Mandatory Health Insurance part 3 - Page 17 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-01-2012, 01:34 AM   #321
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Chief Justice John Roberts Must Have Had an Epileptic Episode, Reason Increasingly Deluded Conservatives

The "epilepsy did it" theory is brought to you by conservative radio host Michael Savage, who implied on his radio show that Roberts' epilepsy-addled brain was ill-equipped to rule on the Affordable Care Act, because seizures make people change their political ideologies. The full quote, per Think Progress

" Let's talk about Roberts. I'm going to tell you something that you're not going to hear anywhere else, that you must pay attention to. It's well known that Roberts, unfortunately for him, has suffered from epileptic seizures. Therefore he has been on medication. Therefore neurologists will tell you that medication used for seizure disorders, such as epilepsy, can introduce mental slowing, forgetfulness and other cognitive problems. And if you look at Roberts' writings you can see the cognitive dissociation in what he is saying."

I don't blame epilepsy. There is more sinister force at work: Barack Obama. Obama obviously had men loyal to him threaten Chief Justice Roberts' family. What man would risk the safety of his family? Not I! That's the only explanation for his piss poor attempt to move the court to the center and support this socialist handout.
__________________

Steved1998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 02:16 AM   #322
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 04:13 PM
It must've been the Kenyan Mafia.
__________________

martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 02:42 AM   #323
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,568
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
mandating free health care at emergency rooms
This is bad...why?
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 03:06 AM   #324
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
This is bad...why?
If you can't afford the doctor, than you're not entitled to the treatment. Don't get sick if you can't pay for it.
Steved1998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 03:19 AM   #325
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,683
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
This is bad...why?
i would think the more pressing issue would be to mandate the charges emergency rooms, err, charge. it shouldn't cost several thousands of dollars for an overnight stay in an er, especially if there's no surgery involved or anything. not to mention how ridiculously inaccurate the billing process can be.

perhaps if we reigned in those charges it wouldn't be so ridiculous that just a fraction of people can't afford to pay their hospital bills, and perhaps too if people didn't get $20k bills there'd also be less people declaring bankruptcy because they had a heart attack.

but that's just me.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 06:27 AM   #326
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,568
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KhanadaRhodes View Post
i would think the more pressing issue would be to mandate the charges emergency rooms, err, charge. it shouldn't cost several thousands of dollars for an overnight stay in an er, especially if there's no surgery involved or anything. not to mention how ridiculously inaccurate the billing process can be.

perhaps if we reigned in those charges it wouldn't be so ridiculous that just a fraction of people can't afford to pay their hospital bills, and perhaps too if people didn't get $20k bills there'd also be less people declaring bankruptcy because they had a heart attack.

but that's just me.
Wholeheartedly agreed. Just...the idea of turning people away who are sick because they don't have the money seems so cold-hearted to me. Doctors are there to help you get better, not get rich off your illness.

Steved, if you're serious, that just flat out makes no sense and isn't at all realistic. If you're not, is there a particular reason for the trolling, or...?

I'm dead serious, some of the comments on this part of the boards of late are really bugging the crap out of me.
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 01:27 PM   #327
War Child
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 705
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
Wholeheartedly agreed. Just...the idea of turning people away who are sick because they don't have the money seems so cold-hearted to me. Doctors are there to help you get better, not get rich off your illness.

Steved, if you're serious, that just flat out makes no sense and isn't at all realistic. If you're not, is there a particular reason for the trolling, or...?

I'm dead serious, some of the comments on this part of the boards of late are really bugging the crap out of me.
I agree with you, Angela. People can't help it if they get sick. Or get into an accident. Or get physically or sexually assaulted.

People can't help it if they are just unfortunate. Trust me. I used to work in an ER/trauma center.
HBK-79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 01:36 PM   #328
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
You really know how to extrapolate. You must be very proud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha
And didn't elected legislators pass this law?
I'll further extrapolate out and predict that you won't make this argument when overturning statutes, ballot referendums and state constitutions concerning same-sex marriage is on the Supreme Court's docket.
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 01:47 PM   #329
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
This is bad...why?
If, as the argument goes, this new mandate, err, tax is only going to affect the 1% to 2% of "freeloaders" who can afford insurance but refuse to pay then why not, just like any other business, allow hospitals to collect on unpaid bills rather than cost-shifting that loss to those that do pay?

