RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

lexie -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/14/2008 5:24:49 PM)

quote:

I just don't get this entire concept that if "I" want to have a baby and "I" want to stay at home with him/her for a certain period of time it's "someone elses" responsibility to provide for me the means to do so or hold my job for me?


We get maternity benefits from the government here for 35 weeks. I didn't qualify for it because I didn't work enough hours in the year before it. You know what, we still did just fine on one income, and we continue to do just fine on one income, because that is the decision we made.

I know of one mother who is going back to work after her one year maternity leave, and plans to work for just enough time to qualify for another year maternity leave, have a baby and leave her job for good when that year is up.

Completely unfair to the employer. It may be legal, but to me is a complete lack of respect for other people.



Sophie11 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/14/2008 5:32:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman

Why is it all of the other industrialized nations have universal healthcare and we don't? Yeah, citizens of the UK, Sweden, and Japan pay more in taxes than we do but they get more out of it than we do, too - paid healthcare, college tuition, daycare for working parents, and an accounting system in the government which not only cuts out pork-barrel wastage but gets the providers paid quickly and uses only a single-page form when one visits the doctor's office.


I STRONGLY DISAGREE with universal healthcare. There are so many problems that are going to come with it besides higher taxes. I'm sorry but it is not the job of the government to pay for everyones healthcare, college education, daycare etc. Also, what they pay for, they control. Not the kind of country I want to live in. Where would our freedom go then? How are we free if we are so completely dependant on the government for all of our basic needs?



PaleHawkWoman -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 2:23:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sophie11

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman

Why is it all of the other industrialized nations have universal healthcare and we don't? Yeah, citizens of the UK, Sweden, and Japan pay more in taxes than we do but they get more out of it than we do, too - paid healthcare, college tuition, daycare for working parents, and an accounting system in the government which not only cuts out pork-barrel wastage but gets the providers paid quickly and uses only a single-page form when one visits the doctor's office.


I STRONGLY DISAGREE with universal healthcare. There are so many problems that are going to come with it besides higher taxes. I'm sorry but it is not the job of the government to pay for everyones healthcare, college education, daycare etc. Also, what they pay for, they control. Not the kind of country I want to live in. Where would our freedom go then? How are we free if we are so completely dependant on the government for all of our basic needs?


The government doesn't pay for it, the taxpayers do. The government sees to equitable administration of healthcare benefits so that all citizens have access to the medical services they and their families need. And keep in mind that the citizens and most of the businesses were the ones who pushed and voted for universal healthcare in these countries.

If this was put before a vote of the people in this country, how do you think most people would vote? How do you think most of those who cannot afford health insurance or basic health care would vote(and that is about 20 million or more Americans)? Most businesses already think that they shouldn't have to offer health insurance period, that the government should take care of that.

As far as maternity leave goes, I agree with keeping the law in place which requires that employers allow said leave(federal law does not require paid leave)and that the employee wil be able to return to her job at the same rate of pay when her leave is over. There are so many temporary staffing companies who can provide staff to cover any employee's leave orvacation and do so economically that no employer is "put out" when an employee takes leave.

If you want to throw out maternity leave, then let's dump the 40 hr work week, paid overtime, child labor laws, federal safety regulations for work sites, and labor laws which protect employees from discrimination and arbitrary treatment by employers, as these cost employers a good margin of profit as well. Let's get rid of paid vacation, or vacation time period, and since many businesses operate 7 days a week, lets get rid of regulations which allow employees time off for religious observances. That way your employer can maximize their profit by working you as much or as little as they see fit, pay you as little as they see fit with no overtime pay, work you 7 days a week, work you in unhealthy or dangerous conditions, replace you with some small child or teenager, and fire you for asking for time off for Christmas or Easter or to attend church. Your boss could also harass, bully, or sexually assault you and threaten to fire you if you complained and there would be nothing you could do about it if you wanted to keep your job or get another one.

Oh wait, that's how it was before the Labor Laws were passed back in the 1930's.



rlj -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 2:36:03 PM)

quote:

Oh wait, that's how it was before the Labor Laws were passed back in the 1930's.


That's why manufacturing moved to China. You also forgot pollution. I grew up in the old "rubber capital of the world" and they say back in the day you could go outside and sometimes taste it.

I know I'm proud of the child labor sweatshops in Asia where people work 7 day weeks year round because it makes my 401k bigger. : )

/sarcasm off



PaleHawkWoman -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 3:17:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rlj

quote:

Oh wait, that's how it was before the Labor Laws were passed back in the 1930's.


That's why manufacturing moved to China. You also forgot pollution. I grew up in the old "rubber capital of the world" and they say back in the day you could go outside and sometimes taste it.

