U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-18-2014, 08:44 AM
 
7,282 posts, read 8,382,550 times
Reputation: 11407

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Not to be glib but, these are conservatives you're talking about. Is anyone really surprised that they have no empathy whatsoever for anyone? I'm not surprised in the least.
So often, empathy is equated with money changing hands isn't it?

Do you really believe that most of the people talking about universal or single payer healthcare have empathy for anyone?

I find it amusing that when people talk about sharing wealth, and lets not forget that is exactly what it is when you get others to pay for healthcare for non-contributors, that they are considered to have empathy right until you want them to participate in the giving too. Then suddenly empathy becomes something else completely.

Empathy has gone from sharing and understanding the experiences of others to sharing their money and simply giving it to others. The progressive agenda at work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2014, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,215 posts, read 7,565,684 times
Reputation: 7717
"Ever feel like you've been cheated?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 08:47 AM
 
12,043 posts, read 5,595,428 times
Reputation: 13572
Interesting that you immediately think of money. Sorry, empathy doesn't need to involve money 24/7. But I realize cons only care about money & that's it. Makes me wonder what would happen if someone in their family fell ill. Too bad for ya, kick 'em to the curb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Vallejo
13,437 posts, read 15,041,010 times
Reputation: 11924
Quote:
Originally Posted by strawberrykiki View Post
That is a completely different topic. I don't like people who are capable of working and choose not to anymore than anyone else, but if they are sick or hurt then yes we should provide health care to them. It's called being a decent human being. I don't think it makes someone entitled at all to expect access to quality healthcare. What would you do? You're having a heart attack? Oh too bad, too sad. Why don't you just go keel over in the parking lot.



Exactly this. It seems like the a lot of the people who it isn't a problem for just don't care about those who it is a problem for. The lack of empathy is astounding. And very disheartening.
How about buying some medical insurance before you have a problem? I mean, prior to Obama Care, you had some excuse. If you were low-income, then insurance might be too expensive. Now it's subsidized on a "pay what you can" basis unless you fall into the gap between the states that did not expand Medicaid and where Obama Care starts. If you had a pre-existing condition, you might not have even been able to get insurance at all. Now there's really no excuse. Obama Care has a lot of problems, but one thing it did was (aside from the Medicaid gap) make insurance affordable.

That doesn't mean cheaper. I pay just under double for Obama Care than I did for my insurance previously. For anyone who isn't low-income it's basically more expensive but now the low-income people and those with preexisting conditions have entitlements provided to them that make health insurance affordable or even just available at all at any price. There's a trade-off there.

You've essentially got what you're asking for. Those who "expect" (e.g., feel entitled to quality healthcare) now have access to quality healthcare. In exchange, they are expected to pay what they can for the insurance. If their income and cost of insurance means that isn't possible, we'll even step in with entitlements so that it is affordable so they can get the quality healthcare that they are entitled to.

Why should I feel sorry for a deadbeat who just figures he'll not paying anything at all in and the taxpayer pick up his medical tab if anything goes wrong? That's (A) pretty faulty logic since emergency medical care only covers, well, emergencies and a lot of chronic fatal diseases are not emergencies until very late stage, and (B) urgent care clinics only offer pretty basic services that won't be able to treat many things. It was their choice not too buy insurance. It isn't the choice I would make, but it's what they wanted so, yes, no real empathy on my part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
11,042 posts, read 11,455,634 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 30to66at55 View Post
This report is typical propaganda for universal health care.

Anyone who knows someone from Canada or England will tell you how horrible getting fast and good healthcare is in those countries.

You would wait weeks to get the same procedures you get in days here.
If you think you get procedures in days, you don't live in America. It takes weeks to schedule even medically necessary surgery. You have to call a month in advance to even get a doctor's appointment. If you are unlucky enough to live in a small town, there is no local health care at all, and you will end up driving 100 miles just to get service.