Why can the government collect a tax on these people but hospitals can't sue them for unpaid bills? Why not just cut out the middleman, government?

Oh wait, getting government MORE involved, not less, is the raison d'être of Obamacare.
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 03:19 PM   #330
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,546
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
If, as the argument goes, this new mandate, err, tax is only going to affect the 1% to 2% of "freeloaders" who can afford insurance but refuse to pay then why not, just like any other business, allow hospitals to collect on unpaid bills rather than cost-shifting that loss to those that do pay?
Sorry, strawman argument. There are plenty of employed young people who choose not to buy health insurance because they are "healthy," but they can't afford to pay their medical bills if they have a catastrophic injury or illness like cancer.
Danny Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 03:33 PM   #331
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,060
Local Time: 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500

I'll further extrapolate out and predict that you won't make this argument when overturning statutes, ballot referendums and state constitutions concerning same-sex marriage is on the Supreme Court's docket.
Because minority rights and health care are the same thing? Because the people of California voted to take away the health insurance of red heads?

Oh, wait, this is all just point scoring and my side vs. your side for the right. Feel free to continue to feel under siege.

You know, Israelis have universal health care.
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 04:46 PM   #332
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:13 AM
TBH, free entry to A&E, whatever about what happens later after a condition is diagnosed, just seems like a basic hallmark of a decent and civilised society. To call it socialism is just absurd. Charging for A&E is something only the privateer brigade, the "privatise everything" wingnuts, would think is a good idea. Didn't work in the 80s, doesn't make sense now either. Even Thatcher didn't go near the NHS.

As for Steve1998, he is obviously trolling or being ironic.
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 07:14 PM   #333
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I'll further extrapolate out and predict that you won't make this argument when overturning statutes, ballot referendums and state constitutions concerning same-sex marriage is on the Supreme Court's docket.

Dude, fucking chill.

purpleoscar seemed to be complaining that the Supreme Court (I refuse to use that hideous acronym) was legislating. I was pointing out that the law that was upheld had been legislated. That's all.
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 08:39 PM   #334
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Boy View Post
Sorry, strawman argument. There are plenty of employed young people who choose not to buy health insurance because they are "healthy," but they can't afford to pay their medical bills if they have a catastrophic injury or illness like cancer.
1) The employed, "young and healthy" need the option of catastrophic, high deductible insurance. If they don't buy that then they are gambling in a manner no different than not buying insurance on their house or saving for retirement. If one chooses to act irresponsibly with their money I lose a certain deal of economic compassion for them.

2) This law now forces the employed, "young and healthy" to buy comprehensive insurance (which actuarially and in reality most won't need) or pay the tax. Obamacare enforces community rating on the "young and healthy" which means their premium is the same as a 55 yo with diabetes, hypertension and a history of heart attacks. In the name of fairness of course.
I wonder at what point the "young and healthy" will realize they are the revenue patsies in this scheme?
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 08:49 PM   #335
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
1) The employed "young and healthy" need the option of catastrophic, high deductible insurance. If they don't buy that then they are gambling in a manner no different than not buying insurance on their house or saving for retirement. If one chooses to act irresponsibly with their money I lose a certain deal of economic compassion for them.
So you're arguing that these people should be denied care then. Because that's the only way the housing/saving for retirement analogy works. They should have not been so short sighted as not to purchase catastrophic care so they should be turned away at the ER door no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
2) This law now forces them to buy comprehensive insurance or pay the tax. I wonder at what point the "young and healthy" will realize they are the revenue patsies in this scheme?
Prior to this law the tax came in the form of higher healthcare costs to cover the costs of those who show up in the emergency room and can't pay. I suppose I understand, given your distaste for the government, why you would prefer to keep those costs being passed on in the private sector rather than via a government tax, but lets not pretend that we haven't been paying for the uninsured all along.
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 08:50 PM   #336
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,546
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500

1) The employed "young and healthy" need the option of catastrophic, high deductible insurance. If they don't buy that then they are gambling in a manner no different than not buying insurance on their house or saving for retirement. If one chooses to act irresponsibly with their money I lose a certain deal of economic compassion for them.

