how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | reply to amigo_boy
Re: Healthcare Reform--- the REAL agenda said by amigo_boy: In a previous post you said Americans should travel for $5 office visits available in other countries. Then you replied with some cases of foreign kids coming here to receive the best healthcare in the world (as charity). I'm not understanding the point your making. Mark NO, I think you are mixing me up with someone else.
I never said
Americans should travel for $5 office visits available in other countries.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by mrkevin:NO, I think you are mixing me up with someone else. I never said Americans should travel for $5 office visits available in other countries.
You said: "If these other countries have such a wonderful level of health care, let's start sending those people there."
For some people (who can't afford our "best healthcare system in the world"), affordable basic care in those other countries might be desirable if the alternative is no care here (or, ER care after a problem becomes critical, and the individual is prepared to go bankrupt).
Clearly, going to other countries for affordable care isn't an option for those who would benefit the most.
However, coming to the US for "the best healthcare in the world" is an option for those who can afford it.
But, I'm not sure how some charity cases affect either point. Just because some doctors perform charity care on foreign children doesn't prove the already proven point that we have the best healthcare in the world (if you can afford it).
Nor does it disprove that the lower-quality basic care available in their own countries would be beneficial to many Americans who can't afford our monopolistic medical system of higher quality.
Mark | |
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | said by amigo_boy:You said: "If these other countries have such a wonderful level of health care, let's start sending those people there." I wasn't talking about Americans...
said by amigo_boy:For some people (who can't afford our "best healthcare system in the world"), affordable basic care in those other countries might be desirable if the alternative is no care here (or, ER care after a problem becomes critical, and the individual is prepared to go bankrupt). Come on...you do not see people here getting turned away from heath care.
Maybe we should institute some Tort reform to control costs instead of letting Uncle Sam bull his way through our heath care system.
said by amigo_boy:However, coming to the US for "the best healthcare in the world" is an option for those who can afford it. It isn't going to be an option to anyone once the government takes over.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by mrkevin:Come on...you do not see people here getting turned away from heath care. I believe what you're saying is that if an individual is sick enough they will be treated by the ER. Or, if they become poor enough they can receive welfare Medicaid.
Until those conditions occur, they're effectively "turned away from healthcare," right? They can't purchase what they can afford: lessor choices which have been banned during the process of creating our "best healthcare system in the world," which is effectively a monopoly providing higher quality than these people would be willing to buy, and which is regularly accepted as normal around the world.
For three examples, see the one-hour documentary: Critical Condition.
said by mrkevin:It [people coming to the US for healthcare they can't buy in their own countries] isn't going to be an option to anyone once the government takes over. Welcome to the club! Americans already have that problem today. As America's healthcare industry gained exclusive control of the market (with the help of legislation to criminalize competition) millions of Americans lost options which were useful to them too.
We're not talking about establishing a new principle of coercion. Just spreading around the coercion that exists today.
Mark | |
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | said by amigo_boy:I believe what you're saying is that if an individual is sick enough they will be treated by the ER. Or, if they become poor enough they can receive welfare Medicaid. Until those conditions occur, they're effectively "turned away from healthcare," right? They can't purchase what they can afford: lessor choices which have been banned during the process of creating our "best healthcare system in the world," which is effectively a monopoly providing higher quality than these people would be willing to buy, and which is regularly accepted as normal around the world. This is a lie. People are not being turned away from being treated.
asking me to watch a PBS documentary is like me asking you to watch a Fox news documentary.
PBS doesn't have much credibility with me.
said by amigo_boy:We're not talking about establishing a new principle of coercion. Just spreading around the coercion that exists today. Then you're not really interested in reform.
Meet the new boss...same as the old boss.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by mrkevin:This is a lie. People are not being turned away from being treated. The documentary follows three uninsured people. It's pretty clear they're denied healthcare as they try to pursue the American Dream (job, home, family, etc.).
