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.
Thus, they earn a small amount of salary more, and have no insurance. Not a great choice if you are already in the position of having qualified for SSI.
I don't think most people would willingly want to live at the level of those who qualify for SSI as it is described on the above site.
Yep. This is what drives me nuts about posts of Facebook about people who are angry because they see patients on medicaid with tattoos or using cell phones. As if the cost of a tattoo or a cell phone is anything close to what someone would pay for health insurance...
Same thing goes with smoking, really. I realize smoking raises healthcare costs, but if doctors would actually spend more than 5 or 10 minutes with a patient, maybe they could help them understand their addiction and devise a treatment plan that would actually help them quit smoking. Do you think people with low incomes really enjoy spending the little money they have on cigarettes? I highly doubt it.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 28 days ago)
11,792 posts, read 5,798,330 times
Reputation: 14221
I'm going to chime in as I've worked in the medical field for 35 years and have seen the good with the bad. I do believe that everyone should be treated equally but due to lack of regulations, rules - what ever you want to call it - for Medicaid recipients -there is definitely animosity in the medical field towards alot of them.
Due to Medicaid recipients - no showing for appts and not caring, calling to reschedule and upset that they may have to wait a week or two to see the doctor, being put out if they aren't called in right way for their appt. ect.. - tees alot of us off. If they don't have a ride - a taxi is called and we pay for it. I've had people call a taxi and go to an ER to have their meds refilled. There is truely a lack of responsibility in alot of these patients. And yes - the latest technology, nice cars they own ect... hits a nerve when we're working our butts of 40+ hrs a week only to get grief from them "As they have other things to do - when will I be seen"
Then on the other hand, we see low income families, who don't quality for Medicaid, stress about how they will pay for their medication, not taking time off work when they need to recuperate because they can't afford it.
I'm a Democrat but as I age and see the abuse of systems I believed would help someone, I've changed.
All these federal programs, designed to help people need to be changed so that the people receiving them are more responsible.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 28 days ago)
11,792 posts, read 5,798,330 times
Reputation: 14221
Quote:
Originally Posted by soanchorless
Yep. This is what drives me nuts about posts of Facebook about people who are angry because they see patients on medicaid with tattoos or using cell phones. As if the cost of a tattoo or a cell phone is anything close to what someone would pay for health insurance...
Same thing goes with smoking, really. I realize smoking raises healthcare costs, but if doctors would actually spend more than 5 or 10 minutes with a patient, maybe they could help them understand their addiction and devise a treatment plan that would actually help them quit smoking. Do you think people with low incomes really enjoy spending the little money they have on cigarettes? I highly doubt it.
Believe me - doctors spend more than 5 minutes with a Medicaid patient - and we see a Medicaid patient more often than we do low income with insurances due to their concern wih copay and medication costs.
People should be angry - as they are paying $50-$100 for a cell phone plan that is now given to Medicaid recepients with no restrictions. When we are providing them with free health care - why should we not expect them to act responsible? If they had to fork over money to pay for health care, food, ect. you would definitely see a change in their habits and food preferences.
Believe me - doctors spend more than 5 minutes with a Medicaid patient - and we see a Medicaid patient more often than we do low income with insurances due to their concern wih copay and medication costs.
People should be angry - as they are paying $50-$100 for a cell phone plan that is now given to Medicaid recepients with no restrictions. When we are providing them with free health care - why should we not expect them to act responsible? If they had to fork over money to pay for health care, food, ect. you would definitely see a change in their habits and food preferences.
I'm not a medicaid patient, but it has been a rare occasion that a doctor has spent more that 5-10 minutes with me. A NP or PA: yes. Doctor: no.
And I still don't understand the big deal about people having cell phones. Smart phones, yes. Cheap prepaid phones that cost $35-50, no. There is no coverage you could buy for $35-50 a month. That wouldn't even cover some co-pays for a single doctor's visit. And a cell phone is not a luxury. You need a phone to get by in society. How else are people even going to make their doctor's appointments without a phone?
I know several people on medicaid. None of them have expensive phones. None of them even have cable. Most don't even own cars, let alone nice cars. One has a crappy tattoo that his friend did for free in high school. Their lives are pretty depressing, honestly.