I know I'm proud of the child labor sweatshops in Asia where people work 7 day weeks year round because it makes my 401k bigger. : )

/sarcasm off


And let's not forget that sweat shops offer parents the opportunity to sell their children into slavery! Are your kids eating you out of house and home? Do your teenagers cause you grief? Well folks, here's your opportunity to get rid of that bratty young'un!

Hey, there's an opportunity for gainful employment for the homeless, those in bankruptcy or foreclosure, and the elderly and disabled who are just cluttering up nursing homes! Prison inmates could be out to work producing cheap goods- heck, they're just sitting around behind bars anyway. Why pay a law-abiding citizen minimum wage when you can put a prisoner to work at $1/day? And if the working conditions are dirty and dangerous, what are they going to do- quit?



rlj -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 7:13:43 PM)

quote:

Why pay a law-abiding citizen minimum wage when you can put a prisoner to work at $1/day? And if the working conditions are dirty and dangerous, what are they going to do- quit?


Why should we pay them at all? I fail to see why they should get free room and board in the first place. ; )



lw9 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 7:32:18 PM)

quote:

PaleHawkWoman: Why is it all of the other industrialized nations have universal healthcare and we don't? Yeah, citizens of the UK, Sweden, and Japan pay more in taxes than we do but they get more out of it than we do, too - paid healthcare, college tuition, daycare for working parents, and an accounting system in the government which not only cuts out pork-barrel wastage but gets the providers paid quickly and uses only a single-page form when one visits the doctor's office.


Having lived in the UK [which I love dearly], I can tell you that socialized healthcare in the UK was no laughing matter. People were waiting up to 4 years for life saving surgeries for cancer and heart conditions, and they were dying on those wait lists. The UK certainly wasn't alone in it's socialized medicine problems as there were other European countries even worse off in their healthcare.

A note about Japan: The government has now imposed ridiculously strict waistline limits for all of their citizens between the ages of 40 and 74 to reduce costs to the overburdened healthcare system. The Japanese are not overweight to begin with, but waistlines must now be 33.5 inches and under for men and 35.4 and under for women since they view anyone even slightly heavier as a potential risk for health problems.

LINK: "Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.

The ministry also says that curbing widening waistlines will rein in a rapidly aging society’s ballooning health care costs, one of the most serious and politically delicate problems facing Japan today.

Some experts say the government’s guidelines on everything from waistlines to blood pressure are so strict that meeting, or exceeding, those targets will be impossible. They say that the government’s real goal is to shift health care costs onto the private sector."

Wow... sounds like a great system. This is what happens when people relinquish their freedom and let the government take over.

Before anyone advocates socialized medicine, I strongly suggest they live in a country that has this system, start paying the outrageous taxes, and see what it's really like. Our government is not set up for efficiency and cost-effectiveness. What makes anyone think it can handle healthcare for the nation?

As far as provided daycare for working parents... WHY? Why does the government [which takes in MY tax money to pay for all of this] or a company own anyone this? When people decide to have children, that decision is theirs alone, and the responsibility and financial burden should be on them, not the country as a whole or on the company they work for. Many two income families could afford to live on one income and raise their children at home IF they downsized their lifestyle. If they've become pregnant through sinful circumstances or irresponsibility, again, why should this be my financial burden?

quote:

Sophie11: Where would our freedom go then? How are we free if we are so completely dependant on the government for all of our basic needs?


But that is what this society is coming to: Let the government take care of my needs rather than me be responsible for myself and my decisions.



Sophie11 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/15/2008 11:49:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sophie11

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman

Why is it all of the other industrialized nations have universal healthcare and we don't? Yeah, citizens of the UK, Sweden, and Japan pay more in taxes than we do but they get more out of it than we do, too - paid healthcare, college tuition, daycare for working parents, and an accounting system in the government which not only cuts out pork-barrel wastage but gets the providers paid quickly and uses only a single-page form when one visits the doctor's office.


I STRONGLY DISAGREE with universal healthcare. There are so many problems that are going to come with it besides higher taxes. I'm sorry but it is not the job of the government to pay for everyones healthcare, college education, daycare etc. Also, what they pay for, they control. Not the kind of country I want to live in. Where would our freedom go then? How are we free if we are so completely dependant on the government for all of our basic needs?


The government doesn't pay for it, the taxpayers do. The government sees to equitable administration of healthcare benefits so that all citizens have access to the medical services they and their families need. And keep in mind that the citizens and most of the businesses were the ones who pushed and voted for universal healthcare in these countries.


