You big tease!
-Adam[/QUOTE]
Go look. I think you will like it. It's up your alley.
Rape is a "pre-existing condition"
- Thread starter DarkAudit
- Start date
- Status
-Adam[/QUOTE]
Go look. I think you will like it. It's up your alley.
Is everyone that is supporting universal health care ready to pay an insane amount of taxes and not complain about it? B/c that's where it's headed.
I'm not saying there's not a problem, but universal health care isn't the answer. How about tort reform? How about insurance reform? Why don't we fix the real problem?
I'm not saying there's not a problem, but universal health care isn't the answer. How about tort reform? How about insurance reform? Why don't we fix the real problem?
You big tease!
-Adam[/quote]
Go look. I think you will like it. It's up your alley.[/QUOTE]
Now I'm doubly confused. What ideas? What am I looking for? I don't own an alley - will I need to build one so your ideas can be all up in it?
-Adam
You big tease!
-Adam[/quote]
Go look. I think you will like it. It's up your alley.[/QUOTE]
Now I'm doubly confused. What ideas? What am I looking for? I don't own an alley - will I need to build one so your ideas can be all up in it?
-Adam[/QUOTE]
Dude. Do I have to do everything for you? http://www.halforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10168
You big tease!
-Adam[/quote]
Go look. I think you will like it. It's up your alley.[/quote]
Now I'm doubly confused. What ideas? What am I looking for? I don't own an alley - will I need to build one so your ideas can be all up in it?
-Adam[/quote]
Dude. Do I have to do everything for you? http://www.halforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10168
[/QUOTE]Why yes, yes you do have to do everything for me.
Dance monkey, dance!
It's hard enough keeping up with the threads I post in through this obnoxiously bad proxy, nevermind trying to keep up with the 'new posts'. So thanks for the linky. It's all up in my alley now.
-Adam
M
makare
Yes. Even great medical insurance has "term" and "lifetime" limits. After you reach a certain payout they will reduce coverage.
Then the family has to fight to get good medical care (because once the doctor's office sees the bills aren't getting paid they stop scheduling appointments that can be put off), and they have to start paying out of pocket for that care, and when they can't pay the bills go to collections, and ruins their credit rating, starts court suits, costs money for lawyers, etc.
Bankruptcy is only the start. They were hoping to declare "medical bankruptcy" so that they can stop paying medical bills without affecting their normal finances or credit rating.
But you can't give up on your child either, no matter the cost.
It has to be heart rending to go through that experience.
-Adam[/QUOTE]
It's kind of irrelevant but my mom's best friend is in her fifties. Her son is 32 so if you were thinking a little child then no that isn't right. But really does it matter what age the child is? I think for parents the pain is always the same. In this case she and her husband are thinking of selling their house to help pay for the bills and they are all feeling really helpless.
I just wanted to clarify that.
Yes, the guy with the heart condition who HAS insurance that isn't covering his medical expenses is the one not "supporting himself"
GasBandit
Staff member
You know, no system, be it socialist or capitalist, will be able to prevent all bad things from happening, ever. You can name off as many sob stories as you want about bad things happening to good people under the current american health care system, and I can come right back at you with just as many sob stories from canada or the UK or elsewhere of egregiously delayed or denied treatments. We know, because we've done it umpteen times. There's always going to be sad cases of preventable death and disease occurring. Nothing on earth is perfect, least of all the constructed systems of man.
Yes, the medical system here needs some changes made (insurance law, tort reform, the list goes on and on). Every system always does. But if you think for one instant Obamacare is about getting better health care to those who need it, you're deliriously naive, or dishonest. It's merely about making the citizenry more entirely dependent on government for essentials of life.
Yes, the medical system here needs some changes made (insurance law, tort reform, the list goes on and on). Every system always does. But if you think for one instant Obamacare is about getting better health care to those who need it, you're deliriously naive, or dishonest. It's merely about making the citizenry more entirely dependent on government for essentials of life.
Evidence?
Well, we're glad you're here to determine how much everyone should make. Thats not against the basic foundations of america at all.
Evidence?[/QUOTE]
This. I hardly think the Democrats are sitting in a smoking room, twirling their mustaches and laughing maniacally about how they are pulling a fast one over on the American people. If they are concerned about ANYTHING self-serving, it's about keeping their elected positions by pandering to the desires of the public. Big Brother may want his fingers in a lot of pies, but I believe it's entirely more likely that he's more concerned with getting people healthcare than he is with making them utterly dependent on him.
The fact that it's not the system you'd pick doesn't make it a malevolent act.
Well, we're glad you're here to determine how much everyone should make. Thats not against the basic foundations of america at all.
[/QUOTE]How about laywers then?
GasBandit
Staff member
Evidence?[/quote]
This. I hardly think the Democrats are sitting in a smoking room, twirling their mustaches and laughing maniacally about how they are pulling a fast one over on the American people. If they are concerned about ANYTHING self-serving, it's about keeping their elected positions by pandering to the desires of the public. Big Brother may want his fingers in a lot of pies, but I believe it's entirely more likely that he's more concerned with getting people healthcare than he is with making them utterly dependent on him.