2) This law now forces the employed "young and healty" to buy comprehensive insurance (which actuarially and in reality most won't need) or pay the tax. I wonder at what point the "young and healthy" will realize they are the revenue patsies in this scheme?
Of course they are the revenue source. No health insurance plan works if only old sick people are paying premiums. And someday, those young healthy people will be old and sick.

I suppose you would like to get rid of social security as well.
Danny Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 09:10 PM   #337
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
So you're arguing that these people should be denied care then. Because that's the only way the housing/saving for retirement analogy works. They should have not been so short sighted as not to purchase catastrophic care so they should be turned away at the ER door no?
I didn't say denied care or asked to pay up front. I said not resolved of responsibility in the same way someone leaving a restaurant or gas station without paying isn't granted immunity because "they don't want to pay."
And I'm talking about bills that, in most cases, that total less then 6 months income. The same way someone failing to pay their income tax isn't forgiven.

By the way, the individual mandate at one time pushed by some Republicans as a response to Hillarycare, it was a mandate to buy high deductible insurance or post a bond that health care providers could use for reimbursement. An altogether different animal than the Obamacare mandate.


Quote:
Prior to this law the tax came in the form of higher healthcare costs to cover the costs of those who show up in the emergency room and can't pay. I suppose I understand, given your distaste for the government, why you would prefer to keep those costs being passed on in the private sector rather than via a government tax, but lets not pretend that we haven't been paying for the uninsured all along.
I haven't been, it's called cost-shifting. Another form of cost-shifting is when Medicare or Medicaid cuts back on reimbursement rates and that loss of revenue is then passed on to private payers. Expect more of that one in the future.
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 09:23 PM   #338
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,546
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I didn't say denied care or asked to pay up front. I said not resolved of responsibility in the same way someone leaving a restaurant or gas station without paying isn't granted immunity because "they don't want to pay."
And I'm talking about bills that, in most cases, that total less then 6 months income. The same way someone failing to pay their income tax isn't forgiven.
They do get billed, and their accounts even get handed over to collection agencies, but a lot of it never gets paid and the cost gets passed on to the insured. Unreimbursed care has only been going up and up since the economy has been in the shitter.
Danny Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 09:31 PM   #339
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I didn't say denied care or asked to pay up front. I said not resolved of responsibility in the same way someone leaving a restaurant or gas station without paying isn't granted immunity because "they don't want to pay."
And I'm talking about bills that, in most cases, that total less then 6 months income. The same way someone failing to pay their income tax isn't forgiven.
The situations you are describing are again, not analogous. When you go to a restaurant or a gas station is not even potentially a life-threatening situation. If you can't afford to go out to eat, eat at home. As for gas, if you're driving off without paying that is intentional theft in a way that going to the ER with chest pains is not. Likewise with tax evasion.

As for less than six months income, for some of us a hospital bill totaling one months income would be a serious problem. Now when you start talking about bills less than a hundred bucks, well, yeah most people who "can't afford it" aren't really trying. But we both know even routine health cares costs aren't even remotely that cheap.


Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I haven't been, it's called cost-shifting. Another form of cost-shifting is when Medicare or Medicaid cuts back on reimbursement rates and that loss of revenue is then passed on to private payers. Expect more of that one in the future.
How is the cost shifting here? Who was paying the costs of the uninsured before? Who is paying the cost now?

And a word on these "young and healthy" that don't want to buy insurance. Typical of youth (with no offense intended to youthful posters here) to assume that they are invincible, that "it will never happen to them" and so decline to buy insurance. Isn't that the height of irresponsibility?
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 11:11 PM   #340
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,060
Local Time: 06:13 PM
5 years ago I was in a weird, freakish accident while I was out being young and healthy (swimming laps). I also had, and continue to have, a relatively high paying job (but no benefits) which afforded me the ability to buy private insurance on my own. If the accident had happened 1-2 years earlier, I only had catastrophic coverage. And there was a period when I had no insurance. A week in the ICU even with health insurance cost me over $2k, and the "real" cost was $17k. Therapy and a permanent injury plus medication that I must now take (flawless health history beforehand), has cost me at least $40k over the past 5 years. AND I PAY $250 A MONTH ON PRIVATE INSURANCE. I can afford it because im a childless homo with a liberal arts degree (horror) who works an urban elite snob evil media job that nets me significantly more than $40k a year ... What do other people do? Like people in red states with high unemployment and far, far higher health risks (like unwanted pregnancy and smoking)?
__________________

Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×