appreciation of assets we see around in the market are the ingredients to make the M&Ms and those that profit off the increased cashflow from stability (not very many people). Ideally, the government would use this moment to put out more bonds that would entice banks and those benefiting from Fed policy to buy government debt, which is being incurred by expanding aid to the poor and economically challenged. If that doesn't happen, inflation stays low and money just kinda accrues in a bottomless pit where it's worthless to everybody.
Seeing as how Fed monetary policy isn't doing much to entice higher inflation, I'm willing to bet minting a trillion dollar coin wouldn't do much either.
|
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Dude... Treatment for a serious illness can easily cost you 20k-100k+++
Have fun saving that up if your not financially well off anyway... Not having health insurance is just playing russian roulette with your future.
You also shouldn't mix things like a car insurances with health insurance... Thats just dumb.
|
On October 01 2013 14:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:It sounds like the 44% number is relative to all spending and specifically for August. Also, the article made a point of: Show nested quote +The BPC does not see it likely there will be an actual default on bond payments.
That's still really bad news, you know -.-
Furthermore, it's relative to all federal spending, not relative to all spending.
Also, see below.
On October 01 2013 14:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
The Treasury doesn't contradict me, so why do I need a source to contradict the Treasury? The Treasury wrote that meeting cash commitments =/= new spending. That doesn't contradict what I wrote.
The Treasury does, in fact, contradict you. Read further.
Failing to increase the debt limit would have catastrophic economic consequences. It would cause the government to default on its legal obligations – an unprecedented event in American history.
Your definition of "default" isn't particularly useful, as it's limited to bondholders. Even if you pay back everyone who physically holds US Treasuries, the Treasury would still be obligated to pay money to everyone it owes money to. That's still considered a default.
What I fail to see is how you don't think this would be catastrophic for the US Economy. What you're arguing in full seriousness, paying back bondholders while failing to raise the debt ceiling, was so unrealistic that only Bachmann supported it (and for less than a week!).
|
On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes mandatory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
If society was fully prepared to let people die because they didn't buy insurance or were too poor to afford treatment, this might work.
For better (IMO), society isn't quite like that.
|
I know where your heart is in this matter, but you're simply wrong. It all depends on where that money goes. Imagine if I was given sole power by Congress to print unlimited amounts of money for myself, but I only used it to buy 1 trillion green M&Ms. The prices for green M&Ms (and other colors as well) would probably go up bit, and maybe the ingredients that make them, but it wouldn't ripple through the economy to nearly the same effect as if I spent the same amount of money and gave it out to poor people.
?? You aren't even making any sense here.What does the person/company (Mars?) do with the money you have given them for the M&Ms? shareholder dividends? asset purchases? Unless they burn/destroy it it will flow into the economy.
Putting Obamacare off for one year is better than nothing, the best thing of course is to cancel it because America cannot afford it.They need to continually raise the debt ceiling without Obamacare for christ sakes.....
|
On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes mandatory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Completely ridiculous notion. The whole POINT of insurance, any insurance, whether it's health, car, home, liability insurance, is to reduce your exposure to highly expensive and improbable events (such as being hospitalized, car destroyed in crash, house being burnt down, losing a massive lawsuit, respectively).
You can't expect people to save for another house when most can barely afford one house, that's why home insurance is needed. The same is true of health insurance. It is generally better to have small and predictable payments (paying for insurance), then run the risk of a massive but rare spike in costs that could completely bankrupt you (e.g. being hospitalized in a serious car accident).
Without insurance, you play a risky game, you could get lucky, nothing bad happens and you come out ahead with more money, or you could get unlucky and then get totally fucked up. Insurance chops off "tail risk", i.e. it puts a cap on the maximum loss you could possibly incur.