The fact that it's not the system you'd pick doesn't make it a malevolent act.[/QUOTE]
I didn't say they were snidely whiplash. They, of course, think they are doing what is best for the country because the little people obviously can't or won't do the right thing/take care of themselves, so they have to push through what's "right" even against overwhelming opposition.
Their self-serving, pandering natures are the only reason why this is having any trouble flying through at all. The democrats own both the senate and the house, lock stock and barrel, as well as the oval office. Republicans aren't stopping them. Republicans couldn't stop them. What's stopping them is democrats outside of the nation's parenthesis are worried that they will face electoral repercussions from supporting socialist medicine.
IMO it doesn't need to be. People who advocate greater government intervention don't have to be malevolent (unless conservative of course, since they're always malevolent according to "the internet" ). It can be people who honestly believe that only the government can do something about "insert injustice here." A side-effect afterward is that people then become dependent on such interventions. And it snowballs.
So you don't need the intervention to be intentioned bad for it to become bad.
IMO it doesn't need to be. People who advocate greater government intervention don't have to be malevolent (unless conservative of course, since they're always malevolent according to "the internet" ). It can be people who honestly believe that only the government can do something about "insert injustice here." A side-effect afterward is that people then become dependent on such interventions. And it snowballs.
So you don't need the intervention to be intentioned bad for it to become bad.[/QUOTE]
Except it doesn't snowball. That's why we have a democracy. When something doesn't work, we change it. Prohibition? Voted for and repealed. Plus, it's taken over 50 years for us to even consider a public option. You really think socialized medicine is right around the corner?
I'm living with it man (Canada). We don't have to worry about going bankrupt form health costs, we just need to worry about if we'll die on the waiting list, or if suicide is a preferable option to being in perpetual pain (I've known at least one person close to me who contemplated this, but luckily eventually got treated), and other "wonderful" things about government health care. This is NOT a theoretical for me.
I'm living with it man (Canada). We don't have to worry about going bankrupt form health costs, we just need to worry about if we'll die on the waiting list, or if suicide is a preferable option to being in perpetual pain (I've known at least one person close to me who contemplated this, but luckily eventually got treated), and other "wonderful" things about government health care. This is NOT a theoretical for me.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, instead we have people who die because they can't afford to go the hospital and are afraid of the cost. I'm not sure which is worse, tbh.
Well, we're glad you're here to determine how much everyone should make. Thats not against the basic foundations of america at all.
[/QUOTE]How about laywers then?[/QUOTE]
What about them?
GasBandit
Staff member
Most of our current governmental problems have come from snowballs. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are great examples of snowballing costs and increasing entrenchment.
M
makare
What are you talking about? He is supporting himself. he is a very successful chiropractor with medical insurance, wife, kids, house, car etc. But he has medical bills beyond even their value because his heart his faulty. He is going to have to sell everything he owns to pay his bills that is why they are considering bankruptcy.
Do you know what family is? Seriously. It's a group of people who sacrifice when each other are in need.
I am qualifying everything you say from now on through the "this guy is a heartless bastard" filter.
Well, we're glad you're here to determine how much everyone should make. Thats not against the basic foundations of america at all.
[/QUOTE]A careful reading of my post should show that I was being sarcastic about where the money is going to come from to pay for social medicine.
I'm sorry if I'm not clear, but I fully support the capitalist system, and think that those doctors are worth what they personally are making. However, some tort reform could lower their liability insurance, which could help a lot of people. Other than that, you're worth what people will pay you for.
If the gov't wants to lower the cost of healthcare, it's almost trival to depress the costs of doctors: Offer a fully gov't funded medical school education to any student that wants to try with the only requirement that they maintain a passing grade in all their classes throughout their schooling.
That is THE cheapest way to lower the costs of healthcare. Increase the supply.
-Adam
I suggested this months ago, but with the added cost of having to work for a public health clinic for a set time period, ether full or part time. If they aren't paying for student loans, they don't need the high salary out of the gate. Let them earn it over time.
Well, we're glad you're here to determine how much everyone should make. Thats not against the basic foundations of america at all.
[/QUOTE]A careful reading of my post should show that I was being sarcastic about where the money is going to come from to pay for social medicine.
-Adam[/QUOTE] Wow. I dropped the ball there. Sadly, there are people that feel thats completely true, so I didn't really bother to check that far.
M
makare
turns out i had the facts mixed up about my mom's friends son.
What is actually happening is the insurance company won't cover his heart thing because they say it is a pre-existing condition because he had it as a child. But he was given a clean bill of health in his teens and did not have any problems for over ten years. On top of that bullshit his wife was so stressed out when his attacks started happening again that she became ill and needed medical care which the insurance company decided not to cover because they claimed it was caused by her husband's pre-existing condition.
