America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

[LynahFan]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Amen. I'd be all for people declining to take health insurance if they also declined to use the ER or better yet could somehow be held responsible for all costs of their medical care. In the absence of something like that, then people need to have insurance so the rest of us aren't paying for their more expensive care for them.

I agree, but I'd even go one step farther - even if you HAVE insurance, if you go to the ER for a hangnail then you're still responsible for paying the costs. Of course, you can't get blood from a turnip, so if they don't have the money then they'd still end up in bankruptcy and they'd still be whining that it was the cost of their medical bills that was driving them to bankruptcy, when in fact it was their own choice to go to the ER that did it. Heaven forbid THEY take on any personal responsibility!

 

[unofan]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

choice

Well, until society makes it acceptable to let you die of your pre-existing condition because you chose not to get insurance, then society can remove your choice to not have it in the first place.

Otherwise, that choice is part of the problem. It's akin to wanting fire insurance after your house is already on fire. That doesn't work.

Listen, I agree with you in theory. If young people want to have the freedom to go without insurance because the risk of a catastrophic injury is minimal, fine. But then you have to accept the vastly negative consequences when those catastrophic injuries occur to a fraction of those who made that choice.

Since society doesn't allow the latter, then it can't have the former, either. Otherwise you only get the negatives of both parts of the equation.

 

[ScottM]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Listen, I agree with you in theory. If young people want to have the freedom to go without insurance because the risk of a catastrophic injury is minimal, fine. But then you have to accept the vastly negative consequences when those catastrophic injuries occur to a fraction of those who made that choice.

I tend to agree. When I was a freshman in college, I developed a hernia. However, due to some waiting period for my insurance it wasn't covered, so I had to pay the surgical bill myself. No small feat when you're paying your own way on a GI Bill. However, I always budgeted for at least a major medical policy throughout my undergrad, law and MBA "careers", since student health could take care of routine stuff, just so I didn't have to pay X/month to a medical collections outfit again. I know alot of twenty-somethings who forego even the cheapest policies offered, and few of them have ended up really paying for it.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

whatever... that $21,000 figure is bs if they think it over reaches 10% of the pool of insured.

that means if your plan cost (you and your employers payment) more than $1,750/mo it is taxed.

that's me... and i don't have an special plan.

so i'm paying anyways. whether some stiff used the ER and doesn't have insurance.. or i pay to get him insurance.

this ain't fixing chit!

everything in the details leads to higher costs.
none of this "if" "if" stuff either rover p )

 

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

I agree, but I'd even go one step farther - even if you HAVE insurance, if you go to the ER for a hangnail then you're still responsible for paying the costs. Of course, you can't get blood from a turnip, so if they don't have the money then they'd still end up in bankruptcy and they'd still be whining that it was the cost of their medical bills that was driving them to bankruptcy, when in fact it was their own choice to go to the ER that did it. Heaven forbid THEY take on any personal responsibility!

Can't speak for all plans, but that's usually what happens. If I go to the ER for a non life threatening problem, they're going to send the bill to my insurance company, who's going to send it to me. As I'm not bankrupt I'm on the hook for it if I went that route.

Regarding low income people who can't pay the full amount of an ER hangnail visit even though they have insurance, I'd say they should be billed some amount greater than what their insurance would have charged for an in-network visit to discourage them from doing that again.

 

[geezer]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

fwiw - a friend is working 12 hr. ER shifts as part of his RN training. His last shift, 12 people came in (small rural hosp.) He thought that one of the 12 actually needed to be there. 4 of them were just looking to replenish their addiction (painkillers, which they manage to get from docs who, I don't know, can't get rid of them otherwise?) One of these, as an example had blown thru 800 pain pills the prior 30 days (selling, maybe?). Another of the patients panicked when they woke up with "eye boogers"... he said "If you want to see what's wrong with health care in this country, spend some time in the ER".

This push is happening a lot sooner than I expected. The HC bill hasn't even been voted on yet! But, I'm glad he's giving some straight talk on the big picture agenda... in case anyone had doubts.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

So maybe instead of ER's that get everyone we have walk in clinics that triage the runny noses and allow the ER's to be, well, ER's?????

Maybe Uncle Sam should facilitate more of the walk in clinics (similar to ones at CVS and Wal-Mart or in store fronts) and provide the docs and/or PA's to staff it???

 

[leswp1]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

So maybe instead of ER's that get everyone we have walk in clinics that triage the runny noses and allow the ER's to be, well, ER's?????

