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)
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:49 PM
 
30,167 posts, read 11,803,456 times
Reputation: 18693

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post

Great idea, great system.

So someone poor goes to the ER because they had a stroke or heart attack or had a horrible accident. They have to wait behind people who paid more in taxes? How do you wait months if you need emergency medical care or you die?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:49 PM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,963,795 times
Reputation: 6059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
I would imagine that with today's technology parents have a pretty good idea if their unborn child will be disabled or not. If someone decides to have the child anyways is that not their responsibility to pay for the child's medical care?
Seriously?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,748,172 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Here's a great idea that is fair to the tax payers:

Pay for your own, do not make me pay for yours. Allow the competition to cross state lines.

Great idea, great system.
No Federal Law precludes Insurance from being sold across state lines. Some states allow out of state insurers to do so. Thus far, no takers.

Insurers have networks that agree to be reimbursed at predetermined rates. An out of state insurer does not have networks in other states. Thus reimbursement would be at the out of network rate with the insured party responsible for the balance.

Then you get into the weeds of state regulations. No two states have the same regulations. Your state may requires insurers to cover ABC medication. The out of state insurer is licensed in a state that does not require insurers to cover ABC medication. You need ABC medication. Which state law applies?

Endless interstate stuff to sort out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:53 PM
 
32,065 posts, read 15,067,783 times
Reputation: 13688
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
No one has a right to healthcare in the US.

The ACA Mandate has so many exemptions, it’s unenforceable.

While most states eventually expanded Medicaid, those that did not exclude millions.

Healthcare Premiums are a reflection of the cost of healthcare.
We absolutely have a right to healthcare especially when you want more kids born to those who can't afford them. Otherwise, the insured pay for the uninsured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
22,216 posts, read 21,681,771 times
Reputation: 7608
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
No one has a right to healthcare in the US.

The ACA Mandate has so many exemptions, it’s unenforceable.

While most states eventually expanded Medicaid, those that did not exclude millions.

Healthcare Premiums are a reflection of the cost of healthcare.
No, but people pay about the OECD average for it anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:58 PM
 
30,167 posts, read 11,803,456 times
Reputation: 18693
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
LOL....I'm so happy that I live in BC, Canada.....Just paid my monthly health care premium of $37.50 this morning....Love our system.... For those of you who think they can opt out and pay their own bills, you should plan to die young, because when you reach retirement age those medical bills will begin to pile up on you.

At retirement age in America there is medicare. Which is free unless you get a donut policy.


You pay a lot more than $37.50 a month. The government just takes the rest before you get it in the form of taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,748,172 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Why do doctors, labs and hospitals need to be subsidized?
EMTALA is now 32 years old. It requires all hospital ERs to stabilize emergency patients regardless of ability to pay. Speculation on my part subsidizing hospitals/ residencies go hand in hand.

Prior to this law it was possible for an ER to decline or refer a patient to a county hospital, regardless of distance or capacity . Early and/ or inappropriate discharges were common when anticipated treatment costs were more than a hospital was willing to absorb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 10:03 PM
 
30,167 posts, read 11,803,456 times
Reputation: 18693
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Seriously?

What is wrong with what I said? I am not saying people should not have disabled kids if they want to. But that should be their responsibility.



Sarah Palin made the choice to have "Trig" and she has the financial means to take care of him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 10:07 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,748,172 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
And they have the second highest HC costs compared to the US. And increasing like the US.
HC costs increase everywhere. Medical inflation.

If only the US towed the line in 1955 where a diagnosis of most serious disease was a near certain death sentence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2018, 10:15 PM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,963,795 times
Reputation: 6059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
What is wrong with what I said? I am not saying people should not have disabled kids if they want to. But that should be their responsibility.



Sarah Palin made the choice to have "Trig" and she has the financial means to take care of him.
First of all, people cant just decide these things like that. In rare cases, its possible but often not. And the child should not have to suffer anyway, regardless of whether the parents are well heeled or not. I am sure you wouldnt like that if you were the child. And it doesnt matter whether the child was disabled at birth or became disabled a month later. Thats not the point.
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 12:12 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