Now that is some shit.
What is actually happening is the insurance company won't cover his heart thing because they say it is a pre-existing condition because he had it as a child. But he was given a clean bill of health in his teens and did not have any problems for over ten years. On top of that bullshit his wife was so stressed out when his attacks started happening again that she became ill and needed medical care which the insurance company decided not to cover because they claimed it was caused by her husband's pre-existing condition.
Now that is some shit.
Having dealt with insurance companies professionally, I think you're wrong about bankruptcy more expensive. Insurance companies have literally teams of lawyers for instances just like this.
Y'know, I really shouldn't interfere in debates like this...I don't have the willpower these days to keep it up.
Anyway, anyone thinking it's either the Free Market or the Canadian system is an idiot who's using bifurcation to avoid an actual debate. There ARE plenty of other options, that have been proven to work (mostly. No system is perfect).
Once again; Belgium has the best emergency medical care in the EU, and we have a semi-socialist evil system. Tough; it works, and thousands of English people come here yearly to get treatment they can't get from the nHS in time or at the quality they want - and even they, who *do* pay full price (whereas Belgians pay full price and get refunded about 85%), pay less than they would in some other countries.
Our social security is a lot more expensive than that of the US - of course. But not in the "800 dollars a month a person" neighbourhood.
And, to stop a couple of the eternal counterpoints: no, our population isn't in a better condition - our age pyramid is worse than yours. Yes, we are facing a shortage in about 10-15 years - and political analysts have been saying for years the government should've invested more in medical care and social security to build funds for the future. Politicians being short-sighted idiots isn't a failing of our medical system. No, I don't think what I pay is too much - nor should anyone with a shred of decency. "Enough to make sure your neighbour doesn't starve or die of malnutrition" isn't too much, it's barely enough. Yes, the US *does* have a very different system, you couldn't magically transform from one into the other. Doesn't mean it an't serve as an example of how to go about things for a reform.
Anyway, anyone thinking it's either the Free Market or the Canadian system is an idiot who's using bifurcation to avoid an actual debate. There ARE plenty of other options, that have been proven to work (mostly. No system is perfect).
Once again; Belgium has the best emergency medical care in the EU, and we have a semi-socialist evil system. Tough; it works, and thousands of English people come here yearly to get treatment they can't get from the nHS in time or at the quality they want - and even they, who *do* pay full price (whereas Belgians pay full price and get refunded about 85%), pay less than they would in some other countries.
Our social security is a lot more expensive than that of the US - of course. But not in the "800 dollars a month a person" neighbourhood.
And, to stop a couple of the eternal counterpoints: no, our population isn't in a better condition - our age pyramid is worse than yours. Yes, we are facing a shortage in about 10-15 years - and political analysts have been saying for years the government should've invested more in medical care and social security to build funds for the future. Politicians being short-sighted idiots isn't a failing of our medical system. No, I don't think what I pay is too much - nor should anyone with a shred of decency. "Enough to make sure your neighbour doesn't starve or die of malnutrition" isn't too much, it's barely enough. Yes, the US *does* have a very different system, you couldn't magically transform from one into the other. Doesn't mean it an't serve as an example of how to go about things for a reform.
Just as a point of order, most individual health insurance plans cost $200-$400.
$300-$500 for individual and spouse.
$600 and up for families. In my family my insurance costs about $100 per individual, although I'm only paying $300/mo - the company I work for pays the remaining portion.
So the per-individual cost is still around $200-$400/mo.
-Adam
Which is about the same as we pay. But we get much, much better coverage for it - and universal. And with silly things like the maximum tab - once your medical expenses get up to a certain amount (based on income, age, etc - hey, it's a socialist system :-p), everything necessary after that is reimbursed 100%.
Note: "necessary" is a qualifier usually taken quite broadly. A dental check-up once a year, a mammography once a year, prostate examination once a year once you're over...ehh...50, I think, and so on. It's not necessary" in the "Yes, it might save your arm, but you can live without that, too, right?" way of viewing things. Though it doens't cover everything, of course.
Note: "necessary" is a qualifier usually taken quite broadly. A dental check-up once a year, a mammography once a year, prostate examination once a year once you're over...ehh...50, I think, and so on. It's not necessary" in the "Yes, it might save your arm, but you can live without that, too, right?" way of viewing things. Though it doens't cover everything, of course.
Yeah maaaaan, we wouldn't have people dying if hospitals were free.
Yeah maaaaan, we wouldn't have people dying if hospitals were free.
[/QUOTE]What are you on about? That's a hell of a reach from what I said.
C
crono1224
Yeah maaaaan, we wouldn't have people dying if hospitals were free.
[/QUOTE]What are you on about? That's a hell of a reach from what I said.[/QUOTE]
Clearly you didn't quantify your statement properly. Because now, you are claiming obamacare is a cureall CAN YOU BACK THAT UP?
- Status