Ah, yes. Maybe the government will handle holding onto the money we pay for healthcare as well as they did for social security. Yes, that would work nicely, wouldn't it?

And thank you, thank you, thank you lw9!!! We definitely seem to need more voices like yours speaking out about this in this country!



Marcus. -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/16/2008 9:02:22 AM)

Friends of mine from Portugal told me that they've had many doctor's appointments canceled because the docs no showed work. Another effect of socialized medicine they said. The doc get paid the same either way.



relady -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/16/2008 10:01:19 AM)

None of the programs I've seen suggested even come close to being true socialized health insurance like the European countries or Canada. What we will end up with in the U.S. is a hybrid system, which could be a very good thing. It doesn't HAVE to be a negative.

In any case, it is coming whether we want it or not, unless the health insurance companies who are more concerned about the bottom line than my health step up to the plate and make some changes. I haven't seen any indication that mgiht be happening.

I do know that I am not looking forward to Medicare after my hubby retires from his job. It's already probably more expensive than the health insurance we have currently. Bah.



Sophie11 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/16/2008 10:14:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: relady

None of the programs I've seen suggested even come close to being true socialized health insurance like the European countries or Canada. What we will end up with in the U.S. is a hybrid system, which could be a very good thing. It doesn't HAVE to be a negative.


I am opposed to ANY type of socialized medicine. If my family and I are healthy and make sure we do all we can at home to "keep the doctor away", why should I have to keep contributing to the pot to take care of everyone else?

And it might not HAVE to be negative, but the facts are wherever it has been tried previously, it is.

quote:


In any case, it is coming whether we want it or not, unless the health insurance companies who are more concerned about the bottom line than my health step up to the plate and make some changes. I haven't seen any indication that mgiht be happening.


Why is it that someone else other than you ought to be so concerned with your health? In my opinion this mentality is the whole problem. And step up to the plate? How? Maybe the insurance companies could charge less if healthcare wasn't so darn expensive. And maybe healthcare wouldn't be so darn expensive if those same people complaining about the cost would stop trying to sue for millions every time someone gets a splinter from a tongue depressor.

quote:


Whatever happens will only be good for me after retirement as retiree health benefits are all but extinct. I know my hubby won't get them. I amd not looking forward to Medicare believe me.


Well now, as long as it is good for you I suppose that makes it ok, right?



lw9 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/16/2008 1:05:20 PM)

quote:

relady: What we will end up with in the U.S. is a hybrid system, which could be a very good thing. It doesn't HAVE to be a negative.


There is no large industrialized country that I have seen yet that isn't suffering from serious problems with their public healthcare, both medical and financial. And when the economy takes a downturn [Sweden and Japan, for example], the healthcare will be greatly impacted. There is no way around that fact because healthcare is tied up with and controlled by the government.

I have three questions for you:

1. Why do you believe the U.S. government - which is rife with inefficiency, overspending, and overblown budgets - can or should handle healthcare or healthcare coverage, even in a hybrid situation?

2. Give some examples of positive socialized healthcare examples in other countries [short and reasonable wait lists, public not taxed to death, modern and efficient facilities, qualified and plentiful staffing], and provide in detail how you believe the U.S. government can streamline itself and emulate those examples effectively.

3. Where is your data or your guarantee that the U.S. will only wind up with a hybrid system rather than full-on socialized medicine? The big push right now is for universal healthcare.

Regarding maternity leave, if a company chooses to offer paid maternity leave, GREAT! That's a really nice benefit to offer. But I don't see that this should be a requirement, and I don't see a reason for shock and horror if a company downsizes their maternity benefits during a difficult economy.



rlj -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/16/2008 1:49:42 PM)

quote:

2. Give some examples of positive socialized healthcare examples in other countries [short and reasonable wait lists, public not taxed to death, modern and efficient facilities, qualified and plentiful staffing], and provide in detail how you believe the U.S. government can streamline itself and emulate those examples effectively.


I can give you an example of a country that meets all of the criteria except "taxed to death" but does pay through the nose for everything mentioned in your list: The United States.

Currently we spend more on health care then any nation.



relady -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:11:16 AM)

quote:

And it might not HAVE to be negative, but the facts are wherever it has been tried previously, it is.
Oh? Care to cite some evidence for that? Canadians and Europeans I've talked to seem to be pretty happy with their arrangements for the most part. Just watched a piece on Denmark the other night and they have many socialized programs that work just fine. If they can come up with a system that works fairly well for everyone, I'd be in favor of it. However, with all the bitter partisanship in this country, I doubt very much that will happen. Thus whatever the final product will be it will be set up to fail, not funded properly or some nonsense like that. But it's coming. Corporations want it and they are the ones really running things. It's just a matter of time. The only question is will it be something that we will all finally pull together on to get a good program or will we let the politicians jack it up as usual.

quote:

Why is it that someone else other than you ought to be so concerned with your health?
For the same reason we should all be concerned that everyone get a good basic education. It's good for society as a whole to have a relatively healthy population. It's not all just about you and your health, it's about everyone's. And no, I don't think you should get better care just because you might have more money to pay for it.

quote:

Well now, as long as it is good for you I suppose that makes it ok, right?
Your apparent disregard for anyone's well being other than your own is very disturbing.

