Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [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 11-02-2017, 09:11 AM
 
6,089 posts, read 4,986,718 times
Reputation: 5985

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Yes you can compare them. Choice in behavior is the point. Those who have no choice are a different group and should be helped. That should also apply to medical care/insurance.
Exactly.

This is such a simple concept, it's hard to fathom someone not understanding that "choice" and "personal responsibility" is actually a thing. I guess not in 2017.

 
Old 11-02-2017, 09:27 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,727 posts, read 26,812,827 times
Reputation: 24790
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
Ask them what? Why they didn't have insurance?
Obviously, in the context of that reply, it was ask to them if they had "a choice in behavior." Did they choose to be hit by a car, get cancer, be born with diabetes, or fall and fracture their pelvis?

No, "choice in behavior" is not the point, and is another reason why one cannot compare health insurance with auto insurance.
 
Old 11-02-2017, 11:24 AM
 
661 posts, read 691,293 times
Reputation: 879
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
Exactly.

This is such a simple concept, it's hard to fathom someone not understanding that "choice" and "personal responsibility" is actually a thing. I guess not in 2017.
It sounds like you think being poor is a choice that everyone poor person makes through bad decisions and because they are poor they have made the choice to not receive healthcare.
 
Old 11-02-2017, 08:05 PM
 
18,172 posts, read 16,395,091 times
Reputation: 9328
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFlats View Post
It sounds like you think being poor is a choice that everyone poor person makes through bad decisions and because they are poor they have made the choice to not receive healthcare.
You are twisting the point and it has nothing to do with the poor.

The choices are eating into a serious medical condition by CHOICE, Becoming drug addicted by CHOICE, becoming an alcoholic by CHOICE, doing dangerous things by CHOICE and many more acts of choice that increase the medical costs. For those who have no choice help then. For those who created their own problem, let them fix it first.
 
Old 11-02-2017, 08:07 PM
 
18,172 posts, read 16,395,091 times
Reputation: 9328
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
Ask someone whose kid was hit by a car. Or someone who got cancer. Or someone who has Type I Diabetes. Or someone who slipped and fractured their pelvis. The list continues.
They are not the subject and do not apply to "CHOICE' The people who choose stupidly and knowingly are the subject not any of the ones listed above except maybe the diabetic who keeps eating ice cream, cake, cookies, chocolate and way tooo many calories. They cause their own problems knowingly.
 
Old 11-03-2017, 08:48 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,727 posts, read 26,812,827 times
Reputation: 24790
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
They are not the subject and do not apply to "CHOICE'
You're taking my response out of context. You were comparing choices in auto insurance (good driving) to choices (to be healthy) in health care, which I responded to. It's not a fair or equal comparison. You can choose not to drive; you can take public transportation or walk. You can be a "good driver"--or be very lucky--and never have a traffic ticket or get in an accident. You cannot chose your body and you cannot avoid health problems, especially as you age.

Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
The people who choose stupidly and knowingly are the subject not any of the ones listed above except maybe the diabetic who keeps eating ice cream, cake, cookies, chocolate and way tooo many calories.
Choose "stupidly"? I doubt that anyone chooses a medical problem, including the person born with diabetes. And those who suffer from addictions have genetic predispositions; it's doubtful that they have "chosen" to become an addict.
 
Old 11-03-2017, 11:57 AM
 
661 posts, read 691,293 times
Reputation: 879
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
You are twisting the point and it has nothing to do with the poor.

The choices are eating into a serious medical condition by CHOICE, Becoming drug addicted by CHOICE, becoming an alcoholic by CHOICE, doing dangerous things by CHOICE and many more acts of choice that increase the medical costs. For those who have no choice help then. For those who created their own problem, let them fix it first.
So if your child breaks their leg in a sports accident, gets prescribed opiates, gets hooked and turns to heroin, loses job, too poor for health insurance. They created their own problem so society shouldn't help them? Let them fix their addiction first? Churches and the charitable contributions of others won't be able to fill that gap, and it can be financially draining on the families.

Last edited by TheFlats; 11-03-2017 at 12:21 PM..
 
Old 11-03-2017, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,275,432 times
Reputation: 34058
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
You are twisting the point and it has nothing to do with the poor.

The choices are eating into a serious medical condition by CHOICE, Becoming drug addicted by CHOICE, becoming an alcoholic by CHOICE, doing dangerous things by CHOICE and many more acts of choice that increase the medical costs. For those who have no choice help then. For those who created their own problem, let them fix it first.
That's nonsense. A kid who is obese when they are 10 will be obese as an adult so you want to deny them healthcare for the rest of their life? Around 10% of the population is vulnerable to addiction, the rest of us do not end up with life long problems from trying an addictive substance whether it's a prescribed opioid or alcohol, the propensity for addiction is genetic it has very little to do with choice except for initially trying the substance and I'm sorry but even a genius like you did not know whether or not you would turn into an alcoholic the first time you drank a beer.

This is just a variation on the 'bootstrap' theory and it's laughable.
 
Old 11-05-2017, 11:18 AM
 
5,888 posts, read 3,225,564 times
Reputation: 5548
The crazy thing is how many Californians (most of whom make under 100K annual HHI) should now be exempt from the ObamaCare tax-penalty, because the cheapest plans in CA will result in expenses that exceed 8.16% of their income - but the exemption is crafted on the basis of only the premium. The problem is that this includes plans that don't really cover anything, but have cheap premiums. So its affordable, but only if you don't use any health care. So its really "pay a lot of money for no benefits".

For example, the cheapest Bronze plan in my county is about 2000/year. But it doesn't cover anything! First of all, its Kaiser. Doctor visits are $75. That's more than you should pay for a doctor visit even if you paid 100% of the cost out of pocket, because how long is a doctor appt? 10 minutes? 20? At $75, that is equal to a wage of at LEAST $225/hour for the doctor (assuming all visits are no more than 20 minutes per patient. And everybody knows the average doctor visit is far far less. Maybe 5-10 minutes of time actually spent with the doctor seems to be about the norm. 20 minutes would be if you are getting a complete annual exam and checkup (ie "physical")...and that would be a much more thorough exam than I have ever received in my life of getting annual exams.

What is ridiculous and unsustainable is the idea that the coverage under the ACA is in any way "affordable" - to all but the poorest and most desperate Californians. The very poorest would be forced to pay relatively little (nothing to less than 10% of their annual income) for their total out of pocket expenses for medical care. But if you make an average income your out of pocket maxes are 20-30% and who in the heck can afford that?
 
Old 11-05-2017, 11:24 AM
 
5,888 posts, read 3,225,564 times
Reputation: 5548
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFlats View Post
It sounds like you think being poor is a choice that everyone poor person makes through bad decisions and because they are poor they have made the choice to not receive healthcare.
Poverty definitely has a behavioral component. It isn't all about bad luck and unfortunate circumstances. Look at how poor people choose to behave and the lifestyles they live, and you can see that choice definitely contributes to poverty.

Should you have amenities (versus necessities) when you are poor? Is that a good choice?
Should you consume things you do not need when you are poor?
Should you purchase things that you do not need when you are poor?
Should you have children when you are poor?
Should you refuse to work when you are poor, or refuse to work extra hours or jobs?
Should you do anything that violates the law when you are poor? How does choosing to violate the law affect your financial situation?
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.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top