Someday I fear health insurance will be a thing of the past.

[dhuba]

Then work two jobs like my husband has always done or go back to school to get training for a better paying job! It used to be the American way to work your way up and try to improve your lot in life, not whine about it and expect the "government" to pay for everything you want in life. I don't think where some of you think "government" gets the money to provide for those who don't pay their own way -it's from those of us who are working two jobs or sacrificing and doing without so some don't have to work.

Not everyone has the childcare in place for two jobs and schooling. So you have your poor husband working two jobs and then debate whether or not to get skin tightening laser therapy and spray on tans like you posted on another topic. Tsk tsk.

 

[mrsklamc]

If her DH chooses to work 2 jobs to support his family in the way he sees fit that's none of your business.

 

[fakereadhed]

Not everyone has the childcare in place for two jobs and schooling. So you have your poor husband working two jobs and then debate whether or not to get skin tightening laser therapy and spray on tans like you posted on another topic. Tsk tsk.

DIS Private Investigating as a rebuttal strikes again!

 

[mrsklamc]

DIS Private Investigating as a rebuttal strikes again!

Not that I usually condone it, but criticizing someone for how they spend money they (or their spouse) actually earned is a new one to me.

 

[barbarabini]

"As for pre-existing conditions... if I go buy a car from a junk yard that was in a wreck would it be okay with you to then go buy car insurance and as soon as I get it tell the insurance company they need to fix my car? That is what you are talking about with pre-existing conditions... if the insurance company did fix my car then they would just raise the insurance premiums on everyone... would that really be a smart idea? In the end, life isn't always fair... some people are born with problems and when that happens it might be sad for you... but it really is the responsibility of the parents that decided to have the kid... not mine, not yours...

As for people needing and deserving affordable health care, it would be nice if everyone could have affordable health care... BUT People do not NEED or DESERVE affordable healthcare, it might make them happier, it might make them live longer... but people can exist without it healthcare... you are't born with an inalienable right to a doctor." posted by 998thomas

--This opinion describes exactly the kind of country with the kind of countrymen that I would want NOT to live in for my lifetime. I don't believe this is the majority view, and if it was, I guess I would see millions of the elderly jumping off the medicare rolls as an act of defiant self-determination. Baby boomers would be burning their Medicare enrollment packages. Medicare is the largest welfare program we have going. Talk about a single payer system, medicare is setting the rate (i.e. price fixing for the largest group of people receiving the most medical care.)
Get it straight - Single-payer -- we are already there, the question is how much you are going to contribute and what benefit you are going to receive.

 

[funnygarcia]

I think we already do enough when we provide a free education to people. If you use the education you can get a job and provide for yourself, if you squander you education you have no one to blame but yourself. Government should provide no health care and hospital ERs should be allowed to turn away any one that can't pay.

I have a question, did you post to purposefully piss off people?
Were you in the crowd that cheered when Mr Wolf asked in the debate "should we just let him die?"
Just wondering...

My view:
Free education does not mean an EQUAL education. High school education (because that is the only level that is free and available to all students in this country) is not enough to train our future workers. High school education, will not land you a high paying job that offers affordable insurance.

You other post, the one about who is more "productive" and this more worthy of quality medical care.. brings to mind the early years of dialysis treatment. It was a time that hospitals had "death committees", people needing dialysis (very limited availability of machines at the time) had to prove their worth to receive treatment, or face their inevitable death as transplants were still considered experimental.. and unless you had a twin, you likely would reject the organ anyway.
Do you offer treatment to the 28 yr old mother of four young children? or to the 50 yr old judge who has no children? And I'm sure, who could afford the treatment was perhaps one factor.. it was so new, possibly very expensive as it was a time consuming process requiring many nurse and doctor hours to set up, run treatments and tear down.. likely out of reach for most people anyway.
We are so fortunate that now no one has to make those awful choices.. who lives.. who dies..

Do we really need to go back to those days?

My husband dialyzes at home, we do all the work.
We get supplies shipped to us, we have tech support a phone call away, a nurse to call if problems occur.. which is rare.
But we are the ones that do all the work.

Yet the dialysis clinic charges the same amount per run as if he was in a center.

His home dialysis actually costs MORE than in center, but he is independent - doing his own health care. He is far far healthier than when he was in center.. a center that makes billions per years off of insurance companies. A center that cuts corners to save pennies, putting patients at risk, delivering mediocre care at best.

He also is a teacher, but if he works.. we actually make less money than if he stays at home and gets disability. If he works, our medical bills get bigger and we worry how to cover it all. And I don't know about you, could you afford the $36,000 the dialysis center tries to charge each month? Medicare pays them much less, thank god he qualifies for that.

