Jump to content
scandal

Why We Need a Public Health-Care Plan

 Share

193 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Other Timeline
"We" don't need a public healthcare plan. The uninsured and uninsurable need a public healthcare plan.

"We" like what we have.

Imagine if your employer took it away from you.

Then, I become one of the uninsured. Were I to develop an illness during this period, I'd then become one of the uninsurable.

The uninsured and uninsurable need a public plan. The rest of us don't.

Which is just what I said above, except you made me use extra words. Please pay attention next time, I don't have all day.

I'm not sure if you are the USC or the immigrant. But I just thought I should remind you that if the foreign born half of your relationship becomes 'uninsurable' before they naturalize, they can't use any current public plans. Those are 'means tested benefits' and in some states (maybe yours) they are regulated such that aliens have no access to them.

Smugness really isn't an asset, you see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 192
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Filed: Country: Canada
Timeline
3) If a public option for uninsured and uninsurable persons is introduced, why should a technically insurable not be able to choose that public option?

Limiting a public plan (I don't call it insurance) to the uninsured and uninsurable would likely pass the Senate as it would pose no threat to insurance industry profits. Safeguards in the form of punitive financial measures can be built in to the system to prevent employers from dropping out of plans.

Cover those who need it first. Score political points later.

I'm not sure if you are the USC or the immigrant. But I just thought I should remind you that if the foreign born half of your relationship becomes 'uninsurable' before they naturalize, they can't use any current public plans. Those are 'means tested benefits' and in some states (maybe yours) they are regulated such that aliens have no access to them.

Smugness really isn't an asset, you see.

Did I say anything about existing plans? I'm talking about a new plan. Pay attention, lady.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Thailand
Timeline
"We" don't need a public healthcare plan. The uninsured and uninsurable need a public healthcare plan.

"We" like what we have.

Imagine if your employer took it away from you.

Then, I become one of the uninsured. Were I to develop an illness during this period, I'd then become one of the uninsurable.

The uninsured and uninsurable need a public plan. The rest of us don't.

Which is just what I said above, except you made me use extra words. Please pay attention next time, I don't have all day.

I'm not sure if you are the USC or the immigrant. But I just thought I should remind you that if the foreign born half of your relationship becomes 'uninsurable' before they naturalize, they can't use any current public plans. Those are 'means tested benefits' and in some states (maybe yours) they are regulated such that aliens have no access to them.

Smugness really isn't an asset, you see.

I take him for a troll. Not to be taken seriously.

I suggest those of us who really have something of value to discuss here, should continue to do so. It's inevitable that the haterz will want to crash the party but we don't need to allow them to.

Big Dog - Your views are much appreciated! Thanks for sharing.

RJ - I know you are going through a personal hell with the issue of healthcare. How do you view the current reform proposals? Are you in favor of what you're hearing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
Wrong again. The stated purpose of the new plan would be to insure all the uninsureds and uninsurables.

Oh RLY?

They haven't exactly thrashed out anything approaching a concrete plan, but never mind that eh. We can all pull "stated purpose" out of our a$$ if that's what we are intent on believing in.

Edited by Private Pike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Thailand
Timeline
Old or new - LPRs would still (very likely) be ineligible for public insurance, just as we are ineligible for any public benefits.

That's not how it has to be, or how it should be.

In Ontario insurance is offered based upon legal residence, with a waiting period. Once you've waited out the holding time (I believe 6 months), if you are a legal resident of the province, you're eligible for coverage. That applies to new immigrants as well. I believe other Canadian provinces are similar.

No doubt the UK and other countries offer this as well.

Why? Because it makes sense. It's a burden on society to have people without coverage. It's in everyone's interest that we all have coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2500 words or less = troll

classic.

Please fill in your timeline. :star:

K-1

March 7, 2005: I-129F NOA1

September 20, 2005: K-1 Interview in London. Visa received shortly thereafter.

AOS

December 30, 2005: I-485 received by USCIS

May 5, 2006: Interview at Phoenix district office. Approval pending FBI background check clearance. AOS finally approved almost two years later: February 14, 2008.

