Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all, a Texas city close to Mexico is not representative of the US as a whole. It's certainly not 21% or even close in NJ, or Pa, or Idaho, or, or.....
Second, "The cost of health care to undocumented immigrants is something we worry about, something we monitor, but we don't want to overstate it," said David Lopez, president and CEO of the Harris County Hospital District. "It's not an overwhelming percentage of our budget." Lopez said the actual cost is 10 to 14 percent of the hospital district's budget, or about $100 million to $120 million.
Third: (from PDF on Texas State Hospitals)
"The final point of interest about the uninsured population relates to work
status (Figure 1.7). For the 2008-2009 period, more than two-thirds (68
percent) of adults who were uninsured were also employed either full or
part time. Only 7 percent of uninsured adults were unemployed".
Finally, what do you say to the many people on this thread and around thew country who are not illegal, who have stated the ACA has allowed them to have insurance they were otherwise unable to afford or be qualified for due to pre-existing conditions? You'd rather they have to go back to being uninsured?
Oh, you're right. Before the ACA everyone paid for all their own medical bills and hospitals did not pass the costs on to the rest of us. *sarcasm*
You could be shown proof from now til the next century and you wouldn't believe it, because you are determined to hate anything associated with Obama.
I gave up on the P&OC forum because of the ridiculous rhetoric and lack of education and insight. I'm sorry that the Current Events forum has become the same thing.
[/font]
Finally, what do you say to the many people on this thread and around thew country who are not illegal, who have stated the ACA has allowed them to have insurance they were otherwise unable to afford or be qualified for due to pre-existing conditions? You'd rather they have to go back to being uninsured?
If they were truly destitute, I would prefer for us to have found a way through medicaid to have paid for their healthcare.
But if they decided they would rather have cable tv, highspeed internet, and/or an xbox one instead of paying for health insurance, I would prefer not to send them my money (either directly or indirectly.) I suppose children are a different matter.
But what I want doesn't really matter. The American people want socialized medicine, whether they like to call it that or not.
That being the case, we should have the best kind of socialized medicine possible rather then this Frankenstein system.
It's important to those in Texas who see their tax dollars going to pay for it and the long lines at your critical care hospitals.
Maybe this will eliminate those lines, and lessen the costs. Why not just give it a chance and see? It certainly isn't going to raise the costs, so what's the harm in opening your mind and seeing if it helps?
If they were truly destitute, I would prefer for us to have found a way through medicaid to have paid for their healthcare.
But if they decided they would rather have cable tv, highspeed internet, and/or an xbox one instead of paying for health insurance, I would prefer not to send them my money (either directly or indirectly.) I suppose children are a different matter.
But what I want doesn't really matter. The American people want socialized medicine, whether they like to call it that or not.
That being the case, we should have the best kind of socialized medicine possible rather then this Frankenstein system.
Many/most of them are employed and wouldn't qualify for Medicaid. You are assuming everyone without insurance spends their money like above, but what is that based on? My ex had a choice when he was laid off, no insurance or $1200 a month for COBRA. He has a roommate and basic cable. Eliminating basic cable wouldn't allow him to pay $1200 a month especially with no job. I work with a woman who has been undergoing treatment for breast cancer. Before the ACA, if she lost her job she would be unable to get insurance that would cover her. You'd "prefer" to pay for her cancer treatment through Medicaid/your taxes? Why? How would that benefit anyone? She'd have to make a deliberate choice to remain unemployed just to qualify. Seems like the only people who would benefit from that are the insurance companies, cause you'd be paying instead of them.
I would rather have a better, more comprehensive plan too, but it didn't have a prayer of passing.
[/b]
Well,e if the other side had actually been willing to discuss it rather than Stick their fingers in their ears and shout "We can't hear you!" we would have gotten a better, simpler plan, As it was, this was all we had on the table, and it is better than ignoring the elephant in the room and spending billions paying for the medical bills of people who either couldn't afford or couldn't get approved for insurance (based on pre-existing conditions). I think there is a belief that only poor people or unemployed people had to do without insurance, but this was very much a middle class problem as well.
Clueless. there was definitely a willingness to deal with the issues From "the other side" the problem is the left refusing to work together. Lets not let the truth be lost here. "We have to pass it to see whats in it" ring a bell?
Stop listening to msnbc and Obama's one sided dishonesty.
There were lots of ideas from the other side. It just wasnt socialistic enough for the far left.
Clueless. there was definitely a willingness to deal with the issues From "the other side" the problem is the left refusing to work together. Lets not let the truth be lost here. "We have to pass it to see whats in it" ring a bell?
Stop listening to msnbc and Obama's one sided dishonesty.
There were lots of ideas from the other side. It just wasnt socialistic enough for the far left.
Clueless. there was definitely a willingness to deal with the issues From "the other side" the problem is the left refusing to work together. Lets not let the truth be lost here. "We have to pass it to see whats in it" ring a bell?
Stop listening to msnbc and Obama's one sided dishonesty.
There were lots of ideas from the other side. It just wasnt socialistic enough for the far left.
Having people buy insurance from private companies is "socialistic?" and "far left" This was always a Republican idea, with widespread support among Republican politicians, and was instituted in Massachusetts by none other than the 2012 Republican presidential nominee. Do yourself a favor and click here:
Hell no. I LIKE MassHealth. If I can't afford several thousands of dollars' worth of bills sitting on my credit report for the next 10 years and I'm sick (which I am) or need surgery (which I do) then I'm not going to just lay down and DIE due to lack of being able to afford to have to pay up-front before they'll even TREAT me, thank you very much!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This was always a Republican idea, with widespread support among Republican politicians, and was instituted in Massachusetts by none other than the 2012 Republican presidential nominee. Do yourself a favor and click here: