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.
I see time and again that many people on here say things like, "I don't want my money to go to anyone, ever", "no wealth redistribution", this is Socialism", "We're turning into a Communist country", etc.
So I'd like to ask a serious hypothetical question: what should be done with people who do not qualify for Medicaid and cannot afford health insurance when they need urgent (and oftentimes expensive) medical care? And that means a good 15% of the US population by now (and growing).
Should we as a society tell people that they only deserve care to the extent that they can pay for it themselves - and that they deserve to be left to die if they can't?
Do we give them care and then force collection of payment to whatever extent possible - up to and including division of assets and bankruptcy?
I'm just curious as to what (if anything), in the principles of the Right, should actually be done for people in situations such as this.
the answer would be yes, give them the service, especially in an emergency...and not because it is socialism or whatever..the fact is give the SERVICE...than have the person pay for the service rendered..even over time
you pay for everything else over time..you pay for other services rendered...why not medical
When the 'people' decide for that emergency it's a whole lot better than when the 'government' decides it. so yes, give the care and deal with the bill afterwards. just don't abuse the emergency room for any ol' stupid bunch of random visits just because you can. that's not responsible or 'free'.
But I'm not a Republican, I just think from a 'peoples' standpoint and not a government one.
I guess I would be considered a Conservative. but what's in a name anyway?
notice a recurring theme in my comments? 'free' and 'people' = free people
Well for starters not everyone takes advantage of it. Secondly, those that do don't have access to preventative care, yearly checkups, screenings, etc. That makes the chances of any potential diseases and illnesses from being caught before anything really happens much less. It also results in any diseases, and illnesses from being caught much later, which becomes much more expensive to treat.
I don't know about other states, but in NC, we have county health departments. I used to take my kids there 15-20 years ago for ear infections, bad colds, even vacinations, at little or no cost.
Repubs only help their own. They have never been known for being kind or compassionate to the less fortunate. Never. And that's okay, because that is the kind of people they are.
Step away from the Bong....
Most conservatives give heavily to the poor, to their community, and abroad. The American people are the most generous giving people in the history of the world.
What we don't like to do is give to corrupt, treasonous political agendas that mask as helping, while stripping our freedoms from us.
Really, we have over 45 million people with no insurance? Can you back that up with an official source please?
Have you been living under a rock for the past decade? Here you go:
Here's the US Census Bureau:
US Census Press Releases (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/014227.html - broken link)
Quote:
Meanwhile, the number of people without health insurance coverage rose from 45.7 million in 2007 to 46.3 million in 2008, while the percentage remained unchanged at 15.4 percent.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- As congressional lawmakers debate healthcare reform legislation, partly aimed at expanding coverage to the uninsured, Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index data for June reveal that 16.0% of American adults are currently without health insurance.
Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.
Force them into bankruptcy? No, that is just silly, you just make sure that they pay back what they can each month. Sure they will have to cut back a bit, but what is more important your health or a new cell phone?
Medical problems caused 62% of all personal bankruptcies filed in the U.S. in 2007, according to a study by Harvard researchers. And in a finding that surprised even the researchers, 78% of those filers had medical insurance at the start of their illness, including 60.3% who had private coverage, not Medicare or Medicaid.
The figure comes from a 2005 Harvard University study saying that 54 percent of bankruptcies in 2001 were caused by health expenses. We reviewed it internally and knocked it down at the time; an academic reviewer did the same in 2006. Recalculating Harvard’s own data, he came up with a far lower figure – 17 percent.
So is it 17%? 62%? Somewhere in between? I don't know, but it sure is happening.
Well then why pass the bill if we are already giving tax dollars to pay for uninsured already in an ER room?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccersupporter
No you are missing the point. We could cover everyone that is uninsured for emergency services for a fraction of wht this alleged HCR bill costs.
You're both missing the point.
Yes, we can cover people who need emergency health care, and we do. But guess what? IT'S EXPENSIVE AND IT DRIVES UP COSTS. And YOU pay for it in the form of higher health care services (oh no, "Socialism"!).