As I said to PNH, you don't get something for nothing. You can't use Public Law to establish a medical monopoly, and set quality standards higher than they would be if left to consenting buyers and sellers. Something has to give. The documentary demonstrates how the "give" are people choosing between treatment (and routine healthcare which could have minimized their eventual crisis) and what most of us take for granted as basic comforts of life.
said by mrkevin:said by amigo_boy:We're not talking about establishing a new principle of coercion. Just spreading around the coercion that exists today. Then you're not really interested in reform. Meet the new boss...same as the old boss. Just spreading "the boss" around more equitably. The socially-enhanced medical system benefiting all of society instead of some. To me, that's "reform" until someone has a better solution.
As I've said before, maybe when it's everyone's problem we'll be more willing to discuss real solutions instead of pandering to class warfare.
It's not like we haven't had 16 years (since "Hillary care"). Why wait another 16?
Mark | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to mrkevin
said by mrkevin:asking me to watch a PBS documentary is like me asking you to watch a Fox news documentary. I watch Fox occasionally. Limbaugh too.
I like to have my ideas challenged. That's why I said I don't usually watch Moyers because his program is too comfortably liberal for my tastes (despite the fact that I lean liberal).
I don't limit myself to faith-building venues. You should try it sometime.
Mark | |
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME
1 edit | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:The documentary follows three uninsured people. It's pretty clear they're denied healthcare as they try to pursue the American Dream (job, home, family, etc.). I watched the documentary:
Joe is getting free medicine samples from his doctor
Joe is seeing a doctor for his liver disease (not being turned away)
Karen needs a operation.
DR. ELLEN BLAIR SMITH: Karen, you're going to meet the financial councils, you'll meet all sorts of people who'll help you working on the bill part....
KAREN DOVE: Ok.
DR. ELLEN BLAIR SMITH: But you know, right now it's bills be damned, let's do this.
KAREN DOVE: Ok, thank you.
This doesn't sound like she's being turned away
Now she's on her way to surgery...
DR. ELLEN BLAIR SMITH: Well let's go in there, let's get it out and fix you. Alright? See you back there.
KAREN DOVE: Alright. Thank you, Doctor...
If we had some kind of medical system where everybody could get in there and be tested, they could stop some of this heartache. We do Karen, you just got to get in there and do it
SHE IS NOT BEING TURNED AWAY!!!!!
CARLOS BENITEZ [Spanish in English subtitles]:
1st have some pride you're an American citizen and speak English ESPECIALLY when you are making an American documentary....
I make 45 thousand dollars
I had insurance, they were giving me it was just medication that you can buy over the counter. And expenses is starting to go up, rent it went up, so it got to the point that I just needed that money that I was paying for the insurance in order to support my family. So I had to discontinue the insurance.
So Carlos discontinued his insurance, it wasn't taken from him.
Side note:
My wife just said "Dam 45,000, I need to be a chef"...
And Dr. Dowling tell me, "No, I don't think you're going to work, right now you're going to go to the hospital, because on your way to work you can die."
mmmm, sounds like he is being turned away.
OK I watched 18 minutes of it before I realized. you're right...
HAHAHA Just kidding!
I watched it and couldn't see where these people were being refused care or being treated badly.
All I see is compassion for these folks.
*Oh maybe Carlos needed the money for the huge stereo system behind him or his brand new car.
These people are better off than I am for CS
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by mrkevin:1. So Carlos discontinued his insurance, it wasn't taken from him. 2. Dam 45,000, I need to be a chef 3. mmmm, sounds like he is being turned away. 1. He said it only covered over-the-counter medications.
But, really, your position is that the people who lost their insurance due to no fault of their own (and ended up with pre-existing conditions which wouldn't be covered by any insurance company) are in a good place. They're getting care. "What's to complain about?" So, what does it matter that the chef gave up his insurance for whatever reason? Everyone should do that, right? 
2. $45k in Los Angeles isn't $45k in Aurora, Maine. For example, apartment rentals are twice the price. So, now you're talking $33k for a family of 4-5.
But, really, your position is that if someone has money for food or clothes, that's money they chose to spend on something other than healthcare. So, it's not the healthcare monopoly's fault, right?