Don't post anymore, you just encourage people to hate. And that's not okay.

 

[twinboysmom]

I think well already do enough when we provide a free education to people. If you use the education you can get a job and provide for yourself, if you squander you education you have no one to blame but yourself. Government should provide no health care and hospital ERs should be allowed to turn away any one that can't pay.

I guess I missed this comment earlier. I honestly think you need to reread what you wrote. I really hope that you are not truly the monster that you have come across as being. I am not going to comment much on your education comment except to say that an education does not grant you health insurance nor does it always grant you a high paying job.

The last thing that an ER practicioner cares about when a patient having a true emergency presents in the ER is if they have insurance. You care about saving their life. Turning a true emergency away violates the Hippocratic Oath. Maybe you have heard of it? Many insured people who present with emergencies are unable to provide insurance information due to their condition. Would you have a practicioner wait to verify their insured status before treatment begins? I am the first to say that ER's are horribly abused. Most countries with socialized medicine do turn away non emergent patients from their ER's. But with socialized medicine comes other issues. I will keep our system before I take socialized medicine.

As for government providing healthcare, I hate the abuse I see with Medicaid, sometimes pure fraud. But remember, Medicare is also government provided. Medicare provides coverage that we working people pay into. It covers our elderly and adults with severe medical disabilities. Would you deny treatment to the elderly? Medicaid covers our poor and our working poor. It also covers other important groups such as children and pregnant women. As much as I may hate our system and the flaws it has, I cannot imagine a child not having needed health care services or a pregnant woman not having prenatal coverage or hospital services for her delivery. Would you deny an innocent newborn health care because his mother had no private health insurance?

 

[justbishop]

I have a better solution... People that don't want to be cared for by the state can opt out, pay not taxes related to health care and only be treatedby doctors they pay for on thier own... Others that don't want to look out for themselves can pay more taxes and let the government tell them how to live. I know what my choice is.

I guess I'm just a little sheep happy to suckle at the teat of the almighty gov't then

Honestly, I think that some hybrid of universal care and the status quo could be ideal. Keep Medicaid and Medicare (though both could definitely use some restructuring for sure), but allow all who pay into them make equal use of them.

For example, low income pregnant women get free care for themselves and their babies. Why shouldn't that care be offered to all citizens? Yes, I'm personally invested in this particular scenario, because we are currently trying to figure out how to come up with another chunk of money to pay the insurance deductibles we will have to pay to add another baby to our family, while others who choose not to make an effort to support themselves are able to grow their families as they wish with no worries. This type of situation just seems ridiculous to me.

 

[Dreamer Kevin]

We will move to a country enlightened enough to have universal single payer insurance.

How bizarre and astonishing that anyone would willingly depart a country that others suffer cruelly in order to enter.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I have no doubt many residents in those countries would weep with joy were they able to trade places with you in this one.

Um no we wouldn't Kevin.

That is one of the most insane things I have read here.

Oh wait.....were you joking?

 

[thomas998]

I have a question, did you post to purposefully piss off people?
Were you in the crowd that cheered when Mr Wolf asked in the debate "should we just let him die?"
Just wondering...

My view:
Free education does not mean an EQUAL education. High school education (because that is the only level that is free and available to all students in this country) is not enough to train our future workers. High school education, will not land you a high paying job that offers affordable insurance.

You other post, the one about who is more "productive" and this more worthy of quality medical care.. brings to mind the early years of dialysis treatment. It was a time that hospitals had "death committees", people needing dialysis (very limited availability of machines at the time) had to prove their worth to receive treatment, or face their inevitable death as transplants were still considered experimental.. and unless you had a twin, you likely would reject the organ anyway.
Do you offer treatment to the 28 yr old mother of four young children? or to the 50 yr old judge who has no children? And I'm sure, who could afford the treatment was perhaps one factor.. it was so new, possibly very expensive as it was a time consuming process requiring many nurse and doctor hours to set up, run treatments and tear down.. likely out of reach for most people anyway.
We are so fortunate that now no one has to make those awful choices.. who lives.. who dies..

Do we really need to go back to those days?

My husband dialyzes at home, we do all the work.
We get supplies shipped to us, we have tech support a phone call away, a nurse to call if problems occur.. which is rare.
But we are the ones that do all the work.

Yet the dialysis clinic charges the same amount per run as if he was in a center.

