cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advisor

Re: Is this what you had in mind?

Jump to solution

That may be true, however, one more wrong doesn't make the other side right, either.  One forgets how easy it can be to move from the healthy category to being sick and in need of medical treatment.  Suddenly, finances get sucked dry without a larger pool to draw from.  "pre-existing" condition is a death sentence.  How can that be right?

0 Kudos
Advisor

Re: Is this what you had in mind?

Jump to solution

I wrote; Today, we are far enough removed from our Judeo/Christian ethical moral roots that most do not even think in these terms.  I find it ironic that evangelicals who believe strongly in God and believe that sin will be punished in the hearafter are so quick to abandon a behavior that recognized the moral imperative for social action, like health care.  That's why I do not believe their religious commitment to righteousness is genuine.  It's a hypocritical stand, like standing before one's parent, holding a cookie and denying it's even there.

 

The issue of morality has to do with how we treat our fellow man.  Re-read what I wrote.  The behavior I'm talking about is abandoning the practice of pooling policy holders, which lowers risk premiums for all and assists those who become ill.  When one person gets sick, all provide the revenue to pay for the services.  The abandonment of sick to the high cost of health care is the immoral act. 

 

Face this fact; we all get sick, eventually.  Nobody survives to live in their bodies forever.  We all are prone to the ravages of aging and illnesses.  Some just have less challenges early but eventually the odds even out as time goes by. 

 

Self interest drives us to abandon the weak.  Compassion motivates us to do the right thing.  Hence, the calling out of those who believe in a morality, a behavior that is in conflict with the practice of abandoning people who get sick.

0 Kudos
Advisor

Re: Supreme Court Decision & Farming

Jump to solution

What's the difference between the universal plan you would support and Obama's plan?  Not taking sides, but seriously interested in what difference "universal" coverage would be different than the legislated plan now in effect.

0 Kudos
Advisor

Not M'wha, Kay

Jump to solution

Not me, Kay!  Not a walking sack of chemicals.  I do take two supplemental doses that replaces what my body is no long making like it used to. 

0 Kudos
Veteran Advisor

Re: Supreme Court Decision & Farming

Jump to solution

I'm looking at it from a different perspective.  We (as in taxpayers, and those with insurance)  ALREADY pay for emergency care, and hospitalization, and pre-natal care for everyone, already because those without means to pay, and no insurance do not get turned away.  We pay their care, one way or another, in higher taxes, and/or higher insurance.

My idea would be to make the emergency care, hospitalization, pre-natal, and medically necessary prescription drugs covered for everyone, and pretty much that would be all.  If you want things like a private room, brand name drugs, organ transplants, cosmetic surgery, etc, etc, you would pay for that yourself, or buy up a supplement to cover it.  Much like the idea of food stamps (in my mind) should provide enough to keep you well fed and healthy, but not buy lobster and porterhouse, this would be the same way, a very simple, basic hospitalization and care plan for what is medically necessary, but no-frills.  Also, there would be a co-pay of some sort, for every visit.  My sister and sister in law both work at a hospital (different ones) and they BOTH say that there are people on Medicaid (and a lesser extent Medicare) who come into an ER, with a headache that won't go away, just for the 'free' aspirin.  One would even call for an ambulance, so she didn't have to drive.  If she had to pay just $5 for the aspirin, and $50 for the ambulance ride, she would have gotten it herself, or had a friend or family member get it for her, and not waste the county's money.  It costs quite a bit for that sort of thing, as they need to sterilize the ER and ambulance every time someone not 'clean' gets in one.  History has shown, when you make things free free free, you get abuses on top of abuses.

 

Lastly, I'm not saying I'm advocating for this, as much as I am saying that if a universal plan is going to be passed anyway, I would like it to be something like this.  Obama's plan did not have proper review, and because of it, there is stuff in there that surprises people.  Before it was written, who knew about the 1099 rules?  What else is going to come forth from the bill, that Nancy Pelosi said they must pass into law 'so we know what's in it'?  Shouldn't we know what's in it, before we vote for it?

MY plan would be as simple as possible, with strong penalties for defrauding the system.

 

 

 

0 Kudos
Veteran Advisor

Re: Not M'wha, Kay

Jump to solution

I went to a wedding reception last night, and a guy siting across the table where we were eating the dinner, said something about it being his time for his medication, and he had a whole handful of pills.  I kind of know the guy, and he must have noticed the look of surprise on my face, because he commented that his Doctor had him on 7 different medications.

0 Kudos
Honored Advisor

Re: Supreme Court Decision & Farming

Jump to solution
Any healthcare that does not contain personal responsibility & cost(even though lowered by % of income) and does not respect the right to opt out(without a safety net), is doomed to fail.

Smoke, thanks for good explanation to my goofy questions. As I reread your comments and wonder when things changed. Imo-- when we shifted responsibility to job & govt, healthcare done right has to b individual responsibility of participation in the pool.
Senior Advisor

Re: Supreme Court Decision & Farming

Jump to solution

Health care cost can never be brought under control with a 3rd party payer system. When something is free there is over use and no concern for cost. Any reform needs to be for an ever increasing number of patients responsible for an ever increasing share of their own bill. 300,000,000 Americans going over their bills looking for unreasonable cost is what keep unreasonable cost from entering the picture, especially when it comes to routine office visits, dental, and eye care. It is competition that delivers a quality product at an affordable price. Any government reforms needs to include high deductible insurance along with medical savings account. People save when there is an incentive to save.

0 Kudos
Honored Advisor

Re: Not M'wha, Kay

Jump to solution

If he's on that many and walking around, some of them are very likely treating side effects of some of the others.  The synergy of so many chemicals would scare the beejeebers out of me.  When you see how many are recalled and the lawsuits stemming from medications and many medical devices, it is not something to consider lightly. 

0 Kudos
Senior Advisor

Re: well smokey

Jump to solution

You have to deal with the diabetes, the blood pressure, the  chlorestral plus the blood thinner, the pee pill, the anxiety pill, the ed pill, & the pain pill.

 

You want to avoid all those pills? Don't go to a doctor.

View solution in original post

0 Kudos