Vacci-Nation [CLOSED DUE TO DISRESPECTFUL, INSULTING, POLITICAL POSTS

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by JD001

I suggest you give it a go, who knows what you will discover..

Or get discovered. That's exactly why I don't do it. Too many skeletons in the Hawk family closet.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Now to the topic that I came here for:

Would you be willing to get a COVID vaccine in exchange for $1,500 stimulus check?

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/03/1500...ould-work.html

I think this is a bad move. I get the idea, which is to incentivize people to go get the vaccine, so we can get the adoption rate above 75%, but America has already demonstrated how defiant they are, and I think this will just be fuel-for-the-fire for any anti-vaccers. I doubt this will happen.

The way I see it they are just renting space in my body for a microchip. Sign me up



(I am joking for those in the back)

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

The way I see it they are just renting space in my body for a microchip. Sign me up



(I am joking for those in the back)

If you don't get the call to get the vaccine it just means that you are one of the group targeted for elimination in the worldwide population reduction plan.
May get really quiet around here.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Sorry to get us off track on the education thing guys. I really only meant it as an example, but should have known better as this isn't my first rodeo (and fall off the bull).

This is why we can't have nice threads.

[TommyW]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I think you are confused sir

Uhhh no.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

This is why we can't have nice threads.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by shiumai

'Free' college or university isn't 'free' - it's paid for by the taxpayers. If you don't have kids or aren't going to college, what percentage of your wages would you be willing to give up to send someone else to college?

Lots of pro and con arguments but I don't think there's a good way to make it 'fair'. The world's not 'fair' and never has been. I don't know what the solution is, or if there's a good one.

It is primarily paid for by the person going to school, even in a system where tuition is "free". On average, people make more money when they go to college:

A recent study from Georgetown University found that, on average, college graduates earn $1 million more in earnings over their lifetime. Another recent study by the Pew Research Center found that the median yearly income gap between high school and college graduates is around $17,500.

So somewhere between $750k to $1 million. Even if that income was modestly taxed at 10% then that is an extra $75-100k in taxes paid. If that income was taxed at 20% then that is an extra $150-200k in taxes. Unless tuition for public school was really expensive, the person will pay back their debt to society in taxes and then some. They will also be more productive member of society and a more educated member of society. They are less likely to take from social welfare systems, and they are more likely to contribute back to society with voting, with philanthropy, while not getting into trouble with the law, etc.

The solution that other countries have come up with is to provide free college. Tuition is going up while wages are dropping, so it has never been harder for people to afford to go to school. The widens the income gap, as the rich continue to send their kids to school. In other countries, if you don't go to college prep middle school and college prep high school then you don't go to public university, which is entirely merit based. Private and trade schools might still have some financial aid, grants or support, but the have tuition.

The idea behind forgiving college tuition isn't a free handout. It is a stimulus for the economy for one, and it is a way to free up people's earnings to go towards other things. That college payment could go towards a new car, or it could help someone pay off their credit cards, or it could be used for a down payment on a home, or whatever. Instead of money getting funneled to a few banks, the money can be freed up to be moved back into the economy and unsaddle students with debt, which typically delays buying a car, home, getting married, moving out, etc.

The schools with the highest amount of student loan debt are University of Phoenix, Walden University, Nova Southeastern University, Capella University, and Strayer University.[8] Except for Nova Southeastern, they are all proprietary (profit-making) universities.

The default rate for borrowers who didn't complete their degree is three times as high as the rate for those who did. [2]:1 Student loan defaults are disproportionately concentrated in the for-profit college sector.[9] In 2018, the National Center for Education Statistics reported that the 12-year student loan default rate for for-profit colleges was 52 percent.[10] The 12-year student loan default rate for African Americans going to for-profit colleges was reported to be 65.7 percent.[11] A 2018 Brookings Institution study projected that "nearly 40 percent of students who took out loans in 2004 may default by 2023."

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

If you don't get the call to get the vaccine it just means that you are one of the group targeted for elimination in the worldwide population reduction plan.
May get really quiet around here.

There was something kind of crazy yet undeniably true about SLJ's plan:

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by shiumai

I guess my issue is with the use of the word 'free'. JC might be 'free' to the student, but it's paid for by taxes, which is other people's wages, time and effort. I think that 'subsidized' is a more accurate word.

Years ago my wife, who's in the health care/medical industry was giving a talk to some high school students. One of them raised his hand and asked her 'What do you think of free health care', and she answered 'There is no such thing as free health care' and proceeded to ask them some questions. None of them really had a concept of how it worked - it just sounded good, like 'free ice cream'.

Originally Posted by TommyW

You can call it whatever you want however it strikes some semblance of balance for the pros and cons of how to deal with college educations from a financial standpoint.

Free healthcare is a whole other F story.