His home dialysis actually costs MORE than in center, but he is independent - doing his own health care. He is far far healthier than when he was in center.. a center that makes billions per years off of insurance companies. A center that cuts corners to save pennies, putting patients at risk, delivering mediocre care at best.

He also is a teacher, but if he works.. we actually make less money than if he stays at home and gets disability. If he works, our medical bills get bigger and we worry how to cover it all. And I don't know about you, could you afford the $36,000 the dialysis center tries to charge each month? Medicare pays them much less, thank god he qualifies for that.

Don't post anymore, you just encourage people to hate. And that's not okay.

To be honest I could ask you and all those that seem to believe that they have a right to use the government to steal money from my pay check to pay for someone elses health, if they are trying to upset me and other hard working people with their continued rants on why it is just to steal hard working peoples' money to support lazy slobs that wont take any personal responsibility for their own live.

You have provided a nice sad story... you also make it seem that he could work but chooses not to because it makes more sense financially to take welfare than to work... that is probably true... it is also one of the problems with the current system... no one should be better off on welfare than they are if they work.... it tells me that welfare is too generous and should be cut so that people have a reason to work not sit back and simply collect a government check (which is really money that someone else working was deprived of).

As for death committees, they exist right now the best example is a transplant list... and if your example of a mother of 4 and a judge were both on the list I would look at who was worth more... if the mother is not working, has no real skills and no expectation of every working... then it is easy you save the judge at least he is being productive... and yes it sounds cruel, but life is cruel... assume you take your example to an extreme you have a world with on 20 people 10 mothers with no skills and 10 farmers in their fifties.... you can only save 10 people... you're thinking with the heart theory would only allow the 10 mothers to be saved... and then everyone would starve because you thought with your heart and didn't bother to save anyone that could produce food.

 

[thomas998]

For example, low income pregnant women get free care for themselves and their babies. Why shouldn't that care be offered to all citizens? Yes, I'm personally invested in this particular scenario, because we are currently trying to figure out how to come up with another chunk of money to pay the insurance deductibles we will have to pay to add another baby to our family, while others who choose not to make an effort to support themselves are able to grow their families as they wish with no worries. This type of situation just seems ridiculous to me.

Maybe if the government stop taking so much of the working peoples' money in taxes and stopped giving hand outs to poor people that get pregnant or have kids they can't afford to feed.... well maybe working people like yourself would actually have enough money to have another kid... an maybe the lazy welfare mothers would stop deciding to have another baby to increase their allotment of food stamps.

People, even lazy people are rational... if you take away the incentive to have kids you can't afford then even lazy people will realize they need to stop having kids.

 

[Halbleib1]

not really. and please lets stop with the rationing scare tatics. first of all, right now we have rationing except we call it capitalism. If you have money or insurance you get the care, if you don't have money believe me your health care is most definitely rationed.
Next medicare is a great program, why the heck to do you think seniors are fighting tooth and nail to keep it? Now it is seriously undercapitalized for the same reasons effecting companies and private citizens. Health care cost are increasing 10X's.
lastly it is evident you have no experience with all universal care because many countries have excellent care. Portugal, where my husband is from and where my kids spend their summers has some of the best health care around. Now I totally admit that Portugal is a small country compared ot the states and they too are in financial straits but there is no "rationing" and they donot wait "years" for procedure.

It's not an all or nothing proporsition. the object is to find the best systems available and see what can be adapted and what is a waste.

I agree care is most definately rationed in this country. Yes they have to take you in the emergency room and treat you but they only treat you to a certain extent. I just went into the emergency room on Monday for a severe tooth abscess. If I would have had insurance I am pretty sure I would have been admitted into the hospital and put on IV fluids as the infection swelled up half of my face. Because I am uninsured I was given a prescription for an antibiotic and pain med. and sent home. I saw the Dr. a total of 5 mins. and before I even left the ER I was given a bill for 800.00 just for the use of the ER not including Dr. fees ect. The billing lady told me that the cheapest that bill will go is to 700.00 and only after I fill out a packet of info. to be sure that I qualify for a discount. Heck if I had dental insurance I would not have needed to go to the ER but because I do not have insurance and dentists do not take you without the up front money or insurance I had no choice. I am still not sure what I am going to do as I need oral surgery and have no money to pay for it. My husband has mostly worked temp. jobs over the last 12 years and if they have insurance it is very expensive and does not cover anything and what it does cover always has expensive co pays making the plan totally worthless.

Yes we would have to pay higher taxes for universal healthcare but at least it would not be a for profit business and everyone would be covered. Maybe we would have to wait longer to see a Dr. but at least I would be able to see one and get the proper treatment needed.