Health care in America is marginal at best, and I have rolls royce medical insurance that covers everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
9,594 posts, read 9,424,935 times
Reputation: 9198
Part of the problem is calling it "health insurance". Insurance as I know it, is a system of shared risk for outlier occurrences. Car insurance is insurance. Health insurance... not so much. Maybe 'proxy payer' is more like it. You will use your health 'insurance' every time you need even the most routine procedure or doctors visit. Just saying, people arrange for accidents to happen to their cars because they twig to the fact that over the last 10 years they have put thousands of dollars worth of premiums into a vehicle that is now worth only a few hundred dollars at best. Now Obama tells 20 somethings, with a straight face, pay hundreds of dollars a month into a healthcare system that won't benefit you at all... your premiums are needed to pay for the care of really sick people. Oh that will work... oh wait... if you don't sign up we'll take a years worth of premiums off you and you get jack anyway. At least if you come in the front door there is a chance that you might get something out of it. Oh but first you have to get sick. Really, really sick. Sick enough so that you might have little luck that America's pathetic Allied Health Industry can do much for you. You can say what you want about UHC in other places... the chief complaint being the wait for care. Hmmm... as observed, you wait here as well. And... I'm just saying... I'd rather wait for a procedure that when it was done, it was done competently and I was made well as a result. How often does that NOT happen here. Criminy, the chances of getting MRSA from even a short exposure to a hospital ward are getting scary high. There isn't any other implementation of UHC where people pay premiums and have deductibles!!!!!!! That's why America is at the bottom of international rankings and there isn't any amount of sarcasm or doubletalk or knee jerk rebuttal that can change the fact.

H
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 02:47 PM
 
Location: On a Long Island in NY
7,624 posts, read 8,115,516 times
Reputation: 6949
I am not necessarily opposed to healthcare reform but there are alot of differences between the United States and alot of the "cradle to the grave" welfare systems in western Europe and Scandinavia.

1) For starters the United States has over 300,000,000 people + millions of illegal immigrants (possibly over 20,000,000).

2) The United States is a very multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial nation which creates a ton of challenges. European nations in comparison are largely homogenous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Portland, OR
9,594 posts, read 9,424,935 times
Reputation: 9198
European countries have immigrants too. No excuse. We have to overcome the inbuilt color, class and race prejudices or explode... implode... something bad. Its coming if we don't claw back some of the gains the 1% have made at the expense of everyone else.

H
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 04:08 PM
 
8,144 posts, read 6,002,296 times
Reputation: 10554
Noone seems willing to say that they'd be happy to have the US Government in charge on their healthcare... So, it's a moot point here, isn't it? Anyone saying "We should have UHC now!" is out of their mind. Working towards it.. Not necessarily a horrible idea.

The plan should be.. "Let's figure out how to make it work, then implement it". Most people on here seem to be on the cut twice, measure once mentality.

Maybe we can contract out to the Shriners.. they seem to do one hell of a good job running their hospitals. I don't think I'd have a problem having a shriner making decisions for healthcare.

The US Government? Well, if we're talking about cutting the population, then putting them in charge of healthcare is a fine idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2014, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Chesapeake Bay
6,044 posts, read 3,634,911 times
Reputation: 3481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
Noone seems willing to say that they'd be happy to have the US Government in charge on their healthcare... So, it's a moot point here, isn't it? Anyone saying "We should have UHC now!" is out of their mind. Working towards it.. Not necessarily a horrible idea.

The plan should be.. "Let's figure out how to make it work, then implement it". Most people on here seem to be on the cut twice, measure once mentality.

Maybe we can contract out to the Shriners.. they seem to do one hell of a good job running their hospitals. I don't think I'd have a problem having a shriner making decisions for healthcare.

The US Government? Well, if we're talking about cutting the population, then putting them in charge of healthcare is a fine idea.
Medicare is very good health insurance, at least as good as BCBS which I had for years prior to it. Almost everyone on Medicare likes it. Interesting in that it is a form of single payer health insurance and is considered to be good and yet single payer insurance is bad, horrible, terrible for those under age 65.

Makes one wonder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top