3. That's a theme which you applied to each of the vignettes. For example, Mrs. Dove is told by her doctor "we're doing the operation. To heck with the bills."
Where was the doctor when the collection agencies began calling? Or, when the husband had a legacy of bills to pay after Dove's death?
If credit card companies operated like that it would be called predatory lending(!). "Don't worry about how you'll pay us back, we'll give you a pay-day loan." And then, a month later you find out you're paying 400% interest.
Remember, these people didn't merely experience high healthcare prices. They experienced higher prices throughout their lives as a result of their credit scores being ruined. (Higher home & auto insurance. Higher loan rates. Higher prices for rent. Fewer job opportunities.).
Mark | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to mrkevin
BTW: What did you think of this part:
said by JOE STORNAIUOLO :
I don't want to live like this. I mean, can't get Social Security, I'm too young. Can't get welfare, make a little bit too much.
...
Oh without a liver, I'm not going to get better. Liver transplant costs about 150 to 200 thousand dollars. If you're broke, you could get the medicine, you could get the hospital, everything else. But if you work hard all your life you get nothing.
To me, this seems like the crux of the problem. There is no middle ground. If you're living the American Dream you'll do pretty good (if your insurance company doesn't deny claims). If you're on welfare you'll do pretty good. But, if you're anywhere in between you'll only last as long as your health.
The irony is that Republicans are all wee-wee'd up about end-of-life counseling. But, indifferent to how our socially-constructed healthcare "market" puts people in a position like Joe. Making end-of-life decisions out of pragmatism (to save money on insulin, or not leave their spouse in debt).
Without any counseling (unless you consider collection agencies counselors).
Mark | |
 rogunitUhhh, Sir?Premium
join:1999-09-18
Phoenix, AZ | reply to amigo_boy
Got quiet in here pretty quick  | |
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:He said it only covered over-the-counter medications. No, Carlos said he was only being prescribed over-the-counter drugs. and in my mind he figured what the hell am I paying for health insurance for and got rid of it. Everything in the world isn't anything if you don't have your health. And him with kids he owes it to his kids to be healthy to provide (whatever) to them
I would rather be poor and healthy then rich and sick.
said by amigo_boy:$45k in Los Angeles isn't $45k in Aurora, Maine. For example, apartment rentals are twice the price. So, now you're talking $33k for a family of 4-5. The cost of living in Maine isn't cheap and wages are low.
I have a mortgage
Property taxes
I have to maintain my own:
water
sewer
trash
my basement is leaking water through the wall. It is going to cost me thousands of dollars to have someone come over and dig up the side of my foundation and fix it...I wish I could call the maintenance man...
said by amigo_boy:But, really, your position is that if someone has money for food or clothes, that's money they chose to spend on something other than healthcare. So, it's not the healthcare monopoly's fault, right? Well kinda.
I understand people need food, clothing shelter, but they also need their health. And they put it at the bottom of the list and then shout "WAIT I AM A VICTIM OF SOCIETY". You can't have it both ways.
said by amigo_boy:That's a theme which you applied to each of the vignettes. For example, Mrs. Dove is told by her doctor "we're doing the operation. To heck with the bills." Where was the doctor when the collection agencies began calling? Or, when the husband had a legacy of bills to pay after Dove's death? But your main premise is that these people are not being treated or being given substandard care. It's just not true.
What about where she said I can pay $40.00 a month and they said OK.
Christ, I have a co-pay on my insurance higher than that.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | | |
|
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:BTW: What did you think of this part: said by JOE STORNAIUOLO :
I don't want to live like this. I mean, can't get Social Security, I'm too young. Can't get welfare, make a little bit too much.
...
Oh without a liver, I'm not going to get better. Liver transplant costs about 150 to 200 thousand dollars. If you're broke, you could get the medicine, you could get the hospital, everything else. But if you work hard all your life you get nothing.
COME ON.
Did Joe really think he was living the American dream by being a Door man? Nothing against Door men, but really, and honestly a man who opens doors all day and tips his hat doesn't aspire to much.
said by amigo_boy:The irony is that Republicans are all wee-wee'd up about end-of-life counseling. I am 'wee-wee'ed' all up about that.
and
insuring 12 million illegal aliens
and
rationing of care
and
A huge cost increase
and
giving government more control over my life.