By any measure you use, health care costs are skyrocketing out of control and are projected to continue doing so - and that's under the CURRENT SYSTEM (with emergency treatment for uninsured) that the Republicans sat by and did nothing with for EIGHT YEARS.
In 2008, U.S. health care spending was about $7,681 per resident and accounted for 16.2% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP); this is among the highest of all industrialized countries.
So how do you stabilize costs growth?
1. You introduce more market-based competition that puts the consumer into a more cost-conscious position to make decisions about health care - which is actually one key thing that Obama's plan does.
2. You get everyone covered so that you can start catching health problems early when it is MUCH CHEAPER to treat than when you're dying in an emergency room.
3. Also, you need everyone in the system so that insurance companies can diversify the risk of caring for sick patients with premiums over a large pool of healthy people (guess what: health insurance is by definition a "socialist" mechanism).
I'm not saying Obama's plan is the best one, but the current path is unsustainable - and ANY solution WILL involve some form of wealth redistribution; it's INEVITABLE.
Most conservatives give heavily to the poor, to their community, and abroad. The American people are the most generous giving people in the history of the world.
No doubt. Just last night I took a BIG black garbage bag full of shoes, clothes that I don't wear anymore along with a thermal blanket directly to a Homeless group of people I saw at the shelter. they couldn't get in that night I guess. but the main homeless guy eyes lit up when he saw me pull that blanket out the trunk. at least 4 pair of shoes, 2 pair of jeans, and some tshirts all in good condition. bag of cookies. I felt good about that. but I do it ALL the time so it's like a habit now.
Quote:
What we don't like to do is give to corrupt, treasonous political agendas that mask as helping, while stripping our freedoms from us.
+1
It takes a keen mind to see it. gotta use that bean God gave us.
Repubs only help their own. They have never been known for being kind or compassionate to the less fortunate. Never. And that's okay, because that is the kind of people they are.
I'm a conservative and living off $265 a week. I have tithed 10% of this meager salary to my church who helps the poor on a regular basis. As a teacher, I would even pay for school supplies for my poorer students. I also helped one of my struggling parents purchase a backpack for her daughter.
It is not that the Republicans don't want healthcare reform or conservatives for that matter, they just don't want a government takeover of healthcare.
What we should do is focus on cost control measures in the healthcare system. For example, torte reform. Doctors are paying out thousands of dollars trying to defend themselves against frivolous lawsuits.
Another thing we could do is offer credits for prior coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. This is already the law in some states but should be the law everywhere. Basically, what happens is let's say you have asthma and you lose your job. You accept COBRA coverage for let's say 15 months. You then find another job and take on your employer's health insurance coverage. Well, your new insurance has a pre-existing conditions clause of 18 months. Well, if a credit was given for prior coverage, your condition would be covered in 3 months instead of 18 months.
States could start a spend-down program for Medicaid for people who don't qualify for Medicaid. This is happening in some states, but not all. This would work by patients paying a small fee for their insurance. It is usually around $40. These individuals have to pay a small fee for their medications as well. This way, the taxpayer isn't footing the entire bill and the state budget isn't a total train wreck.
Encourage health savings accounts. I don't need to explain anything here.
Insurance companies could start offering discounts to healthy individuals. Car insurance companies already give discounts to safe drivers so why can't health insurance companies give discounts to healthy people? This might even encourage others to develop healthy habits.
Get the government out of the way and encourage development of low-cost clinics at local drug stores. The Minute clinic at CVS has been a blessing to me during a time of unemployment. They only charge $65 and even offer some preventative care services such as physicals and flu shots. Going to the emergency room I would pay $600. See the huge price difference here?
I once visited a church where the congretation was asking individuals in the congregation who have MD, NP, or RN training to volunteer in a clinic to give free health services to the poor in my community. They weren't forcing people to volunteer. A lot of the people were excited to help out. The church was paying for this out of their budget. Total cost to the taxpayer: $0.
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.
