Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 01-30-2013, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,759,995 times
Reputation: 35920

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
uhn the interstaes are funded by a USAGE (in this case GAS) TAx...which would fund it with no problem, if the liberals didnt steal it to use elsewhere
That is not the entirety of the support of the interstate system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2013, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,483,709 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
Hey farm boy, I'm not your mother and don't take a liking in being spoken to that way, got it? As I stated, I've have worked for over 40 years. You've got this thing stuck between your ears that everyone is a friggin socialist because you may lose an ear of corn, or pay tax to build a school to educate other people's kids for Christ's sake. Everyone pays taxes, everyone needs expensive healthcare eventually, even morons, get it? If not try reading, or get off the farm once and a while.
oh please


I like you have been working for over 40 years...

the differenec: I dont EXPECT the government to take care of me
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 08:30 AM
 
8,630 posts, read 9,137,436 times
Reputation: 5990
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
oh please


I like you have been working for over 40 years...

the differenec: I dont EXPECT the government to take care of me
What makes you think I want the government to take care of me, because I don't agree with your 18th century take on medical care? You're living in the past, man! I agree that it would be nice to scrap the whole insurance aspect of the delivery of health care, but it ain't going to happen because even without insurance health care is not cheap and never will be. The contrast between doctor care now opposed to what it was in 1957 is tremendous. Insurance is needed because without it not only will the sick become destitute, so will their families including children. What we have now is a fragmented system that rations healthcare more than any modern nation on earth at a much higher cost which doesn't rest well with me and many others who've paid hard earned cash over decades just to be rejected when the chips were down. That may be fine for your 3rd world future outlook for working Americans but it ain't mine. The system can be fixed at a much lower cost. And that's a fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,948,900 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
What makes you think I want the government to take care of me, because I don't agree with your 18th century take on medical care? You're living in the past, man! I agree that it would be nice to scrap the whole insurance aspect of the delivery of health care, but it ain't going to happen because even without insurance health care is not cheap and never will be. The contrast between doctor care now opposed to what it was in 1957 is tremendous. Insurance is needed because without it not only will the sick become destitute, so will their families including children. What we have now is a fragmented system that rations healthcare more than any modern nation on earth at a much higher cost which doesn't rest well with me and many others who've paid hard earned cash over decades just to be rejected when the chips were down. That may be fine for your 3rd world future outlook for working Americans but it ain't mine. The system can be fixed at a much lower cost. And that's a fact.
The number one reason for personal bankruptcies is medical bills. We are the only country in the world where this happens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,483,709 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The number one reason for personal bankruptcies is medical bills. We are the only country in the world where this happens.
false

the number one (and only) reason for personal bankruptsies is you CANT PAY YOUR BILLS



1. Filing for bankruptcy isn't cheap, either. According to a study released this month by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the average bankruptcy fees increased from $921 to $1,477 after 2005's BAPCPA was enacted

2. Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharges certain debts, while Chapter 13 may reduce or reorganize debts. However, neither one offers an easy solution



The idea that half of all bankruptcies are caused by medical debt has become part of the common folklore.

The claim, first made in a 2005 Health Affairs article, is at variance with four decades of economic research, including a finding that even large medical bills have no impact on family living standards.
The paper by David Himmelstein, Elizabeth Warren, Deborah Thorne, and Steffie Woolhandler was published as a Health Affairs web exclusive on February 5, 2005. The authors are strong proponents of government run health care.

The data comes from 1,250 personal bankruptcy cases, assumed to be representative of the almost 1.5 million households that filed for bankruptcy in 2001. The data on each bankruptcy were abstracted from court records and supplemented with 931 telephone interviews. The paper's conclusions about illnesses in households were based on medical interviews conducted with 391 people. The paper does not specify how those people were selected. It does say that Himmelstein and Woolhandler (H & W), both MDs, coded the diagnoses given by debtors into the categories used for the analysis.