As for MSI, that sounds like an awesome program. But know that it only applies to low income people in Orange County. Many people in the US don't have access to such programs and many are uninsured.
|
On October 01 2013 17:00 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +I know where your heart is in this matter, but you're simply wrong. It all depends on where that money goes. Imagine if I was given sole power by Congress to print unlimited amounts of money for myself, but I only used it to buy 1 trillion green M&Ms. The prices for green M&Ms (and other colors as well) would probably go up bit, and maybe the ingredients that make them, but it wouldn't ripple through the economy to nearly the same effect as if I spent the same amount of money and gave it out to poor people. ?? You aren't even making any sense here.What does the person/company (Mars?) do with the money you have given them for the M&Ms? shareholder dividends? asset purchases? Unless they burn/destroy it it will flow into the economy. Putting Obamacare off for one year is better than nothing, the best thing of course is to cancel it because America cannot afford it.They need to continually raise the debt ceiling without Obamacare for christ sakes.....
Very affordable actually. Just raise taxes.
|
On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 15:17 Thrax wrote:On October 01 2013 15:02 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:29 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 01 2013 14:27 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:20 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 14:15 MarlieChurphy wrote:I don't see any such button. On October 01 2013 13:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote:
Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?)
I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. 3 basic parts: -No one can be denied healthcare or charged more due to preexisting conditions, lifetime caps, etc, and all healthcare plans have at least a minimum standard of benefits -Everyone must get healthcare or be fined. Nothing changes if you already have healthcare. -There are subsidies to buy healthcare on exchanges here for low income families that can't afford it. Some plans are as cheap as $100 a month. Currently I have no job and am broke, and don't have any conditions or care about insurance. What do/should I do? PS- I see a bunch of people on fb complaining right now they aren't going to be paid for the next 2 weeks or something. I think they all work for the TSA or airport or something? They aren't being very receptive to my questions, what are they bitching about? What you should do is go to https://www.healthcare.gov/ and after answering a few questions, it will tell you the price of health insurance and whether you are eligible for subsidies. And then decide for yourself whether you want to buy it. Shit happens, you might be in a car crash, randomly becomes sick etc, and then you'll need healthcare. Yea, in the past if something ever came up. I just went to the hospital and either a family member or myself after the fact just went to a hospital social worker or whatever and filled out a bunch of forms and I don't think I paid anything. What is the difference from that? Like I fail to see what ACA even does. There is/was already MSI and stuff like that anyways. Going to the hospital to get basic health care costs SIGNIFICANTLY more than if you were to just go to the doctor. You're not paying for your treatment so other tax payers have to pay for it, the hospital is going to get its money at the end of the day. If you can actually go to the doctor before something gets too far out of hand it costs less and has better results. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" I don't just randomly or regularly go to the doctor at all. I only go when there is an emergency. Examples of the last 5 times I've been to the doctor/hospital over the course of like 10 years: Appendicitis, Back Sprain, Tonsilitis, Hairline Fractured Ankle, A silver nitrite? suture (had a small cut on my back that wouldn't stop bleeding). So again, I see no use for health insurance for me and it makes no difference to me. You can call me fortunate, or selfish but I still don't see how MSI or Medical or whatever is different than ACA. Do you think the care you received is free? It's basically sheer luck that you haven't had to pay for those services. Many (uninsured) people have been bankrupted by healthcare fees. You don't seem to understand the concept of insurance. The whole point of insurance is risk management. Insurance is there so next time you fracture your ankle, your costs are covered. Obviously, you always have the option to play the roulette. You can hope you don't get sick or hope you won't have to pay for any healthcare services you receive in case you do get sick. No, it's not luck. It's because there is MSI/Medical and other similar programs that have always been around (at least where I live in the US). Even if there wasn't, there is still free clinics, County hospitals, and colleges where you can get free services at a cost of time. That's my point, how is ACA going to affect anything or change anything when we have already had this affordable care for decades (this is a rhetorical question)? PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it. Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 15:25 KwarK wrote:
Charlie, this is just you not understanding how the world works again. You need to stop posting and read some wikipedia. I understand it's a lot of nonsense, I might read the wiki later on. peace.
