|
But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it?
Because if you don't have health insurance you are still going to end up benefiting from the system once you are really sick. Hospitals aren't going to just let someone die when treatment is readily available.
|
Sup doods I think tax is theft when its used on 200,000+ bathrooms and stuff like that so until all the things like this is stopped you could think of tax as theft.There needs to be change in are ass backwards system hospitals will complain that prices on things arnt going up( my sister sells things to them and if the price hasn't gone up in a few years they will complain about it ) shit like that blows my mind .On a side note when I get my check and see that 2 or 3 days of work is taken out is like damn man really im trying to live here! Would also be nice if they told you where your money went not that we would have say where it was spent but to know where it did get spent would be nice.
|
On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 04:52 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 04:15 Blargh wrote:
Guys, don't you want a CAPITALIST ECONOMY? You can't just introduce this "socialist" medicare system that spreads the cost over the country as a whole!! It's not like this whole country/world revolves around social interaction and communication, cooperation, etc with other individuals. When someone gets in a car accident, it's clearly all their fault and they deserve to die because I sure as hell was not responsible! Our current system works great!! Demand is always high on medical anything, and so the the costs are too!! Simple economics.
In all srsns, one of the flaws here is that a capitalist system when it comes to hospitals just isn't viable. When you are in an accident and are bleeding to death, you don't moan to the ambulance, "Hey, don't go to that hospital, go to the cheaper one 10 miles away! They have better deals!" It's stupid to leave it to capitalism or economics to decide the price for necessities of life. Hell, it's barely economics at this point. It's just abuse of a social society. For any progressive nation, this is clearly detrimental. Literally EVERY developed nation EXCEPT the United States has a national healthcare system in place. This semi-free market is a joke, especially so when it comes to the medical department. Believe me, medical costs aren't free. But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it? Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization,
The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it."
We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist.
|
the real rhetorical trick is when you assume a notion of "property" that naturalizes your highly ideological position
|
On February 24 2013 06:11 sam!zdat wrote:
the real rhetorical trick is when you assume a notion of "property" that naturalizes your highly ideological position
Yes, I assume property. I'd love to hear an alternative that didn't sound like a pot head's pipe dream.
|
On February 24 2013 06:09 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 04:52 Millitron wrote:
[quote]
But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it? Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization, The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it." We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract you agreed to in order to remain in the country you live in. You consented to paying those taxes by choosing to live in a nation that provides services and structure by using those taxes.
No one is forcing you to pay those taxes, but as long as you enjoy the benefits that those tax dollars are providing, then you must pay for them.
|
On February 24 2013 06:09 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 04:52 Millitron wrote:
[quote]
But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it? Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization, The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it." We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist.
Living in this country, in a house, is giving consent. Feel free to leave wherever you live and all of the stuff you use that requires electricity and go live out of a tent-you'll be free of taxation then no problem
|
On February 24 2013 06:13 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:11 sam!zdat wrote:
the real rhetorical trick is when you assume a notion of "property" that naturalizes your highly ideological position Yes, I assume property. I'd love to hear an alternative that didn't sound like a pot head's pipe dream.
meh, why don't you say what you mean about it, where it comes from, and why it's justified, what kinds of things can be property, who can own them, so on and so forth. for things that can't be property, why not, and how are they different from the kinds of things that can.
don't accuse people of just making up definitions or smth when you can only defend it by introducing a hypostasis of your own. pure laziness. not that anyone's going to take you seriously anyway, but it might help if you put some thought into it.
edit: for an encore, you can try to explain how property rights can exist without you paying taxes to a state to protect them.
|
On February 24 2013 06:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:09 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:
[quote]
Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization, The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it." We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist. Paying taxes is part of the social contract you agreed to in order to remain in the country you live in. You consented to paying those taxes by choosing to live in a nation that provides services and structure by using those taxes. No one is forcing you to pay those taxes, but as long as you enjoy the benefits that those tax dollars are providing, then you must pay for them.
I was born into said country. It was not a choice. And consent cannot be implied by forcing a person to leave their nation of origin.
|
On February 24 2013 06:19 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 24 2013 06:09 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:
[quote]
Beats me. I think all tax is theft.
Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection".
"You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization, The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it." We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist. Paying taxes is part of the social contract you agreed to in order to remain in the country you live in. You consented to paying those taxes by choosing to live in a nation that provides services and structure by using those taxes. No one is forcing you to pay those taxes, but as long as you enjoy the benefits that those tax dollars are providing, then you must pay for them. I was born into said country. It was not a choice. And consent cannot be implied by forcing a person to leave their nation of origin.
It was a choice to remain in that country once you reached the age of adulthood.