The classifications used to determine a medical bankruptcy were odd. Only 28.3 percent of the sample cited self-reported illness or injury as a cause of bankruptcy. However, H & W managed to almost double that figure (to 54.5 percent) by counting the following as "illnesses":

•1. A birth or addition of a new family member
•2. A death in a family
•3. A drug or alcohol addiction
•4. Uncontrolled gambling
•5. Loss of at least 2 weeks of work-related income due to illness or injury by anyone in the household
•6. Out-of-pocket medical bills of $1,000 in the two years before filing by anyone in the household
•7. Mortgaging a home to pay medical bills.
In a 2005 article in the Northwestern University Law Review, Prof. Todd J. Zywicki called the $1,000 threshold for contributing medical debt "indefensible." That's an understatement. By H & W criteria, a bankruptcy with $50,000 in student loans and $1,001 in unpaid medical bills would be classified as a "medical bankruptcy." Moreover, the average U.S. household had out-of-pocket expenses of $2,182 in 2001!

In a 2006 review (gated) of the H & W study results in Health Affairs, David Dranove and Michael L. Millenson:

•Recalculate the medical bankruptcy rate using the data given in the H & W paper. They conclude that just 17 percent of the H & W sample "had medical expenditure bankruptcies," although it cannot be stated "with any degree of certainty whether medical spending was the most important cause of bankruptcy."
•Explain that "four decades of studies have addressed the bankruptcy-medical spending connection" and that the results from those studies are much closer to their 17 percent estimate than to the 54.5 percent estimates of H & W.
•Cite a 2002 Fay, Hurst, and White American Economic Review study, which found no statistical link between bankruptcies and health problems.
•Cite a 1999 Domowitz and Sartain Journal of Finance study, which found that high medical debt raised the probability of bankruptcy for the tiny proportion of the population that had high medical debt, but that at the margin, credit cards were the largest single contribution to bankruptcy.
Moreover, Helen Levy in an Economic Research Initiative on the Uninsured working paper estimated the effect of being diagnosed with a serious new health condition, (cancer, diabetes, heart attack, chronic lung disease, or stroke) and found that household consumption "remains smooth" in the face of serious health shocks for both insured and uninsured households.


YET:
A study by the Department of Justice examined more than 5,000 bankruptcy cases between 2000 and 2002. It found that 54% of bankruptcies involve no medical debt, and more than 90% have medical debt of less than $5,000. Even among the minority of bankruptcies that report medical debt, only a few have enough to cause personal bankruptcy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,483,709 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The number one reason for personal bankruptcies is medical bills. We are the only country in the world where this happens.
there is ZERO PROOF that bankruptcies are due to medical bills
ie: some guy claims bankruptcy: has 30,000 dollars debt to CC, 200,000 debt to a folded mortage, has 20,000 debt to a car payment, and 6000 to a medical bill from 3 years ago....yet elizabeth warren((and the faulty study in the American Journal of Medicine conducted by Dr. David Himmelstein and other researchers from Harvard University and Ohio University)) will claim that that bankruptcy was due to medicaL

* The personal bankruptcy rate was actually higher in Canada in 2006 and 2007 (0.30 percent for both years) than in the United States (0.20 percent and .27 percent).
* Medical spending was only one of several contributing factors in 17 percent of U.S. bankruptcies -- medical debts accounted for only 12 to 13 percent of the total debts among American bankruptcy filers who cited medical debt as one of their reasons for bankruptcy.
* Medical reasons were cited as the primary cause of bankruptcy by approximately 15 percent of bankrupt Canadian seniors (55 years of age and older).
* Non-medical expenditures comprise the majority of debt among bankrupt consumers in both Canada and the United States; the inability to earn sufficient income to cover these costs -- not exposure to uninsured medical costs -- is the real explanation for almost all bankruptcies in either country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 10:30 AM
 
8,630 posts, read 9,137,436 times
Reputation: 5990
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
there is ZERO PROOF that bankruptcies are due to medical bills
ie: some guy claims bankruptcy: has 30,000 dollars debt to CC, 200,000 debt to a folded mortage, has 20,000 debt to a car payment, and 6000 to a medical bill from 3 years ago....yet elizabeth warren((and the faulty study in the American Journal of Medicine conducted by Dr. David Himmelstein and other researchers from Harvard University and Ohio University)) will claim that that bankruptcy was due to medicaL

* The personal bankruptcy rate was actually higher in Canada in 2006 and 2007 (0.30 percent for both years) than in the United States (0.20 percent and .27 percent).
* Medical spending was only one of several contributing factors in 17 percent of U.S. bankruptcies -- medical debts accounted for only 12 to 13 percent of the total debts among American bankruptcy filers who cited medical debt as one of their reasons for bankruptcy.
* Medical reasons were cited as the primary cause of bankruptcy by approximately 15 percent of bankrupt Canadian seniors (55 years of age and older).
* Non-medical expenditures comprise the majority of debt among bankrupt consumers in both Canada and the United States; the inability to earn sufficient income to cover these costs -- not exposure to uninsured medical costs -- is the real explanation for almost all bankruptcies in either country.
I came extremely close to losing everything because of a ill spouse, and I mean as close as anyone can get. If it wasn't for my congressman, and eventually my wife acquiring medicare, which took 3 years of hell, we would be completely broke. We would have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even after her settlement with SS to this day I'm still paying for medical bills from several years ago. We will sell our home to pay those off but we were very lucky, most would have gone down in flames. So, it isn't even a stretch in the slightest for me to come to the conclusion many bankruptcies are caused by medical issues. The simple fact insurance companies deny care to maximize profit as a business model should lead one to conclude the same. If not you're wearing blinders.

Last edited by jmking; 01-31-2013 at 11:13 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Maryland about 20 miles NW of DC
6,104 posts, read 5,990,747 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
The DEA would have something to say about that. Can not allow dying people to much narcotic, they may get themselves addicted. And I'm not kidding.


I think we can agree that a dying person addicted to drugs or narcotics is not a long term problem. I have never heard of a dead person needing a fix!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 02:03 PM
 
8,630 posts, read 9,137,436 times
Reputation: 5990
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwruckman View Post
I think we can agree that a dying person addicted to drugs or narcotics is not a long term problem. I have never heard of a dead person needing a fix!
My point is the DEA is really cracking down on prescription narcotics. Some medical staff have no common sense and will become very difficult to deal with when pertaining to narcotics and very ill people, primarily because of the DEA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,759,995 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
there is ZERO PROOF that bankruptcies are due to medical bills
ie: some guy claims bankruptcy: has 30,000 dollars debt to CC, 200,000 debt to a folded mortage, has 20,000 debt to a car payment, and 6000 to a medical bill from 3 years ago....yet elizabeth warren((and the faulty study in the American Journal of Medicine conducted by Dr. David Himmelstein and other researchers from Harvard University and Ohio University)) will claim that that bankruptcy was due to medicaL

* The personal bankruptcy rate was actually higher in Canada in 2006 and 2007 (0.30 percent for both years) than in the United States (0.20 percent and .27 percent).
* Medical spending was only one of several contributing factors in 17 percent of U.S. bankruptcies -- medical debts accounted for only 12 to 13 percent of the total debts among American bankruptcy filers who cited medical debt as one of their reasons for bankruptcy.
* Medical reasons were cited as the primary cause of bankruptcy by approximately 15 percent of bankrupt Canadian seniors (55 years of age and older).
* Non-medical expenditures comprise the majority of debt among bankrupt consumers in both Canada and the United States; the inability to earn sufficient income to cover these costs -- not exposure to uninsured medical costs -- is the real explanation for almost all bankruptcies in either country.
This is not Canada.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/...064_666715.htm

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.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:32 PM.

© 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