People don't actually mean free healthcare. It obviously comes from taxation, but it is free at the time of use. I frankly would prefer a single payer option like medicare with a private supplement plan like most people have for what is not covered by medicare. The larger insurance pool will keep costs down.

Coupling healthcare with employment is the biggest bad idea. People lose their job, get fired, get laid off, or whatever like during this pandemic then they lose their insurance. If they change employers then they change their insurance, and possibly, their doctor. If their employer changes carriers then they could possibly lose access to the network their doctor is on. If someone wants to go to school or if they want to change jobs then this often means losing their insurance, even temporarily. It is actually a barrier for advancement. I know of people who were offered a per diem position at a higher wage/posiont, but it was without full healthcare benefits, and they didn't want to take a chance of going without insurance until a full time position opened up.

Currently, those that don't have insurance just go to the emergency room and don't pay the bill. Hospitals rely on private insurance to make up the cost for any shortcomings for anyone without insurance or with substandard insurance, which is why premiums continue to go up and up. The inefficiency of people using the ER instead of using doctor's offices and having preventative screenings are one reason why the US pays more for healthcare, but has worse outcomes. We pay high pharmaceutical costs, and for-profit insurance has larger margins here too. We could do better.

[JD001]

Vaccine rollout, from the 8th Dec. nursing homes followed by our General Practice Doctor surgeries (18th Dec).

I personally think that they've prioritised the wrong people, I think it should have been:

1. Frontline workers - healthcare etc.
2. People who can't work from home.
3. Schools - children and teachers.

[why?]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

People don't actually mean free healthcare. It obviously comes from taxation, but it is free at the time of use. I frankly would prefer a single payer option like medicare with a private supplement plan like most people have for what is not covered by medicare. The larger insurance pool will keep costs down.
Coupling healthcare with employment is the biggest bad idea. People lose their job, get fired, get laid off, or whatever like during this pandemic then they lose their insurance. If they change employers then they change their insurance, and possibly, their doctor. If their employer changes carriers then they could possibly lose access to the network their doctor is on. If someone wants to go to school or if they want to change jobs then this often means losing their insurance, even temporarily. It is actually a barrier for advancement. I know of people who were offered a per diem position at a higher wage/posiont, but it was without full healthcare benefits, and they didn't want to take a chance of going without insurance until a full time position opened up.

Currently, those that don't have insurance just go to the emergency room and don't pay the bill. Hospitals rely on private insurance to make up the cost for any shortcomings for anyone without insurance or with substandard insurance, which is why premiums continue to go up and up. The inefficiency of people using the ER instead of using doctor's offices and having preventative screenings are one reason why the US pays more for healthcare, but has worse outcomes. We pay high pharmaceutical costs, and for-profit insurance has larger margins here too. We could do better.

All your ideas are backwards. Coupling insurance to your job is absolutely a bad thing. However it happened because government thought it would be cool to limit how much someone could earn in the 70's, and yet you want to add one terrible idea on top of another. So instead of allowing government to destroy something else, how about let's eliminate the actual problem, which is government?

You know what the most popular option in countries with single payer healthcare? Private health insurance. That alone tells you they are all failures.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

It is primarily paid for by the person going to school, even in a system where tuition is "free". On average, people make more money when they go to college:

So somewhere between $750k to $1 million. Even if that income was modestly taxed at 10% then that is an extra $75-100k in taxes paid. If that income was taxed at 20% then that is an extra $150-200k in taxes. Unless tuition for public school was really expensive, the person will pay back their debt to society in taxes and then some. They will also be more productive member of society and a more educated member of society. They are less likely to take from social welfare systems, and they are more likely to contribute back to society with voting, with philanthropy, while not getting into trouble with the law, etc.

The solution that other countries have come up with is to provide free college. Tuition is going up while wages are dropping, so it has never been harder for people to afford to go to school. The widens the income gap, as the rich continue to send their kids to school. In other countries, if you don't go to college prep middle school and college prep high school then you don't go to public university, which is entirely merit based. Private and trade schools might still have some financial aid, grants or support, but the have tuition.

The idea behind forgiving college tuition isn't a free handout. It is a stimulus for the economy for one, and it is a way to free up people's earnings to go towards other things. That college payment could go towards a new car, or it could help someone pay off their credit cards, or it could be used for a down payment on a home, or whatever. Instead of money getting funneled to a few banks, the money can be freed up to be moved back into the economy and unsaddle students with debt, which typically delays buying a car, home, getting married, moving out, etc.

Averages lie. Especially when someone can earn tens of billions of dollars. There is a massive difference between people that go to school for an actual useful stem degree, and those that go to school for a totally useless non stem degree.

College tuition is insane, specifically because they are evil. There is a direct relationship between the amount of government money given out and the vast increase in college tuition. The further colleges move towards being in bed with leftists, the more government money they get, the more they brainwash people into foolish leftist slavery.

