U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2010, 10:19 PM
 
Location: Yes
2,660 posts, read 6,263,861 times
Reputation: 899

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyG View Post
The "fringe" passed this.
Guess more than half the country is fringe then. Take away 13% who think the bill didn't go far enough (liberals), and only 45% of the country oppose this bill passing because it goes too far. And 47%-48% voted for McCain. So that means 52% that voted Obama in the election are "fringe" and the 55% that wanted a bill like this (or something more) are fringe? Can a fringe be a majority?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2010, 11:11 PM
 
Location: Seattle
1,369 posts, read 3,049,928 times
Reputation: 1496
AADAD,

Exactly. Many people just assume that healthcare is some enormous cost and that poor people without insurance just get sick and die.

What do they do? The same thing everyone else does when they get sick...they go to the hospital. Can they pay the bill? Of course not...but they still get care. Someone pays for the bill nonetheless, and it's not the poor, uninsured people who get sacked with the $50,000 hospital bill.

At the end of the day a lot of these people would create much less cost to the healthcare system if they got treatment ahead of time, before requiring an ER visit.

I am not a huge fan of the healthcare bill, but it's better than the system we have now, which is where uninsured people use the ER for "routine" care.

If you ask me, people who think that this bill will get overturned in the courts are completely full of themselves. Really unlikely to ever happen.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2010, 11:32 PM
 
5,409 posts, read 10,335,019 times
Reputation: 4478
Quote:
Originally Posted by AADAD View Post
The new law will work and I would like to tell you why. I work as an ER ICU Nurse. I have worked in 24 states. Over 70% of the people we see in the ER and treat for a long time in the ICU have no insurance.

The new law will save billions. Here is why.

-70% of all people coming to the ER/ICU have no insurance and their care is the most costly. These people now will have a doctor who will treat them in the office and get their diseases under control. This will reduce their use of the ER as their primary care. They MUST do this. If they come to an ER without an MD they will be given one who will follow them.

-Nearly all of the long term ICU patients are those who have not taken care of themselves. Over time this law will improve the health of these people thereby avoiding the long >10 day stays in the ICU

-Children will have primary care pediatricians who will be able to treat kids with expensive illnesses in their office thereby reducing crisis visits to the ER.

-All people regardless of ability to pay will have a doctor. Nearly 80% of visits to ER's in major cities are people who don't have jobs. Again, using MD office will reduce the stay and prevent ER visits again saving huge $.

-The law over time will improve the health of the people of this country. We will be stronger, more healthy and perhaps even again believe in our country.

Socialism? A label used by people who don't understand the reality of the road. Yesterday I took care of 17 people 15 of which had no doctor. You don't think this law is progress?
Get with it, believe me I am on the front lines. You can sit in your comfy chair and say all you want and if you do and still criticize this I say to you..........

"You're obsolete my baby, my poor old fashioned baby I said Baby Baby Baby you're out of time".

Rolling Stones.
Never really touched this . . .

So just why does the hospital bill so much and so high for ER care?

Yunno, the classic $12 Aspirin and $20 band-aid.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2010, 11:58 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
19,846 posts, read 16,608,184 times
Reputation: 4307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip T View Post
Never really touched this . . .

So just why does the hospital bill so much and so high for ER care?

Yunno, the classic $12 Aspirin and $20 band-aid.
Because they need to recoup the costs of providing services to the uninsured

Quote:
North Shore-LIJ treated several hundred thousand uninsured people in 2008 at a cost of $53 million, up about 5 percent from the prior year.

Brookhaven Memorial Hospital Medical Center wrote off $10.5 million in charity care in 2008, up from $7.9 million in 2007. South Nassau Communities Hospital in the first quarter of 2009 racked up $7.7 million in uncompensated care, from $6.26 million in the prior comparable quarter. That equals 8.8 percent of revenue, up from 7.6 percent the prior year.

“The total amount of charity care has increased dramatically,” Brookhaven
Memorial spokesman Christopher Banks said. “We’re projecting it will increase
again in 2009.”
Long Island Business News » The new look of the uninsured

Those numbers are just absurd. $53 million in losses due to providing treatment to the uninsured in 2008 for one Hospital alone (and its not even the biggest Hospital here on Long Island, can't even imagine what the Nassau County Medical Center wrote off due to treating the uninsured) and those numbers keep skyrocketing.

When Hospitals and ER's have these kind of immense losses due to treating the uninsured they need to recoup the $$$ elsewhere. That is why they charge so much because they need to recoup these costs. So the Insurance companies get charged more by the Hospitals, well guess who the Insurance Companies pass those increases on to. Not only that, but many Hospitals will also need increased bailouts and funding from local and state Governments, to help recoup those huge losses. So we are already paying for the uninsured and have been for many years. Also as was stated earlier, the uninsured are much more expensive to treat. They don't have the same access to checkups, they don't have the same access to various screenings. As a result, potential diseases and illnesses that may have been avoided if they had this type of access are not. Not only that, but the diseases and illnesses that would occur are often caught later, making it much more expensive to treat.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 12:12 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
3,398 posts, read 7,426,459 times
Reputation: 2848
Pftt...I make so little now...Go ahead, IRS, fine me...Fat lot of good you'll get out of it too, since you cant get blood out of a turnip.