Maybe Uncle Sam should facilitate more of the walk in clinics (similar to ones at CVS and Wal-Mart or in store fronts) and provide the docs and/or PA's to staff it???

Many ERs have 'fast track' which is where the hang nails are shunted to. Most ER copays are huge compared to Office visits. Problem is access in some areas (huge waits, not enough providers) and other times it is our ignorant, impetuous culture that fosters the feeling that you shouldn't have to wait for anyting, evah. Why see the primary tomorrow, I will go tonight.

 

[Bill]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

I was speaking to the fact that both did mail-in surveys to random physician samples. I am curious as to how IDB found their sample. I'd also like to know how complete the AMA database is when so many doctors aren't members.

edit: IBD methodology

I saw a figure recently (don't remember where) that said 18% of physicians belong to the AMA. If you wiki the AMA, it says 20% and declining.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters without health insurance favor passage of the health care plan proposed by President Obama and Congressional Democrats. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 504 uninsured voters found that 35% are opposed.
Those figures include 30% who Strongly Favor the plan and 26% who are Strongly Opposed.

 

[unofan]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters without health insurance favor passage of the health care plan proposed by President Obama and Congressional Democrats. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 504 uninsured voters found that 35% are opposed.

I'd be curious how many of those without insurance who are opposed to it are 18-34 and how many of them feel it would be unfair if any pre-existing conditions weren't covered as they got older.

My guess is the majority to both of those, which speaks to the problems in the system. You don't want to pay in when you're young and healthy, but still want to be covered when you're older after playing the odds earlier on.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

So maybe instead of ER's that get everyone we have walk in clinics that triage the runny noses and allow the ER's to be, well, ER's?????

Maybe Uncle Sam should facilitate more of the walk in clinics (similar to ones at CVS and Wal-Mart or in store fronts) and provide the docs and/or PA's to staff it???

There are urgent care facilities already operating at many clinics. They're like ERs, except that they're intended for the smaller issues that could/should be considered more routine.

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

There are urgent care facilities already operating at many clinics. They're like ERs, except that they're intended for the smaller issues that could/should be considered more routine.

In my experience, you avoid the ER at all costs because the waits are long, the hospital bureaucracy is Byzantine, and your fellow patients are some permutation of drunk, psychotic and belligerent. You go to UC for everything they have the equipment to handle, because the standard of care and service is superior.

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

...and your fellow patients are some permutation of drunk, psychotic and belligerent.

Yes, those stupid kids who break or tear things playing youth sports fit all 3 adjectives.

Your endless string of elitist vitriol shouldn't surprise me anymore, but once in a while it catches me off guard.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

There are urgent care facilities already operating at many clinics. They're like ERs, except that they're intended for the smaller issues that could/should be considered more routine.

True, but should there be more of them? And where are they currently concentrated? Should there be more in unprofitable areas that could be subsidized by the taxpayers?

Don't make government the solution to the problem. Government should only, when possible, facilitate solutions and trust the people to figure out how to provide the solutions.

 

[leswp1]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

True, but should there be more of them? And where are they currently concentrated? Should there be more in unprofitable areas that could be subsidized by the taxpayers?

Don't make government the solution to the problem. Government should only, when possible, facilitate solutions and trust the people to figure out how to provide the solutions.

People don't want to figure out solutions. They want what is best for them, not what is best for the town, state or country. Somewhere the ideal of selfless love for country went away. There are too many people that are out for #1 to let anyone make a viable solution.

 

[walrus]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

There are too many people that are out for #1 to let anyone make a viable solution.

Very true, yet folks continue to vote for them, go figure

 

[mookie1995]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

People don't want to figure out solutions. They want what is best for them, not what is best for the town, state or country. Somewhere the ideal of selfless love for country went away. There are too many people that are out for #1 to let anyone make a viable solution.

and is #1 a storefront "health clinic" in the hood? or the ER in one of the top hospitals in the country?

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

and is #1 a storefront "health clinic" in the hood? or the ER in one of the top hospitals in the country?

But if the storefront can deflect some/most of the less serious cases from the ER, then both are good and necessary for the well being of the community.

Costs SHOULD be lower in the storefront so everyone saves money.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

But if the storefront can deflect some/most of the less serious cases from the ER, then both are good and necessary for the well being of the community.

Costs SHOULD be lower in the storefront so everyone saves money.

well...

who's gonna line up first to go use the storefront then? (cause i'm going to Mass General)