I understand your frustration with people who are entitled and irresponsible, especially if they are driving nice cars or have smart phones. But some of the complaints against medicaid patients are silly, IMHO.
The biggest complaint that Medicaid recipients have that irritates me no end is the complaint that when they have to use clinics, for instance,or are restricted due to shortage of doctors accepting Medicaid,that they have to wait for 'long times' because of so many people there and/or they don't get their choice of doctors.
It's even funnier when they complain about the "low class" types of people they may have to wait with.
They should get the same competence of care but thinking they are entitled to the same convenience of care should be the same as those paying dearly for it, is "cry me a river " time.
(Not to mention that it's not infrequent for those paying to experience similar wait times, depending on how the doctor schedules)
...All these federal programs, designed to help people need to be changed so that the people receiving them are more responsible.
Hmmm. For the past thirteen years I have lived in two countries, both with national healthcare systems (as well as private healthcare.) From what I understand the national healthcare systems in both countries were run on definitely "unAmerican" lines, i.e. - there is no slack.
The rules are the rules. Screw up and you to the back of the line. Period.
It probably works better to have a ruthless system, than believing that people can be made more responsible.
But what would happen in the U.S. the first time that someone died because they wouldn't/couldn't/didn't follow the rules?...if that someone was a sweet ol' granny with white skin or a baby of any color, there would be fulminations in Congress, a special presidential address on TV, and a street smothered in yellow ribbons and teddy bears and herds of sobbing women posing for the TV cameras. And the next week there would be a bill in Congress to provide persons in whatever program granny or babdy was in with a limo and driver on call 24/7.
Better, get honest and just go to the Indian or sub-Saharan model: Those that have, get; those that don't, die. The UN could supply tents for camps and Medecins San Frontieres supply the medical care for the latter if they chose to. NIMBY basis, of course.
How can you justify giving the same benefits to someone who never lifted a finger nor paid a dime for heath insurance vs. those who busted their azzes to responsibly provide health insurance for their family?
How can you justify giving the same benefits to someone who never lifted a finger nor paid a dime for heath insurance vs. those who busted their azzes to responsibly provide health insurance for their family?
Forget the emotion of it all.
Because the vast majority of people on medicaid have busted their azzes all their lives and paid taxes like the rest of us. I hope that if one day due to unforeseen circumstances, I find myself on medicaid, I will get the same care as I have always gotten. Most people on medicaid are seniors and children anyway. Should we give them less than standard care?
How can you justify giving the same benefits to someone who never lifted a finger nor paid a dime for heath insurance vs. those who busted their azzes to responsibly provide health insurance for their family?
Forget the emotion of it all.
I can justify it very easily. If you don't see the point I'm making below, you are pretty hopeless.
The system can only have one standard of care for all it treats. Anything less than that is a danger to everyone. What if the system believes falsely that I am a Medicaid patient, when in fact, I have good private health insurance? Result: I get poor quality treatment. Mistakes get made all the time in the healthcare industry and there are a surprisingly large number of deaths every year from medical negligence.
The problem with all these "grandiose ideas" about dividing patients into categories of "deserving" and "undeserving" is that, in effect, you turn the whole health care industry into a sort of "court" that must decide who is worthy of a particular skill or level of treatment before it is rendered.
This can't be done at all on an emergency basis. Its hard to do it on a non-emergency basis. No, the only response, you can build into the system is one response. You have to have a programmed response that when ANY patient comes in with a certain condition, they receive certain specific treatment. The speed at which this treatment is rendered must depend on the condition and not who the patient is or how much money he has.
Anything else is a threat to YOU and to Me who are not Medicaid recipients.
Finally, have you ever considered the fact that over half of the people on Medicaid are children? Do you feel comfortable with them getting less than average or optimal care for their medical problems? I hope your answer is "No". If it is something else, you have values that I (and most people) will simply never agree or identify with.
How can you justify giving the same benefits to someone who never lifted a finger nor paid a dime for heath insurance vs. those who busted their azzes to responsibly provide health insurance for their family?
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.