And for someone who seems to waive all responsibility because you were born in a nation, you seem oddly quick to take all the privileges of being born there.
|
Instead of beating the dead horse, perhaps talking about how it makes sense to charge 200 USD for a test that costs 10 USD (all costs included).
|
On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 04:52 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 04:15 Blargh wrote:
Guys, don't you want a CAPITALIST ECONOMY? You can't just introduce this "socialist" medicare system that spreads the cost over the country as a whole!! It's not like this whole country/world revolves around social interaction and communication, cooperation, etc with other individuals. When someone gets in a car accident, it's clearly all their fault and they deserve to die because I sure as hell was not responsible! Our current system works great!! Demand is always high on medical anything, and so the the costs are too!! Simple economics.
In all srsns, one of the flaws here is that a capitalist system when it comes to hospitals just isn't viable. When you are in an accident and are bleeding to death, you don't moan to the ambulance, "Hey, don't go to that hospital, go to the cheaper one 10 miles away! They have better deals!" It's stupid to leave it to capitalism or economics to decide the price for necessities of life. Hell, it's barely economics at this point. It's just abuse of a social society. For any progressive nation, this is clearly detrimental. Literally EVERY developed nation EXCEPT the United States has a national healthcare system in place. This semi-free market is a joke, especially so when it comes to the medical department. Believe me, medical costs aren't free. But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it? Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction...
If something is morally justified, it is, by any reasonable definition, not theft.
|
But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it?
Because you will benefit from it when you get old and sick. And if you don't think you will ever get sick, you should really take a look at statistics. I mean from a principal standpoint if you would agree on never complaining if you're eventually going to die because you don't get treatment, your argument may be viable, but most people who will get seriously sick and have no insurance will end up in an hospital anyway and profit from society, and thats the reason why a public insurance is a good idea.
If people are starting to argue that tax is theft i really don't know what to say at all, its ironically in itself that you are stating that on an internet board using your internet connection which is probably just there because the state pumped money into its technology infrastructure. So if you wanna be taken seriously with this argument the only legitimate place to speak it out loud is probably in a cave.
And the free market idea is nice and all, but as many people stated out before, free markets only work if there's enough competetition and the customer has leverage and power. If you're bleeding out after an accident you don't have much time to compare prices, you're just paying or dying, and guess what, most people will probably end up spending all of their money if the alternative is death. The solution is pretty simple, public insurance forced for everyone, price limits on drugs and medical services. (the health-system should be self-sustainable, and people should get paid reasonably)
Well and if the solution is that easy people may be wondering why that hasn't happened still, and i think thats mostly to blame on political failure. People who are making a business out of the health system succeed and spend billions of dollars on lobbying. That's of course not true for every problem (see the whole horse-meat mess here in europe, where you can surely say that customers are mainly responsible for what they eat and how much they want to pay for it) but regarding health and education people don't have much of a choice.
Thankfully here in Germany our healthcare system is working pretty okay, but we have king of the same lobbying problem when it comes to the agricultural sector in the EU.
|
On February 24 2013 06:23 Ghostcom wrote:
Instead of beating the dead horse, perhaps talking about how it makes sense to charge 200 USD for a test that costs 10 USD (all costs included).
It makes perfect "sense". They charge $200 because no one will charge any less than that. That's a capitalist economy at work.
|
On February 24 2013 06:23 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 06:19 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 06:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 24 2013 06:09 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 06:02 mcc wrote:On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:
[quote]
If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... Does not satisfy definition of theft, and calling it theft is just a rhetorical trick mostly used by anarcho-capitalist, so do not be surprised by the generalization, The real rhetorical trick is when we take the meaning of a word and then make the exception "unless the government is doing it." We operate under different definitions. I define theft to mean "taking a person's property without consent." That definition does not make me an anarcho-capitalist. Paying taxes is part of the social contract you agreed to in order to remain in the country you live in. You consented to paying those taxes by choosing to live in a nation that provides services and structure by using those taxes. No one is forcing you to pay those taxes, but as long as you enjoy the benefits that those tax dollars are providing, then you must pay for them. I was born into said country. It was not a choice. And consent cannot be implied by forcing a person to leave their nation of origin. It was a choice to remain in that country once you reached the age of adulthood. And for someone who seems to waive all responsibility because you were born in a nation, you seem oddly quick to take all the privileges of being born there.
A choice to remain in the country when I reached adulthood? It is my home. I cannot come into your home and make demands of you because you refuse to leave. "Your choice to stay in your home means you are granting consent for me to rape you." What????