The mandatory car insurance is not there to protect you from high claims, it is there to protect other people and to make sure they get their monney if you fuck up.
Of all insurances wich are obligated this is by far the most reasonable.
Say you drive your car and cause an accident with results in 2m$ damage to other people/goods.
There is no way you can and will pay thoose 2m$ withouth insurance, you will just go bankrupt wich is perfectly fine, but the victems wont get their monney either and that is the problem. Not you but other people end up beeing the monetary victem of this accident. Therefor car insurance is obligated.
Same goes to some degree for health insurances.
Our society does not let people die when they are sick, if you are not insured someone else will in the end pay the bill for your medical costs, therefor healthcare insurance is/should be obligated as well, unless you want to live in a society where people who cant pay for healthcare are left to die on the streets lol.
Annyway:us government closed down today right?
Wonder when they will re-open again, will they now stay closed down till there is a deal or obama uses his executive powers?
There still is some time, i heard monney wont completely run out till october 31.
Will bonds then start to default on november 1?
Guess they can start with defaulting on the bonds wich the feds holds, that should buy them alot of time lol.
|
On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Please tell me what you're gonna do if you get cancer, you're just gonna sit down and say: 'this is my life choice'? Right.
Oh wait no you're gonna pay for it with the tons you have saved up. Your country is a disaster and you're the leading cause.
|
On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 15:17 Thrax wrote:On October 01 2013 15:02 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:29 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 01 2013 14:27 MarlieChurphy wrote:On October 01 2013 14:20 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 14:15 MarlieChurphy wrote:I don't see any such button. On October 01 2013 13:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote:
Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?)
I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. 3 basic parts: -No one can be denied healthcare or charged more due to preexisting conditions, lifetime caps, etc, and all healthcare plans have at least a minimum standard of benefits -Everyone must get healthcare or be fined. Nothing changes if you already have healthcare. -There are subsidies to buy healthcare on exchanges here for low income families that can't afford it. Some plans are as cheap as $100 a month. Currently I have no job and am broke, and don't have any conditions or care about insurance. What do/should I do? PS- I see a bunch of people on fb complaining right now they aren't going to be paid for the next 2 weeks or something. I think they all work for the TSA or airport or something? They aren't being very receptive to my questions, what are they bitching about? What you should do is go to https://www.healthcare.gov/ and after answering a few questions, it will tell you the price of health insurance and whether you are eligible for subsidies. And then decide for yourself whether you want to buy it. Shit happens, you might be in a car crash, randomly becomes sick etc, and then you'll need healthcare. Yea, in the past if something ever came up. I just went to the hospital and either a family member or myself after the fact just went to a hospital social worker or whatever and filled out a bunch of forms and I don't think I paid anything. What is the difference from that? Like I fail to see what ACA even does. There is/was already MSI and stuff like that anyways. Going to the hospital to get basic health care costs SIGNIFICANTLY more than if you were to just go to the doctor. You're not paying for your treatment so other tax payers have to pay for it, the hospital is going to get its money at the end of the day. If you can actually go to the doctor before something gets too far out of hand it costs less and has better results. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" I don't just randomly or regularly go to the doctor at all. I only go when there is an emergency. Examples of the last 5 times I've been to the doctor/hospital over the course of like 10 years: Appendicitis, Back Sprain, Tonsilitis, Hairline Fractured Ankle, A silver nitrite? suture (had a small cut on my back that wouldn't stop bleeding). So again, I see no use for health insurance for me and it makes no difference to me. You can call me fortunate, or selfish but I still don't see how MSI or Medical or whatever is different than ACA. Do you think the care you received is free? It's basically sheer luck that you haven't had to pay for those services. Many (uninsured) people have been bankrupted by healthcare fees. You don't seem to understand the concept of insurance. The whole point of insurance is risk management. Insurance is there so next time you fracture your ankle, your costs are covered. Obviously, you always have the option to play the roulette. You can hope you don't get sick or hope you won't have to pay for any healthcare services you receive in case you do get sick. No, it's not luck. It's because there is MSI/Medical and other similar programs that have always been around (at least where I live in the US). Even if there wasn't, there is still free clinics, County hospitals, and colleges where you can get free services at a cost of time. That's my point, how is ACA going to affect anything or change anything when we have already had this affordable care for decades (this is a rhetorical question)? PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Can I ask how much you have saved up? Because if you are hit with a chronic illness that requires expensive treatment, then you may well be paying $40k/year for the rest of your life, so given your post I would assume you have saved up at least 500k right? And that you had this savings from the day you became an adult, illnesses do not necessarily wait for your finances to be in order.