What is your plan to insure all the retirees that are going to be without insurance at a time when they most need it. Just let them die because they can't afford health insurance? I hear a lot of complaints about and fear about anything "socialized" but I don't hear many ideas coming from those same complainers.



relady -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:16:16 AM)

quote:

meets all of the criteria except "taxed to death"
Speak for yourself! By the time I add all the different taxes I pay over the course of a year...income, sales, personal property, entertainment, gas....I would bet that I pay fairly close to 40% of my gross income in taxes. and I see very little benefit for it. The Danes seem to be very happy with their system but they do pay high taxes. However....since they are getting something for their money they don't seem to be nonplussed by the fact that they pay a lot in taxes. I'm just waiting to see the proposals and see what the come up with. Considering the rabid opposition in some quarters, I don't have great expectations.



thorkraki -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 5:04:22 AM)

Hi! I just registered for the forums today and this is my first post! I am excited because I saw someone mention Denmark and I am Danish! My wife is Italian, and we live in the US, although we are now in Italia visiting family.

We have excellent socialized medical care in Denmark, it works much better than many other countries' care. Italy is not bad, either. In Denmark, we are used to paying high taxes, and people don't generally complain, because there is a huge consensus that that is the way we want to do things. We also have a monarchy, which we love. Long live Queen Margrethe II!

Our system probably wouldn't work in the US because people's view of government and taxation is so different, and also because there is a much greater range of income levels.

Anyway, I am excited to be posting for the first time! I am a new Christian and eager to talk!

Thor



rlj -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 7:29:58 AM)

quote:

Speak for yourself! By the time I add all the different taxes I pay over the course of a year...income, sales, personal property, entertainment, gas....I would bet that I pay fairly close to 40% of my gross income in taxes. and I see very little benefit for it. The Danes seem to be very happy with their system but they do pay high taxes. However....since they are getting something for their money they don't seem to be nonplussed by the fact that they pay a lot in taxes. I'm just waiting to see the proposals and see what the come up with. Considering the rabid opposition in some quarters, I don't have great expectations.


Taxed to death for healthcare. ; )



thorkraki -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 8:03:02 AM)

Actually, I don't know any Dane, and I am one myself, who considers himself taxed to death. We decided long ago that in Denmark, it worked best to have some things paid for by taxation. Although our tax rate is very high, so is our standard of living, life expectancy, and general overall health.

Even the Queen pays high taxes! And she certainly has a high income. She not only gets a stipend from the government, but her family owns a great deal of land and property. She is also a working artist, but she donates that money to charities. She designs sets and costumes for the theater and opera. And if you are a Tolkien fan, you should know that Her Majesty is the illustrator for the Danish edition of "Lord of the Rings!"

Anyway, it depends on what people as a nation agree on. Denmark is a wealthy country for its size, we have a lot of North Sea oil that funds a lot of our services, and we agree to pay taxes in exchange for free health care, higher education, etc.

Thor



Sophie11 -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 8:56:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: relady

quote:

And it might not HAVE to be negative, but the facts are wherever it has been tried previously, it is.
Oh? Care to cite some evidence for that? Canadians and Europeans I've talked to seem to be pretty happy with their arrangements for the most part. Just watched a piece on Denmark the other night and they have many socialized programs that work just fine. If they can come up with a system that works fairly well for everyone, I'd be in favor of it. However, with all the bitter partisanship in this country, I doubt very much that will happen. Thus whatever the final product will be it will be set up to fail, not funded properly or some nonsense like that. But it's coming. Corporations want it and they are the ones really running things. It's just a matter of time. The only question is will it be something that we will all finally pull together on to get a good program or will we let the politicians jack it up as usual.


http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=270338135202343
Well for starters I found this article. It basically reflects a lot of things I have heard about the issue.

But I suppose none of my "evidence" would truly matter to you anyhow. You are already in the process of blaming it's failure on the politicians, I'm sure that really means republican politicians though, right?

quote:

quote:

Why is it that someone else other than you ought to be so concerned with your health?
For the same reason we should all be concerned that everyone get a good basic education. It's good for society as a whole to have a relatively healthy population. It's not all just about you and your health, it's about everyone's. And no, I don't think you should get better care just because you might have more money to pay for it.