Are you saying that governments own the entire planet and human beings are therefore born into their ownership? That we should have no basic human rights except what governments choose to grant us? That morality is determined solely by government dictate? You live in a very strange world indeed.
|
There are many culprits, in no particular order
- doctor's over-use of diagnostic tests/imaging
- high prices set by Big pharma
- high premiums set by Insurance
- skyrocketing prices due to natural technological advances
- focus on late-stage treatment/life-saving procedures versus cheaper preventative care
Let's see what we can do. 1) difficult to intervene; doctors don't want their practice to be supervised by bureaucrats. Changes to malpractice may help stop over-testing by doctors to "cover their ass" but won't change the situation all that much. 2) Would work but unfeasible due to lobbying power. Drug costs do not need to be that high, just need to convince them to make "good" profit rather than "maximum profit". 3) Would work in theory by cutting out the middle man (insurance). However that would never happen, we cannot even get a public option for healthcare because Big Insurance > our president. So we are just going to have to deal with insurance office workers who purely work towards crunching numbers to maximize profit (and contribute nothing to healthcare) sucking up a portion of the pie. 4) Can't help it. Newer stuff = pricier. 5) Will definitely help. If Obamacare works, more people with insurance will be inclined to visit primary care doctors who will keep them healthy and prevent a lot of hospitalizations.
|
On February 24 2013 06:24 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 05:40 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:31 GTPGlitch wrote:On February 24 2013 05:27 rusedeguerre wrote:On February 24 2013 05:18 Simberto wrote:On February 24 2013 05:15 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 05:09 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 05:00 Ghostcom wrote:On February 24 2013 04:52 Millitron wrote:On February 24 2013 04:15 Blargh wrote:
Guys, don't you want a CAPITALIST ECONOMY? You can't just introduce this "socialist" medicare system that spreads the cost over the country as a whole!! It's not like this whole country/world revolves around social interaction and communication, cooperation, etc with other individuals. When someone gets in a car accident, it's clearly all their fault and they deserve to die because I sure as hell was not responsible! Our current system works great!! Demand is always high on medical anything, and so the the costs are too!! Simple economics.
In all srsns, one of the flaws here is that a capitalist system when it comes to hospitals just isn't viable. When you are in an accident and are bleeding to death, you don't moan to the ambulance, "Hey, don't go to that hospital, go to the cheaper one 10 miles away! They have better deals!" It's stupid to leave it to capitalism or economics to decide the price for necessities of life. Hell, it's barely economics at this point. It's just abuse of a social society. For any progressive nation, this is clearly detrimental. Literally EVERY developed nation EXCEPT the United States has a national healthcare system in place. This semi-free market is a joke, especially so when it comes to the medical department. Believe me, medical costs aren't free. But why should people who don't want in on the system be forced to pay for it? If I don't want health insurance, why should I be forced to buy it? Why should you be forced to pay ANY tax? Beats me. I think all tax is theft.Not that being forced to buy insurance is even a tax. You're being forced to pay a private company for a service. That's not a tax, its like paying the mafia "protection". "You really should pay Humana, it'd be a real SHAME if you ended up in jail." If that is your perspective I do not think it would be possible for me, or anyone else to convince you otherwise. There is this weird group of hardcore anarcho-capitalists that appear in every single political discussion in this forum with absurdly weird theories. It is best to simply ignore them. Just because you acknowledge that taxation is theft doesn't make you a hardcore anarcho-capitalist. The only question is when and how much theft can be morally justified. Oh that's right tax which is used to keep the country that you live in functioning and also to pay for services that keep people from dying is definitely theft... Yes, definitely theft. Often morally justified. Apparently people are incapable of making such a distinction... If something is morally justified, it is, by any reasonable definition, not theft.
Ah, ok. I will tell that to the judge when I rob somebody. "It wasn't theft because I used the money for a worthwhile cause." Try again.
|
On February 24 2013 06:05 rusedeguerre wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 05:49 TheFish7 wrote:
The free market cannot solve every problem. The military, schools, healthcare... these are things that cannot be provided by private entities. The consumers of these things have no purchasing power. Supply and Demand does not apply.
Consumers have no purchasing power? Supply and demand does not apply? I have no idea what you are talking about. And all three of your examples have existed in private enterprise form. The question is whether or not it is better or worse than the alternatives. You can't just say "it's not possible" when it clearly is.
And all three examples, when left to the free market, have failed. The U.S. military is incredibly bloated and wastes an obnoxious amount of this nation's money. Our school system is noticeably worse than other developed countries' school systems. This thread very clearly points out why we have the worst healthcare system in the developed world.
|
On February 24 2013 06:28 rusedeguerre wrote:
Are you saying that governments own the entire planet and human beings are therefore born into their ownership? That we should have no basic human rights except what governments choose to grant us? That morality is determined solely by government dictate? You live in a very strange world indeed.
yup. welcome to the human condition. guess you'd better start thinking about what kind of government you'd like to have. "man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains." bummer, huh?
|
On February 24 2013 06:23 Ghostcom wrote:
Instead of beating the dead horse, perhaps talking about how it makes sense to charge 200 USD for a test that costs 10 USD (all costs included).
What test are you talking about? You can't tunnel vision on purely the materialistic cost. Services aren't cheap, and these are professionals you are hiring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