Interestingly enough FDR was intending on passing a 2nd Bill of Rights which included universal health care for everyone but he passed away before it could be done. Things would be a whole lot different today had he of lived and it were to have passed because he had a lot in that bill to help the poor people of this country.

 

[Halbleib1]

The less fortunate already do have health insurance is called MEDICAID. You can donate any of your money that you wish to the less fortunate - it's your right to decide where your income is spent. My family already gives 10% of our earnings to charity and a total all inclusive of 30% of our income in taxes so I don't want to hear about another government entitlement plan like "FREE" healthcare.

No not all the less fortunate do have health insurance. There are income loopholes with medicaid that people fall through. If you make even 1.00 more in a month than the guidelines they have set up you do not get health insurance unless you can afford to pay for it yourself. Just because you do not qualify for medicaid does not mean that you can afford to pay oop for health insurance.

 

[Halbleib1]

Hi Eliza. You and I have argued on these boards before regarding insurance. Your opinion as to who and why people frequent the ER is inaccurate. Wanting to ask an ER nurse, you got one. Background, 13 years as a RN with 8 years of ER experience. I have worked in more affluent areas and some downright dangerous areas of town. On any given day the majority of patients in the ER could see their personal physician. Very few truly have medical emergencies. Many people do come for routine care such as ear aches, child with fevers, rashes, pelvic problems (yuck), etc. There are the few that are uninsured. There are many of this group that come to the ER because it was convenient, they didn't want to make an appointment with their doctor, they have used all their monthly visits to their doctor's office on Medicaid, it goes on. Most state Medicaid will deny payment for visits such as this and of course, getting money from the majority (not all) uninsured people is like getting blood from a turnip.

ER's are almost always a money hole to hospitals. The more abuse they see, the more those of us with insurance pay. Doesn't really seem fair. As a nurse some think I have great health insurance. Not so. I struggled with getting my insurance company to pay the neonatologists for their assistance during my emergency delivery. It was very frustrating knowing that others paid nothing for any of their bill. However, even with a system that is in need of some repairs, I will take it over a universal health system any day.

And it is not only those with insurance paying for the uninsured you left out the part where the federal govt. actually gives hospitals grant money to cover the uninsured. If hospitals did not charge so much for there services health insurance would be more affordable as well. Also if pharm. companies did not charge the hospitals so much for a simple IV bag etc. healthcare would be so much more affordable as well. We need to take the profit out of healthcare. You should not be charged 800.00 just for walking into an ER treatment room. Also you should not be charged the same amount for 2 pills that you would pay for a whole bottle at the pharmacy.

 

[Planogirl]

By the way if you do your research you will see that many nations do some amazing medical research. The United States doesn't have a lock on that. Some even say that American healthcare isn't the best in the world including the WHO the last time it decided to rate such things. But who knows?

I'll be in the camp that wants to help everyone have healthcare. I see nothing wrong with those who don't want to be involved opting out but if anything should ever happen where you'd need help...

 

[Bonnie151]

How bizarre and astonishing that anyone would willingly depart a country that others suffer cruelly in order to enter.

You do realise there are several million of us American expats, yes?

 

[clarabelle]

I am not sure that "for profit" and healthcare make a good mix.
It is hard for some health professionals not to let the bottom line influence their decisions.
Everyone wants to make money. I see nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't keep costs down when the doctors, hospitals, dialysis centers, PTs, OTs etc....
all want to make a living.
I wonder if everyone was paid a flat fee -and profit didn't enter into it -if healthcare costs would go down?
I am sure productivity would go down too. I am not sure what the answer is.

 

[thomas998]

I am not sure that "for profit" and healthcare make a good mix.
It is hard for some health professionals not to let the bottom line influence their decisions.
Everyone wants to make money. I see nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't keep costs down when the doctors, hospitals, dialysis centers, PTs, OTs etc....
all want to make a living.
I wonder if everyone was paid a flat fee -and profit didn't enter into it -if healthcare costs would go down?
I am sure productivity would go down too. I am not sure what the answer is.

If you wanted a real impact you would ban all health insurance and government subsidies. The truth is doctors and hospitals charge high rates because they can. If they are forced to charge a price people can afford or have no customers which do you think they will pick. Will a drug company really be able to charge 5,000/month for special medicines when they know that such a price wouldn't be in reach of any customers?

 

[DISNEYSIX]

I just can't believe our citizens would even consider allowing this government to run health care given what they have done to this great nation ($14 trillion in debt comes to mind). Of course, I thought the same thing about the last presidential election too and, boy, was I wrong!