Yah I am wee wee'ed up about all of it.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to mrkevin
said by mrkevin:No, Carlos said he was only being prescribed over-the-counter drugs. He said: "Many years ago when I had insurance, they were giving me it was just medication that you can buy over the counter. "
That could mean the insurance company wasn't covering anything, which occurs frequently today. People pay premiums only to have claims denied.
It could also mean he didn't see any value in it. For example, it could have been an HMO many years ago which commonly persuaded participating doctors to limit treatment (and prescriptions) to cut costs.
He should have paid for insurance that he wasn't getting a benefit from?
said by mrkevin:said by amigo_boy:But, really, your position is that if someone has money for food or clothes, that's money they chose to spend on something other than healthcare. So, it's not the healthcare monopoly's fault, right? Well kinda. Not "kinda." You've said that people without insurance are in good shape. They aren't denied care. Why should it matter how they lost their insurance when, according to you, they'll still get healthcare?
said by mrkevin:I understand people need food, clothing shelter, but they also need their health. And they put it at the bottom of the list and then shout "WAIT I AM A VICTIM OF SOCIETY". You can't have it both ways. You are applying Maslove's "hierarchy of needs" as if it is an uncoerced market. It's very coerced through Public Law (some people imposing standards and higher prices upon others). There is a basis to say victimization is occurring. A loss of "market" choices, resulting in "choosing" between over-expensive healthcare or food, housing, clothing. That's not much of a choice.
Imagine if we gave the collision repair industry a monopoly. Resulting costs of fixing fender benders would be higher than a free market. As a result, the distribution (insurance) of that cost risk would be higher than a free market. Would it really be an uncoerced "choice" when people choose food and clothing over auto insurance?
You'll say we can't have a free market of healthcare goods and services. It's different than collision repair. You could be right. But, that's just the justification for socializing the market. It doesn't change the fact that it's been socialized (a majority telling a minority that their market choices are illegitimate). Essentially denying them access to goods and services which would have been available (as they weigh their "hierarchy of needs.").
said by mrkevin:But your main premise is that these people are not being treated or being given substandard care. It's just not true. People aren't being treated because they elect not to seek preventative/diagnostic treatment because they can't afford it. As in the case of Mrs. Dove, they wait until it's advanced.
In your world, delaying doesn't mean anything. If they ultimately receive care (from the ER, etc.) then they received care. To you, the care is the same as if they were insured. That's false.
said by mrkevin:What about where she said I can pay $40.00 a month and they said OK. Christ, I have a co-pay on my insurance higher than that. That was for one doctor visit costing $1000+. Compound that by multiple visits. A hospital stay. The costs of an anesthesiologist. Medicine costing almost $2000 per month.
How many $40.00 a month payments does that add up to? When they only earn $14k per year?
Mark | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to mrkevin
said by mrkevin:COME ON. Did Joe really think he was living the American dream by being a Door man? Nice. I wish Republican representatives would come out and tell it like you do. That would help shape public opinion.
For example, we've established that the Right Wing is ok with Eugenics (determining the worth of someone's life, and whether to preserve it).
The doorman doesn't deserve the same access and quality of care as the desk clerk.
So much for feigned shock over "rationing."
Mark | |
mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:He said: "Many years ago when I had insurance, they were giving me it was just medication that you can buy over the counter. " That could mean the insurance company wasn't covering anything, which occurs frequently today. People pay premiums only to have claims denied. To me that means he was being prescribed Motrin and Tylenol these are over the counter like aspirin. I don't know of any insurance plans that pay for Tylenol or cough syrup ect.
said by amigo_boy:It could also mean he didn't see any value in it. He should have paid for insurance that he wasn't getting a benefit from? Ahhh, I guess he see the value in it now, and yes he should have been paying premiums and he wouldn't be in this mess.