|
Part of the analysis that is off... is that you are looking at insurance pricing with someone advocating paying with cash (basically).
The pricing strucure of paying with cash does not exist. (In 99% of cases)
There are lots if situation where is is illegal for a doctor to give you a cash discount. They have to bill you what they bill an insurance provider.
|
Minting the trillion dollar coin just gets around the debt ceiling. It is not printing money in the usual FED sense. It just avoids the debt ceiling and has no further effect.
The only reason not to do it is just how silly it looks.
|
On October 01 2013 22:00 DoubleReed wrote:
Minting the trillion dollar coin just gets around the debt ceiling. It is not printing money in the usual FED sense. It just avoids the debt ceiling and has no further effect.
The only reason not to do it is just how silly it looks.
Abolishing the debt ceiling gets around the debt ceiling. Not that whatever party is in majority will ever give up such a valuable political tool... 
|
On October 01 2013 22:06 Clarity_nl wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 22:00 DoubleReed wrote:
Minting the trillion dollar coin just gets around the debt ceiling. It is not printing money in the usual FED sense. It just avoids the debt ceiling and has no further effect.
The only reason not to do it is just how silly it looks. Abolishing the debt ceiling gets around the debt ceiling. Not that whatever party is in majority will ever give up such a valuable political tool...
Minting the coin is an executive power and it's not constitutionally controversial.
Of course it's still politically and economically controversial because of the silly factor.
|
Also, fear mongering with the Zimbabwe dollar and East Germany ignores the economic reality that we are in right now. We are not in danger of hyperinflation because if the still-depressed economy. And if you think printing money "just devalues it," then you're operating under a false reality of how currency works. Google "Baby Sitting the Economy" for a good explanation on how printing money can boost the economy.
Of course, this doesn't apply to the trillion dollar coin. That's not "printing money" in this sense. That's just dodging the arbitrary debt ceiling.
|
United States41989 Posts
On October 01 2013 19:13 Frits wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Please tell me what you're gonna do if you get cancer, you're just gonna sit down and say: 'this is my life choice'? Right. Oh wait no you're gonna pay for it with the tons you have saved up. Your country is a disaster and you're the leading cause.
In his plan he just dies of cancer and because he's generally unproductive the country as a whole is better off. The problem comes when people don't want him to die and pay for him.
|
On October 01 2013 23:20 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2013 19:13 Frits wrote:On October 01 2013 16:10 MarlieChurphy wrote:
PS- I think the whole concept of insurance is dumb to begin with. You should just save up your own money in case of something and if you want to waste your money or think the investment is good enough, get insurance. This especially includes manditory car insurance. This is an entirely different topic though, don't lay into me about it.
Please tell me what you're gonna do if you get cancer, you're just gonna sit down and say: 'this is my life choice'? Right. Oh wait no you're gonna pay for it with the tons you have saved up. Your country is a disaster and you're the leading cause. In his plan he just dies of cancer and because he's generally unproductive the country as a whole is better off. The problem comes when people don't want him to die and pay for him.
I agree that that's where the problem lies, but are you saying that you think that we should simply let people who can't care for themselves die?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