Spoken like a true socialist! And what next, universal college education for all children?
I do not think anyone is entitled to have medical care. There is no basis for saying that seeing a doctor is a fundamental right of mankind. Why should my family and I be forced to pay for someone else's medical care? And some of those people may smoke, drink, etc., things I would not do if I want to stay healthy, yet my money would still have to go into some giant pot to take care of everyone and anyone regardless of their own level of personal concern. Tell me how that is fair. When we end up paying triple the amount into healthcare to help take care of the rest of the country as we are in insurance premiums now, how is that fair? We are not rich by anyones standards, believe me.

quote:

quote:

Well now, as long as it is good for you I suppose that makes it ok, right?
Your apparent disregard for anyone's well being other than your own is very disturbing.


quote:

ORIGINAL: relady
Whatever happens will only be good for me after retirement as retiree health benefits are all but extinct. I know my hubby won't get them. I amd not looking forward to Medicare believe me.


No, sorry, nice try but you are the one thinking only of yourself. I do care about others, I just happen to beleive that universal healthcare is anything but the answer, and I also happen to beleive that personal responsibility should come first.

quote:

What is your plan to insure all the retirees that are going to be without insurance at a time when they most need it. Just let them die because they can't afford health insurance? I hear a lot of complaints about and fear about anything "socialized" but I don't hear many ideas coming from those same complainers.


What is your plan for the treatment of the children in this country when by the time they are senior citizens socialized medicine has made it nearly impossible to get care? Just let them die because at least it fixed the problem for a while right now?



relady -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:34:21 PM)

quote:

I do not think anyone is entitled to have medical care. There is no basis for saying that seeing a doctor is a fundamental right of mankind. Why should my family and I be forced to pay for someone else's medical care? And some of those people may smoke, drink, etc., things I would not do if I want to stay healthy, yet my money would still have to go into some giant pot to take care of everyone and anyone regardless of their own level of personal concern.
Wow, somehow I just really have a terribly hard time imagining these words coming from Jesus' mouth.

Since medical care is not a fundamental right of mankind does that mean that you think that if someone cannot afford needed medical care they should just be allowed to die? Wow. I'm speechless.

quote:

What is your plan for the treatment of the children in this country when by the time they are senior citizens socialized medicine has made it nearly impossible to get care? Just let them die because at least it fixed the problem for a while right now?
You are making some really strange assumptions here. Who said anything about only fixing things for a little while? I don't want that. I want some sort of system in place that will work for everyone to at least have basic medical care taken care of. Whether or not I would be in favor of a particular program would depend upon the particulars of that program.



HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:49:35 PM)

Keep in mind, Denmark has less people than the DFW Metroplex. There are NO conclusions that can be empirically drawn from their experience and applied to ours.



thorkraki -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:52:52 PM)

Dear HighPlainsDrifter:

That is my point exactly. Denmark is a small and extremely wealthy kingdom, and we already have a long tradition of nationalized services. I do not think that such a system would work in American. I was just pointing out that there are places where nationalized medicine does work.

What strikes Europeans as strange is how health care in the USA is almost always tied to employment. I am not certain of the history of this, but I think it goes back to the Great Depression, no?



KatMack -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 3:57:34 PM)

Was just reading and interesting study the other day. It showed how the advent of Medicaid and Medicare actually decreased the amount of medical treatment available to the poor. It seems that doctors and hospitals used to offer a great deal of pro bono services to the poor, but once the government paycheck was available, it all dried up. I think that services like healthcare for the poor, welfare, etc belong in the private sector. Imagine how much more money we could give to charities if we didn't have to support so many bloated government programs with our tax dollars and WE actually got to keep it!

--Kat



rlj -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 4:38:29 PM)

quote:

Imagine how much more money we could give to charities if we didn't have to support so many bloated government programs with our tax dollars and WE actually got to keep it!


People would be able to afford to keep their homes and put gas in their cars. :D Don't know that anything would be left to charity though...



HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: Downsizing Maternity Leave: Employers Cut Pay, Time Off (6/17/2008 4:58:49 PM)

I do think nationalized healthcare is probably an inevitability. Many people have made the mental leap to where they think healthcare costs are someone else's responsibility due to the benefits employers added thru the years that untethered people from the actual process of shopping for and paying for the services of a doctor. That genie isn't going back in the bottle. I think a great many people use medical services, and especially pharmacies, out of sheer boredom or hysterical over-reaction.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI