[twofinbluna]

Article from New Bedford ST

"Massachusetts congressmen have introduced a bill that would offer affordable health care coverage to the nation's commercial fishermen and their families.

The bill, known as the Commercial Fishing Industry Health Care Coverage Act of 2008, is modeled on the success of the Fishing Partnership Health Plan, a Massachusetts program that provides low-cost coverage to more than 2,000 fishermen and family members who previously were uninsured or chronically underinsured."

This post edited by twofinbluna 09:25 PM 02/14/2008

 

[Seajay2]

Where do the rest of us go to get our free health insurance?

 

[loligo]

Seajay2 wrote:
Where do the rest of us go to get our free health insurance?

Here in Massachusetts we have "mass health"- it's free.

Most states have free health care plans of one sort or another and theres medicare/ade for the rest.

I see the term affordable mentioned, not free.

 

[Codkiller]

Loligo
That sound you hear is the sound of businesses(especially small businesses) leaveing your state rather than be extorted by Mass to pay for "free health insurance".
There are many groups that need affordable health care as much as the commercial fisherman .


Bob

 

[MakoMike]

Health insorance debate is a subject better suited to the loungs, so all I'll say here is that the words "health Insurance" and "affordable" should not be used in the same sentence.

 

[claw1]

I fish

I fish for a living and pay over $800 per month for insurance , is that "FREE" ?

 

[loligo]

Codkiller wrote:
Loligo
That sound you hear is the sound of businesses(especially small businesses) leaveing your state rather than be extorted by Mass to pay for "free health insurance".
There are many groups that need affordable health care as much as the commercial fisherman .




Bob - I agree 100% that the cost of the "free" insurance is just being put onto the businesses and taxpayers.

The idea of an affordable insurance program shouldn't be limited to one industry- it should be available to everyone, I don't think I should be entitled to anything that any other citizen isn't.

 

[onitis]

arent commercial fishermen eligible for a federal seamans health program .I sort of remember hearing from one mate on a partyboats years ago.

 

[loligo]

onitis wrote:
arent commercial fishermen eligible for a federal seamans health program .I sort of remember hearing from one mate on a partyboats years ago.

oh we get a seamen program...first we bend over- then we get the seamen.....

 

[twofinbluna]

MakoMike wrote:
Health insorance debate is a subject better suited to the loungs, so all I'll say here is that the words "health Insurance" and "affordable" should not be used in the same sentence.

This is not about health insurance in general, but about a bill that would give it specifically to fishermen. I think that this discussion is very much one that belongs here, not in the lounge.

 

[twofinbluna]

loligo wrote:
onitis wrote:
arent commercial fishermen eligible for a federal seamans health program .I sort of remember hearing from one mate on a partyboats years ago.

oh we get a seamen program...first we bend over- then we get the seamen.....

LOL

 

[twofinbluna]

Codkiller wrote:
Loligo
That sound you hear is the sound of businesses(especially small businesses) leaveing your state rather than be extorted by Mass to pay for "free health insurance".
There are many groups that need affordable health care as much as the commercial fisherman .


Bob


Bob, I dont see anything that talks about 'free' insurance...maybe I missed something. But regardless, given that fishing is a very dangerous occupation and one that has fallen on hard times, what is the problem with a bill that helps that sector of the population? Sure, others need it to, but that is no reason to go against this, is it?

 

[twofinbluna]

Another article out of Lynn

"Providing low-cost health insurance to commercial fishermen and their families through an influx of government funds is a step in the right direction and would showcase Massachusetts' Fishing Partnership Health Plan model, said U.S. Rep. John F. Tierney, a Salem Democrat who joined colleagues this week in support of the proposal."

 

[Codkiller]

Nothing is free Chris, what one small group recieves as a subsidy comes from another group as a tax. In mass its a mandatory tax.

Fisherman have had a hard time of it but is it any worse than someone
outsourced out of a job to China or Mexico etc ?

As for it being a dangerous job, that by itself doesn't have anything to do with health insurance, thats a workers comp issue.

Bob

 

[loligo]

Codkiller wrote:
Nothing is free Chris, what one small group recieves as a subsidy comes from another group as a tax. In mass its a mandatory tax.

Fisherman have had a hard time of it but is it any worse than someone
outsourced out of a job to China or Mexico etc ?

As for it being a dangerous job, that by itself doesn't have anything to do with health insurance, thats a workers comp issue.

Bob



Easy there guys...


I don't want anything from the government, that any other person in my economic situation isn't entitled to.

I think that health care cost's for all of us are insane. And I do think that if we could get a better grip on our economy, coupled with some significant trade and immigration policy changes, we'd all be better off.

But...in this particular instance, in light of the fact that it's at least as much the gubmints fault for letting fishing get so F'd, that if this can keep a few more guys families healthy or just ease the costs of living to some enough that that can remain fishing- thats OK with me and I'd sure rather those washington morons spending our money on that than investigating professional sports.

Could you imagine managing sports like they do fishing...

 

[LooneyTunes]

Why should one group be treated different than the rest of the world.

Not for nothing, but health insurance is expensive everywhere. New York has one of the highest health insurance costs.

We pay the same $800 monthly. The only difference is that we pay it on the front end as part of a benefits package in lieu of a larger salary.

One job I took, gave me the option of pay with medical benefits and without.

Our benefits through my wife still cost us because we have to contribute to the benefits.

We need to stop with the hand outs. This is a capitalist society not a socialist society.

You wouldn't like it very much if you lived in a socialist society and they took half of your catch because the government needs to pay for the medical system.

LooneyTunes
Dave

 

[commfish]

This is a really old idea.I can't remember which one but any early president orginally came up with the idea.

 

[621287]

I certainly don't see why commercial fishermen should get preferential treatment in getting health insurance.

 

[Capt. Jamie]

I have no insurance for a family of 4 it cost over 1400$ i had to drop it. Tried to get new york health care for at least my sons, Ha Ha i own a house and have other bills, not eligible. I don't think that any one group should benefit from low cost insurance we all should have it afforded to us.
AS sombody else said sombody has to pay for it, yes well maybe some tax money that goes to other counties or maybe even monies going to illegals could be used to help. AS for people that have insurance through their jobs they are also paying in loss of salary. I could go on but will probably just tick sombody off since this is a touchy subject.

 

[TonySMJC]

I PAY

Insurance is expensive but Govt. Programs are more expensive and offer less in the way of bennifits in the long run.
While I think there should be some form of universal health coverage Im not a fan of giving to one group over another .
With health care everyone pays one way or another .