I'd absolutely go for free college tuition if it was packaged with fiscally responsible government, a reduction in government by 75%, making it illegal to steal from taxpayers and give to anyone at all for any reason at all, and removing the patently evil income tax and property tax. Let's actually go back to the system the Founders created, they knew a hell of a lot more than anyone living today does. Jefferson wanted free college tuition for everyone, but he also wanted a government that didn't feel its citizens were property, like we have now.

The biggest issue we all have is we view these things as problems, the people that created the system see it as working exactly as designed. They are the Founders worst nightmares, and the Founders were sure the citizens would never allow this to happen.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by why?

All your ideas are backwards. Coupling insurance to your job is absolutely a bad thing. However it happened because government thought it would be cool to limit how much someone could earn in the 70's, and yet you want to add one terrible idea on top of another. So instead of allowing government to destroy something else, how about let's eliminate the actual problem, which is government?

You know what the most popular option in countries with single payer healthcare? Private health insurance. That alone tells you they are all failures.

You say all my ideas are backwards then agree that coupling insurance to your job is bad...???

Private insurance doesn't fix a problem. Here is the problem: I don't have insurance, but go to the ER, and I don't pay my bill. What should happen? Option 1 is you don't let me in without insurance, but what if I am a trauma patient and my wallet is lost in my car or left at home, or I am found unconscious at the grocery store. We can't deny access for emergency care based on a need to immediately prove adequate insurance coverage or an ability to pay back the bill. Ok 2, so if someone doesn't pay then we will send them to jail or take their possessions or have them file bankruptcy. Well, this isn't far off. The number one reason for bankruptcy is medical bills. Meanwhile, the hospital just raises the premiums for private insurance anyways, so whether it is through taxation or through higher premiums, someone is paying for someone else, except in the latter case, it is far more because there isn't a mandate via taxation for everyone to contribute something.

What about those pesky regulations that government uses to regulate the insurance industry? Should we throw out those too like laws against denying people insurance or raising their premiums to astronomical levels because they have a preexisting condition or because they are older?

Did you know government healthcare has the highest customer satisfaction out of all insurance providers?

https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/...satisfied.aspx

Originally Posted by why?

Averages lie. Especially when someone can earn tens of billions of dollars. There is a massive difference between people that go to school for an actual useful stem degree, and those that go to school for a totally useless non stem degree.

College tuition is insane, specifically because they are evil. There is a direct relationship between the amount of government money given out and the vast increase in college tuition. The further colleges move towards being in bed with leftists, the more government money they get, the more they brainwash people into foolish leftist slavery.

I'd absolutely go for free college tuition if it was packaged with fiscally responsible government, a reduction in government by 75%, making it illegal to steal from taxpayers and give to anyone at all for any reason at all, and removing the patently evil income tax and property tax. Let's actually go back to the system the Founders created, they knew a hell of a lot more than anyone living today does. Jefferson wanted free college tuition for everyone, but he also wanted a government that didn't feel its citizens were property, like we have now.

The biggest issue we all have is we view these things as problems, the people that created the system see it as working exactly as designed. They are the Founders worst nightmares, and the Founders were sure the citizens would never allow this to happen.

I already said that the average person makes more money, so it doesn't matter if someone is making six or seven figures and someone is using their college education as a stay at home parent to better develop their child and will never have a paycheck, THE AVERAGE person makes more money, which is a gain to our economy in higher GDP, more production, less dependency on government assistance, less incidence of going to jail/prison, higher taxes going back into the government, etc. Yes, some pay for more than others, just like with insurance, where some use the system more than others, or with taxes in general, how some pay more than others and some reap more of the benefits than others.

Prices for tuition are much better controlled when college is free and the government sets a standard for reimbursement. Currently, a student takes out government loans and private loans for college, and prices keep going up because people will just take out more loans, and unfortunately, it is the private colleges which typically use private loans that most often are defaulted on.

In a system with no government regulations or support, someone either has the money or doesn't for school, and school is expensive because it isn't federally supported with loans, nor is it state funded, so all we have is private schools with large tuition. This greatly limits who can get into school because only those families and individuals who can pay for college go. But I forgot...we have no regulations. I suppose then students will just find a way to get into school, even if it means taking out private student loans, and then they will just default on the loans and declare bankruptcy and not have to pay their loans. They could do that because we would be getting rid of government regulations, specifically the one saying student loans can't be written off from bankruptcy. I guess we are back to free college.

[Spuds]

Wasn't this a thread about some vaccines for the coronavirus?

[soundman98]

Fun story. My youngest coworker and I were leaving a job at a well-off middle managers house that is now working from home all the time.

I said something to the effect of "if this whole work from home thing goes much longer, I think we're going to see a lot of people without jobs as companies get smart and move those well paid managerial positions overseas for a fraction of the cost, just like they've done in the past with tech support."

He got a really concerned look on his face and said " no, I'm sure the government would step in to prevent that."

I'm concerned and laughing at the same time.