I am totally against having to pay for someone else's medical expenses. If there ever comes a time where I have money, I'd actually like to keep it instead of being taxed into giving it away to (Insert curse words here) people that likely already rely on the gubmint for everything anyway.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 01:14 AM
 
Location: Hawaii
1,691 posts, read 3,973,092 times
Reputation: 3091
The new law will cost Billions and what will change is the amount of doctors who will not accept medicaid (the new entitlement is the same thing).

If only Gandhi were.

Nonetheless this thread is about the mandate that everyone pays for health care. As soon as I can tell the fat lady not to slam the puff pastry then I will be happy to pay a fine; no wait, is it not a tax according the the 17,000 new IRS positions that will open up to monitor this little tidbit out of the great bill.

Yes, yes. And we thought Big Brother was the rantings of a bunch of Hippies.

I'm with the OP "Outrageous"
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 01:18 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
19,846 posts, read 16,608,184 times
Reputation: 4307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colddiamond102 View Post
Pftt...I make so little now...Go ahead, IRS, fine me...Fat lot of good you'll get out of it too, since you cant get blood out of a turnip.

I am totally against having to pay for someone else's medical expenses. If there ever comes a time where I have money, I'd actually like to keep it instead of being taxed into giving it away to (Insert curse words here) people that likely already rely on the gubmint for everything anyway.
You do realize that you will have subsidies to help pay for it if you can't afford the coverage right??

Also you are already paying for someone else's medical expenses and have been for a long time. Who do you think pays for the services provided to the uninsured?? We all do.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 01:41 AM
 
15,765 posts, read 28,092,485 times
Reputation: 27064
I'm fine with people refusing to carry health insurance as long as they waive the requirement that they be treated in an emergency regardless of insurance.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 02:04 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
3,398 posts, read 7,426,459 times
Reputation: 2848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
You do realize that you will have subsidies to help pay for it if you can't afford the coverage right??

Also you are already paying for someone else's medical expenses and have been for a long time. Who do you think pays for the services provided to the uninsured?? We all do.
You do realize I want nothing to do with the Gubmint involved in my healthcare? Id rather pay out of pocket for the office visit and be done with it. Better care, faster.
A long time? LMAO! 6 years maybe...The only thing that makes me smile about this is that I wasnt one of the stupid sheep (College kids)in my generation that believed Obama's crap.

Morons couldnt even handle Katrina...or any other "subsidized" program they've started.

If the "results" from the government recommendations for breast exams is an example of Uncle Sam's "Coverage" then they can bite me.

Im better off alone...as to the IRS, catch me if you can. Where there's a will, there's a way, and Im one stubborn, willful biotch.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2010, 02:12 AM
 
3,646 posts, read 10,118,529 times
Reputation: 5471
It's not the "uninsured" that's been the problem. The "uninsured, self employed" folks aren't clogging up the ERs, going twice a week. It's the indigent and HOMELESS that are clogging it up.

BTW - I am self employed, uninsured, uninsurable. Under Obama's plan, in 4 years, I'll be eligible to buy health care while I pay fines for the next four years if I don't (pre existing conditions won't be covered until 2014 under Obamacare). Someone earlier said that only the CHILDREN's health care will be mandated immediately. So I'll be paying hundreds of dollars monthly. Like most self employed, frugal people, I will expect my FULL MONEY'S worth.

Are my kids healthy? Yep. If we are forced to pay for health care, I will probably take the kids in when they have a sore throat instead of the "watch and see" method I have taken over the past couple of years. Why take a chance when I've already paid for it? So, instead of twice a year, paying cash at the Acute or Urgent care (like the majority of the SELF EMPLOYED, UNINSURED - not the indigent homeless who refuse to do the paperwork for Medicaid and show up at ERs twice a week), I'll take up some overworked doctor's extra time 2-3 times a month. Holding up care for those who are truly sick. Now multiply our little family by 32 MILLION new patients and see what Obama has truly 'created'. I'd suggest we all wait the next four years out and see who is really hurting then, but those of us who can add will be helping to REALLY CHANGE THINGS in November. I'd say a year from now, most of this will just be a bad memory for us all.

In the past three years that we have been without health insurance, I have been to an ER ONCE on a late Saturday night when I suddenly was struck with pneumonia last summer. Health insurance would not have prevented that visit. It would've just cost more, if I'd been eligible to get it, that is. I also brought my daughter when she suddenly injured her mouth at bedtime on a Sunday night. Would having health insurance have helped? Well, let's ask all of you - if your 5 year old suddenly started bleeding from her mouth at 8pm on a Sunday night, what would your health insurance policy have done for her that my checkbook couldn't, but for far less money overall?
Rate this post positively 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 > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:23 AM.

© 2005-2021, 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