Received 10-year green card February 28, 2008

Your Humble Advice Columnist, Joyce

Come check out the most happenin' thread on VJ: Dear Joyce

Click here to see me visiting with my homebodies.

[The grooviest signature you've ever seen is under construction!]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
Old or new - LPRs would still (very likely) be ineligible for public insurance, just as we are ineligible for any public benefits.

That's not how it has to be, or how it should be.

In Ontario insurance is offered based upon legal residence, with a waiting period. Once you've waited out the holding time (I believe 6 months), if you are a legal resident of the province, you're eligible for coverage. That applies to new immigrants as well. I believe other Canadian provinces are similar.

No doubt the UK and other countries offer this as well.

Why? Because it makes sense. It's a burden on society to have people without coverage. It's in everyone's interest that we all have coverage.

Hey I didn't say that's what I believe - just that its consistent with the US' general attitude towards providing "public" benefits to non USCs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Timeline
"We" don't need a public healthcare plan. The uninsured and uninsurable need a public healthcare plan.

"We" like what we have.

Imagine if your employer took it away from you.

Then, I become one of the uninsured. Were I to develop an illness during this period, I'd then become one of the uninsurable.

The uninsured and uninsurable need a public plan. The rest of us don't.

Which is just what I said above, except you made me use extra words. Please pay attention next time, I don't have all day.

I'm not sure if you are the USC or the immigrant. But I just thought I should remind you that if the foreign born half of your relationship becomes 'uninsurable' before they naturalize, they can't use any current public plans. Those are 'means tested benefits' and in some states (maybe yours) they are regulated such that aliens have no access to them.

Smugness really isn't an asset, you see.

I take him for a troll. Not to be taken seriously.

I suggest those of us who really have something of value to discuss here, should continue to do so. It's inevitable that the haterz will want to crash the party but we don't need to allow them to.

Big Dog - Your views are much appreciated! Thanks for sharing.

RJ - I know you are going through a personal hell with the issue of healthcare. How do you view the current reform proposals? Are you in favor of what you're hearing?

Not particularly. I see nothing being proposed to check the greed of the insurance companies or the drug companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2500 words or less = troll

classic.

Please fill in your timeline. :star:

If you read my early posts you'd know I don't have one yet.

Oh, my mistake.

Is that like your "early work"?

K-1

March 7, 2005: I-129F NOA1

September 20, 2005: K-1 Interview in London. Visa received shortly thereafter.

AOS

December 30, 2005: I-485 received by USCIS

May 5, 2006: Interview at Phoenix district office. Approval pending FBI background check clearance. AOS finally approved almost two years later: February 14, 2008.

Received 10-year green card February 28, 2008

Your Humble Advice Columnist, Joyce

Come check out the most happenin' thread on VJ: Dear Joyce

Click here to see me visiting with my homebodies.

[The grooviest signature you've ever seen is under construction!]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
"We" don't need a public healthcare plan. The uninsured and uninsurable need a public healthcare plan.

"We" like what we have.

Imagine if your employer took it away from you.

Then, I become one of the uninsured. Were I to develop an illness during this period, I'd then become one of the uninsurable.

The uninsured and uninsurable need a public plan. The rest of us don't.

Which is just what I said above, except you made me use extra words. Please pay attention next time, I don't have all day.

I'm not sure if you are the USC or the immigrant. But I just thought I should remind you that if the foreign born half of your relationship becomes 'uninsurable' before they naturalize, they can't use any current public plans. Those are 'means tested benefits' and in some states (maybe yours) they are regulated such that aliens have no access to them.

Smugness really isn't an asset, you see.

I take him for a troll. Not to be taken seriously.

I suggest those of us who really have something of value to discuss here, should continue to do so. It's inevitable that the haterz will want to crash the party but we don't need to allow them to.

Big Dog - Your views are much appreciated! Thanks for sharing.

RJ - I know you are going through a personal hell with the issue of healthcare. How do you view the current reform proposals? Are you in favor of what you're hearing?

Not particularly. I see nothing being proposed to check the greed of the insurance companies or the drug companies.

That's my issue as well - the focus seems to be on coverage, rather than on quality of service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...