Now it's someone else's problem to come to the rescue and pick up the pieces...Blahhhh
said by amigo_boy:You are applying Maslove's "hierarchy of needs" Thank You...
said by amigo_boy: That's not much of a choice. Life is all about choices.
What about my choice of having government LEAVE ME ALONE.
I guess the minority dictates to the majority and everyone loses in the end.
--
An army of sheep led by a lion, will always defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | said by mrkevin:Ahhh, I guess he see the value in it now, and yes he should have been paying premiums and he wouldn't be in this mess. You don't know that. There are plenty of cases of insurance companies denying claims (after years of paying premiums) as "pre-existing conditions." People have been denied coverage for heart disease because they saw a doctor 20 years earlier for chest pain.
But, again, according to you, people without insurance are receiving perfectly good healthcare. It shouldn't matter how he lost his insurance. Carlos, Joe and Karen are (or were, now that two are dead) receiving healthcare. No problem, right?
said by mrkevin:Now it's someone else's problem to come to the rescue and pick up the pieces...Blahhhh If you're making an argument for mandatory health insurance, I agree. It's human nature to choose a widescreen TV over insuring against problems that don't affect us at that very moment. That's why we have mandatory retirement (Social Security) and auto insurance.
However, in the case of healthcare, it's a socially-created monopoly with artificially higher prices than a "free market" would produce. Compelling people to buy into a coerced "market" would be the ultimate of coercion. We create a monopoly and then force the customer base to pay the extorted price?
said by mrkevin:said by amigo_boy: That's not much of a choice. Life is all about choices. When society stepped in and gave the medical industry a monopoly, it's not the kind of "choice" that Maslow described in his "hierarchy of needs." When the market is limited to produce one kind of goods and services, from one kind of accrediting agency, schooled by one kind of education facility, this upsets Maslow's theory.
For example, the resulting higher prices (due to the monopoly's control of supply relative to demand) cause younger people to opt out of insurance. Since they are less likely to be sick, they would alter the risk pool (and costs). Their absence only raises prices for all.
You simply cannot use society to alter a "market" without winners and losers. Once you do that, it's impossible to apply "wants and needs" theory (as if an open market exists to choose from).
said by mrkevin:What about my choice of having government LEAVE ME ALONE. I guess the minority dictates to the majority and everyone loses in the end. I think the operative word is ME.
You seem to be ok with using Public Law to set medical standards higher than willing buyers and sellers would negotiate amongst themselves. And then claiming that people are merely "choosing" not to participate in the resulting socialized (and expensive) "market."
Mark | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:Imagine if we gave the collision repair industry a monopoly. Resulting costs of fixing fender benders would be higher than a free market. As a result, the distribution (insurance) of that cost risk would be higher than a free market. Would it really be an uncoerced "choice" when people choose food and clothing over auto insurance? We did. Your bumper is make of plastic and styrofoam unless you buy a pickup.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumper_(au···tandards | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by mrkevin:What about where she said I can pay $40.00 a month and they said OK. Christ, I have a co-pay on my insurance higher than that. That was for one doctor visit costing $1000+. Compound that by multiple visits. A hospital stay. The costs of an anesthesiologist. Medicine costing almost $2000 per month. How many $40.00 a month payments does that add up to? When they only earn $14k per year? Mark Well, lets follow Calvinist doctrine and say if you earn $14K a year, its because of God's will, and if your sick, its because of God's will, and God wants you dead, so its wrong for anyone to help you. | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to patcat88
said by patcat88:said by amigo_boy:Imagine if we gave the collision repair industry a monopoly. Resulting costs of fixing fender benders would be higher than a free market. As a result, the distribution (insurance) of that cost risk would be higher than a free market. Would it really be an uncoerced "choice" when people choose food and clothing over auto insurance? We did. Your bumper is make of plastic and styrofoam unless you buy a pickup. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumper_(au···tandards Collision repair people aren't required by law (threat of prison) to be trained. And, from the link you provided it looked like the industry pushed for lower standards (resulting in lower repair costs?).
That's the opposite of medical costs which have outpaced inflation for years.
Mark | |
|
