Should Americans be required to buy health insurance?
- Thread starter TheLonelySquire
- Start date
I said you have to work for what you get. Not buy it. No more bribes, or backroom deals. You have to earn what you get. No kind of hand outs or kick backs. No business as usual. Earn has to actually earn what they get and what they use.
What good does it do to deny a person basic healthcare? And since when did basic healthcare become "everything"?
Of course the flipside of that is, if you don't like what our duly elected representatives are doing in accordance with the basic principles of American society, then I'm sure you could find somewhere else to live. Maybe somewhere where you don't have to worry about that pesky voting?
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
That's a classic post. You can't get your party to agree on something so you blame the other party, as well as people who are not casting a vote in the process. Anyone but the people who actually can pass whatever they want.
Everyone is free to agree or disagree as they like, the problem is that the Senate has that stupid filibuster rule that neither party will get rid of because they are all power crazy. This goes to all of the Senators, if they would just grown up and just let people vote honestly then we would have a good bill that would be good for the country. Instead you have to make all these deals with 6 people that are DINO's in Republican states. So yes it is the 100 Senators fault that we have this crappy bill. Unlike a lot of people here I hold them all accountable for this mess, but I hold the people more responsible. When people really want change they will get off their butts and get change, until then they deserve what they get. It is just too bad I and others like me have to suffer until then.
You and others like you? Are you uninsured? If so, you really think it's right that other people should pay for your insurance? Just asking how you would justify this if it's indeed the case.
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
Hey, I actually agree with you to a point. Many Americans were too stupid and were blindly following the American Idol candidate. They will get hosed and many are realizing it right now. That's why hos #'s are dropping like a stone.
However, just because someone was elected doesn;t mean you can't fight against the policies of their administration.
Sure, go for it. But when Gertch accuses people of being un-American and suggests that anyone who feels different should leave his country then we've crossed the border out of productive discourse. And the only point of that sort of behavior appears to be to actively stifle real conversation.
Agreed. (I'm assuming we are excluding those that simply cannot work for physical or mental reasons.)
It's just one more item in the "everything" bin.
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
Well. it's not like there's many opinions changing here anyway.
That's a classic post. You can't get your party to agree on something so you blame the other party, as well as people who are not casting a vote in the process. Anyone but the people who actually can pass whatever they want.
Everyone is free to agree or disagree as they like, the problem is that the Senate has that stupid filibuster rule that neither party will get rid of because they are all power crazy. This goes to all of the Senators, if they would just grown up and just let people vote honestly then we would have a good bill that would be good for the country. Instead you have to make all these deals with 6 people that are DINO's in Republican states. So yes it is the 100 Senators fault that we have this crappy bill. Unlike a lot of people here I hold them all accountable for this mess, but I hold the people more responsible. When people really want change they will get off their butts and get change, until then they deserve what they get. It is just too bad I and others like me have to suffer until then.
You and others like you? Are you uninsured? If so, you really think it's right that other people should pay for your insurance? Just asking how you would justify this if it's indeed the case.
Simple. As others have told you before which you continue to ignore. I can give you a Christian reason, a humanitarian reason, a business reason, a practical reason, how many would it take to convince you? Apparently there are none, which is why it was always pointless to negotiate with the other side in the first place. I don't want health insurance reform, I want health care reform.
I don't want either. If anything I only want some price reform. And not by pooling but by making everyone pay their own way and keep insurance out of the non-catastrophic care.
But with yet another Islamic extremist trying to blow up a plane who was let on despite being on the watch list reinforces the truth that government is so inept I don't want them involved in my health care in any way. Definitely not directing my doctor.
You realize in countries that have UHC, we get to choose our own doctors, right?
And that the only time the government gets involved is
a) funding the public hospitals
b) paying the doctors and nurses who work in those hospitals
c) paying scheduled fee to the doctors, radiologist, pathology labs etc etc.
d) subsidizing the cost of some medications
At no time does the government have any say in the treatment of patient, the choosing of doctors or specialists.
I heard of one instance (from the partner of the doctor involved) where they a women with a massive hemorrhage following child birth. they pumped $300,000 worth of drugs into her - no calling on government minister, death panels or any such shit, no calling on insurance companies for the go ahead. They just went ahead with the treatment and saved the patient's life.
In fact because the government is so hands off with the choise of doctors there is a part of Adelaide South Australia where the doctor/patient ratio is only 500:1 because the doctors are allowed to say how many patients they take.
Yes there is a shortage of doctors but the Australian Medical Association has a lot to answer for along with the former conservative government. The AMA wanted fewer medical school places and the government gave it to them (while upping the HECS fees several hundred percent so any new graduate comes out with over $100,000 in debt).
Wouldn't surprise me if the AMA in the U.S also wanted a lid kept on the number of training places to protect the income of exiting doctors.
Of course given it takes 10 years to become a GP that patients pay the price.
They're not pushing a specific plan. They're pushing "coverage", which they all already have...so it's moot.
Alright, you can let your insurance comapany continue to direct your doctor. Either way there's a chance you could die and the poetic justice in there is just too delightful to pass up.
Yeah, I wouldn't want Amsterdam to choose my doctor here in the US either.
I'm surprised that some people seem to think distribution of medical services is more efficient when it's based on how much patients are willing to pay than when it's primarily based on necessity.
I guess medics should check people's wallets before starting triage.
I guess medics should check people's wallets before starting triage.
You might think that's a joke, but people really do worry about it. It's not unheard of for someone to scrounge around for their insurance card while being loaded onto an ambulance, or to try to refuse treatment because they know they can't pay.
Recent personal experience with this one, I've got; so does dad.
Dad -- His insurance is refusing to pay a lot of his bill from his heart attack cause the surgeon used a more expensive type of stent after discarding a cheaper stent due to it not working. Their issue: the surgeon should have made the cheaper stent work, and why put one in anyway when it didn't cure the problem, why couldn't the heart attack be treated by none invasive means. Plus the fact that Dad (whose heart stopped litterally as he walked into the ER, and the nurse came out and told my mom to call the family minister if we had one cause it didn't look good as they were carrying him back trying to get his heart going again) didn't get pre authorization before having a invasive treatment.
Me and the Mrs. -- The insurance company is limiting the OBGYN and we've found actually told the OBGYN NOT to offer any procedures without clearing it with the insurance company first, and if we're offered any uncovered options they may refuse to pay the bill at all.
Last edited:
