RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


cadenas -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:12:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Yes, we should focus on those without health insurance who cant afford it (far less than 50 million by the way). Socializing and compromising the entire system to benefit the minority isnt the way to do it. And that isnt what is eating up health care premiums...end of life care is the single biggest component of total healthcare spending, representing 10-12% of all spending. 40% of Medicare spending is spent in the last 30 days of life.


End-of-life care is one problem we don't need to worry about too much, because it is usually covered by a very effiicent single-payer system. Known as Medicare.

The only exception to that is people who die young. And the solution is simple: avoid the end-of-life care by avoiding the end of life! Many people who die young die because they can't afford the medication they need.

Of course, there are also trauma victims - keeping somebody with third-degree burns or severe gunshot wounds alive is pretty expensive, and when he dies anyway, that, too, becomes "end-of-life" care cost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Once again you are back to the economic reality and bioethics crossroad, and cost/benefit analysis should drive those decisions. Once again, who is better suited to make those decisions, a patient, his family, and his doc or a government bureaucrat/computer program and his doc (who is incentivized to limit those costs).


I think you have two mistakes in your question. First, you forgot to include "single payer system" and "public option" in your list. And second, I'm surprised you, of all people, describe Cigna, Blue Cross, Aetna, Kaiser et. al. as government entities. Because right now, it's their bureaucrats and computer programs who make the decisions.





tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:25:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I did, you posted a snippet of what Obama said in NC. i included much more information, not designed to manipulate people into thinking its worse than it really is... nor as you tried to show, that he doesnt have any backing.. which he does.


That isnt even close to what I tried to show, or even imply. What I said, and what should have been clear from the introductory sentence, is not that he doesnt have backing, but that he doesnt want to acknowledge that someone as close to him as his own doctor disagrees with him.
And that is exactly what the snippet demonstrates.

Now we can rightfully point to this exchange and say "tazzygirl tries to use misinterpretations of what someone says to discredit them, intentional or not? you be the judge" (The jurys already come in on that issue wrt to RML and DK)


Not at all, i explore and try to find the truth behind what i am being told. a useful technique. perhaps one you need to look into yourself.

none of that changes the situation. people are dying due to lack of health care, and all you seem to care about is who is paying the most and the cost of care, instead of the cost to lives.




cadenas -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:26:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

There may be instances of ambiguity where the legitimacy of a claim is challenged, but it cannot be systemic policy to deny legitimate claims within an organization or their asses would be sued from now to forever,


Are you aware that health-insurance companies are largely immune from lawsuits under ERISA?

So the only avenue open is usually to file a complaint with the state. And those are being won - California won a large settlement against Blue Shield recently, as well as Kaiser and HealthNet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
not to mention that since employers are still the purchaser of the majority of health insurance, and the last thing any employer wants is their employees to be hassled, no company with that reputation could stay in business.


Why? The people affected by the hassles wouldn't be employees any more anyway, not after having been disabled due to the very long illness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Again, overpayments are far more frequent then underpayments in the hundreds of claim audits as the office of my former employer I worked out of showed.


Oh, so you have been working for the insurance industry? That would explain a lot.





cadenas -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:34:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
Id like to interject a question here.... why are there such a large number of people in the US not paying any taxes? 45%? thats bloody enormous 


Mostly because their incomes are either too low or too high. The tax system is set up so that the middle class pays far more taxes than the truly wealthy. Warren Buffet - the second richest man in the world after Bill Gates, and a very sensible man - complained about it recently.

He is worth $62 billion according to Forbes, but only pays taxes at a rate half that of his receptionist - and then only on $42 million of his income. I'm sure he could spend a few thousand dollars on tax advisor fees to shelter those $42 million as well if he really wanted to.




And still the top x% of earners pay 80% of all taxes?


That's hardly surprising when the same top x% also have 99% of the income.

In absolute $, Warren Buffet's around $6 million in taxes (out of $42 million) are more than his receptionist's probably around $20k in taxes (out of around $60k - I think that was how much she reportedly made - Buffet is very generous with his salaries)





tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:41:08 PM)

Speaking of income and taxes...

http://www.sandypost.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=121259857056476300

A surprising twist on who pays the most.




cadenas -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:51:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Problem #1: Current government run programs give direct access to specialists.
Solution #1: Force government run programs to mimic for-profit systems which require people to visit primary care physicians and be referred to specialists.


At first, I thought that this was an attempt at satire.

That is like saying "Problem #1 with my car is that it has a transmission."  Absolutely nonsensical.

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Problem #2: Current gov't run programs allow multiple doctors to run the same diagnostic test and pay for it multiple times.
Solution #2: Require the gov't run programs to subscribe to single-diagnostic tests that are then shared amongst providers.


I thought that, too, was satire. You mean, it's a problem that government doesn't ration health care, and the solution is to ration health care, even when it is advisable to re-run a diagnostic test?

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Problem #3: Current gov't run programs do not have lifetime caps on insurance which allow people to continue to make whatever healthcare choices without consequence.
Solution #3: Almost every private insurer has lifetime caps on insurance payouts.  Only the most expensive treatments over many years would every reach these lifetime caps.


That, too, seemed satirical at first glance. So again you are saying that "NOT rationing" is the problem, and the solution lies in rationing health care by private insurance?

By the way, it is very rare that the lifetime cap is reached over many years. It's usually incurred in a very short time by a very expensive illness, such as cancer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Problem #4: Emergency room care is the "primary care" for most below the poverty line recipients.
Solution #4: Make emergency room care via gov't run programs the same as private insurers.  If you aren't admitted, you pay a larger portion of the bill to prevent people from using ERs as physicians' offices.


That's when I realized that you were actually serious. You identified the problem, and then completely bombed the "solution".

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Problem #5: Everyone can't afford insurance.
Solution #5: Give everyone access to the discounts that insurers negotiate through a pay-minimally-for-minimum coverage resolution.  In the case of my wife's latest pregnancy, it reduced the hospital bill by 75%.


On the problem - agreed. But the solution basically says "if you can't afford insurance premiums that are higher than your mortgage payment, don't worry - you don't need insurance. We'll make sure that your hospital bill will only be twice the value of your home instead of five times."

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Make medical billing fraud a felony for all people involved.  Make medical billing fraud an offense that would revoke a medical license.


Already the law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
Publish medical outcomes publically so that doctors and hospitals that have better patient outcomes can profit from more patients.  One physician with which I was involved had such a high positive outcome rate that I was glad to wait 2.5 hours after my appointment time to see him...I knew I had the best doctor I could possible have.  There are many different ways to combat the rising rates of healthcare...and very few of them have been done in the largest gov't run healthcare plans yet.


Actually, you didn't. You just had the doctor who was best at turning away the sickest patients. The problem with these "outcome" statistics is that they don't control for the starting point. For instance, consider two oncologists. One of them accepts Medicare, the other one doesn't. Who do you think will have the better outcome? Simple: the one with the younger patients - the one who doesn't accept Medicare.

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
What makes us think that an inefficient bureaucracy is going to manage our healthcare any better?


Probably the fact that we already know they will do better. The private-for-profit bureaucracy costs well over 30% of your premiums. Medicare? 4%.

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking
SSI disability recipients routinely have to go to court to force Social Security to give them benefits that medical professionals have deemed necessary.  Do we really want the same situation for our healthcare system...some faceless bureaucrat telling you that you can't have X because it is unnecessary?


And that is different from our current system exactly how?





Lucylastic -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:56:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

So much for open dialogue and transparency:

""Nobody is talking about some government takeover of health care. I'm tired of hearing that," Obama said in Raleigh, N.C., on Thursday.
But Scheiner says that nobody has seen the details of that option, making it a hard sell for the president.
"We don't even fully know what the public option is going to be. If the public option is too good, patients who are sick will flock to it, and I'm not sure it will be able to support itself."
Scheiner almost had a chance to confront the president with his concerns. He was invited to a recent televised town hall meeting with Obama, but he says he was dropped from the program."

Wonder why his own doctor was dropped from the program.




I wonder why you didnt post this part of Sheiners chat, Willbur?
But then I forgot who we were talking about...

"So what makes Scheiner so special? He was Obama's personal physician for 22 years, and voted for the former Illinois senator in the 2008 presidential election. Scheiner thinks the president's plan doesn't go far enough. In his mind, the worst part of the proposal is that "private insurers continue to be a part of the health scheme." "Everybody keeps saying we don't want the government involved in health care," Scheiner said in an interview. "But the government is involved in Medicare, and it works." Scheiner would rather see the nation adopt a single-payer system like the ones in Canada and Europe. The financing system relies on one "payer" -- which could be a government-run agency -- to fund all health care costs billed by doctors, hospitals and other health professionals.I even added the link for you
oh and there is a clip too http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/30/obama.doctor/index.html
edited to get the link to work.
Lucy





tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 6:59:58 PM)

because its easier to make his point the other way, Lucy




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 7:25:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
And hurt the millions of people who work for them and the 10s of millions of people invested in them.


It seems that their "socialized medicine" doesn't exactly hurt other countries in this field. One of the leading manufacturer of MRI machines is Siemens, a German company. Germany invented the whole field of antibiotics and Aspirin. The HIV virus was discovered by a Frenchman. The heart transplant came out of South Africa. Most of the computerization in the medical field also came out of Germany (I was involved with one such project myself as a consultant). Germany is also leading in cancer research.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
So we've destroyed the high end travel industry, socialized banking and the car companies, why not move on and fuck up a another chunk of the economy.


Huh? How about a Caribbean cruise STARTING AT $23,938 on the Seabourne Odyssey? Or a transatlantic crossing on the Queen Mary 2 or Queen Elizabeth 2? A $250/day cruise with Silversea Cruises - and that is after a 50% price cut due to the economy.

And that really IS a luxury, unlike health care.

Socialized banking? Really? Where can I sign up?



Frankly I dont see the link between socialized medicine and medical discovery/technology in an era when the technology itself isnt socialized and is still profit driven. It is the imposition of price controls that I was talking about.

However, your post is so funny/pathetically inaccurate just in many of its "facts".

Antibiotics and aspirin? Socialized medicine? ROFL. First of all Germany doesnt have socialized medicine in a strict sense, it has competition between providers. And if you honestly posted that thinking that antibiotics and asprin were invented after any form of universal care in Germany youre just a clown. (well Ive actually known that for a while, but this just confirms it)

You are totally wrong about MRI. It was invented by an American born and trained doctor, Raymond Damadian, and his company FONAR was the first to produce them.

The HIV virus? Yes, discovered by a Frenchman. Of course he didnt know it caused AIDS. That was an American who made the link between HIV and AIDS.

Socialized medicine in South Africa? Frankly I dont know or care to research its state in the 60s, however, since it was a fucking disaster in the 40s, and given its current state, I would venture a guess that Christian Barnard was firmly entrenched in private medicine:


"South Africa's health system consists of a large public sector and a smaller but fast-growing private sector. Health care varies from the most basic primary health care, offered free by the state, to highly specialised hi-tech health services available in the private sector for those who can afford it.
The public sector is under-resourced and over-used, while the mushrooming private sector, run largely on commercial lines, caters to middle- and high-income earners who tend to be members of medical schemes (18% of the population), and to foreigners looking for top-quality surgical procedures at relatively affordable prices. The private sector also attracts most of the country's health professionals. "

Germany is "leading" in cancer research? By what measure? Says who?

Computerization...nothing to do with socialized or private medicine.

Nice prices...whats the occupancy rate? What about the occupancy in Las Vegas and financial troubles of MGM, on the verge of bankruptcy because Obama so thorughly demonized corporate trips there? How about the St Regis in California? The Greenbriar in WV? The Westin Scottsdale. All attributed to cancellations of corporate meetings because of the public "outrage" over corporate spending, not the overall economy.

Luxury hotels are rebranding themselves as "family spas" to overcome the stigma of a President whos a profligate spender on his own luxury.

Sign up for socialized banking? Youve already done it my friend, youve already done it.





tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 7:58:38 PM)

quote:

Nice prices...whats the occupancy rate? What about the occupancy in Las Vegas and financial troubles of MGM, on the verge of bankruptcy because Obama so thorughly demonized corporate trips there? How about the St Regis in California? The Greenbriar in WV? The Westin Scottsdale. All attributed to cancellations of corporate meetings because of the public "outrage" over corporate spending, not the overall economy.


your not serious, right?




rulemylife -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:01:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Sadly, rule, this part he is right on. ER's have become the primary care for underinsured people, and many insured as well.

quote:

"Uninsured Adults Presenting to U.S. Emergency Departments," which was conducted by researchers at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, found several reasons for emergency room overcrowding, including a decreasing number of emergency departments and inpatient hospital beds. But it also concluded that overcrowding is directly tied to the declining number of primary care physicians, said Manya Newton, M.D., M.P.H., an emergency department physician and one of the primary authors of the study.......

....During the past 10 years, ER use has more than doubled in the United States, increasing among the insured and uninsured, said Newton. In fact, the number of ER visits by insured patients has increased in that time from 35 visits per 100 people per year to 39 visits per 100 people annually, according to Newton.

"That doesn't sound like a huge increase, but when you are looking across millions of people in America, that is enough to drive crowding," she said. "One of the reasons that is happening is a lack of access to primary care."

Insured individuals technically have access to primary care physicians, but as these physicians become more overloaded and fewer in number, people are forced to seek care from emergency departments, said Newton.

"There is a decreasing number of primary care physicians, and that is hurting everyone -- the insured and the uninsured," said Newton.


http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/publications/news/news-now/clinical-care-research/20081125jama-er-use.html


I'm not sure how you are drawing that conclusion since even the quotes from your own link say it is not a problem of the uninsured but a shortage of primary care physicians.

One of the first assumptions addressed in the
JAMA article is that the uninsured are the major culprits behind ER use and overcrowding, an assumption dispelled by the study. "There are increasing numbers of everybody -- insured and uninsured -- coming to emergency departments," Newton said.

Another common assumption is that the uninsured are showing up in ERs with minor ailments or injuries. In reality, the uninsured tend to postpone care longer than their insured counterparts; as a result, they are sicker by the time they access emergency care, Newton said.








tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:22:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Sadly, rule, this part he is right on. ER's have become the primary care for underinsured people, and many insured as well.

quote:

"Uninsured Adults Presenting to U.S. Emergency Departments," which was conducted by researchers at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, found several reasons for emergency room overcrowding, including a decreasing number of emergency departments and inpatient hospital beds. But it also concluded that overcrowding is directly tied to the declining number of primary care physicians, said Manya Newton, M.D., M.P.H., an emergency department physician and one of the primary authors of the study.......

....During the past 10 years, ER use has more than doubled in the United States, increasing among the insured and uninsured, said Newton. In fact, the number of ER visits by insured patients has increased in that time from 35 visits per 100 people per year to 39 visits per 100 people annually, according to Newton.

"That doesn't sound like a huge increase, but when you are looking across millions of people in America, that is enough to drive crowding," she said. "One of the reasons that is happening is a lack of access to primary care."

Insured individuals technically have access to primary care physicians, but as these physicians become more overloaded and fewer in number, people are forced to seek care from emergency departments, said Newton.

"There is a decreasing number of primary care physicians, and that is hurting everyone -- the insured and the uninsured," said Newton.


http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/publications/news/news-now/clinical-care-research/20081125jama-er-use.html


I'm not sure how you are drawing that conclusion since even the quotes from your own link say it is not a problem of the uninsured but a shortage of primary care physicians.

One of the first assumptions addressed in the
JAMA article is that the uninsured are the major culprits behind ER use and overcrowding, an assumption dispelled by the study. "There are increasing numbers of everybody -- insured and uninsured -- coming to emergency departments," Newton said.

Another common assumption is that the uninsured are showing up in ERs with minor ailments or injuries. In reality, the uninsured tend to postpone care longer than their insured counterparts; as a result, they are sicker by the time they access emergency care, Newton said.














well, rule, i was responding to this particular part of his post


quote:

4. You cant seriously question whether the ER is the source of primary care for the un/under-insured. You do read the newspapers don't you? You do know that at least a dozen emergency rooms and urgent care clinics closed in LA and Texas because they were so overburdened with routine medical issues AND COULDNT DENY SERVICE BASED ON INABILITY TO PAY?


and the reality is in that article. i dont know about that specific area... but.. as the article states

quote:

"Uninsured Adults Presenting to U.S. Emergency Departments," which was conducted by researchers at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, found several reasons for emergency room overcrowding, including a decreasing number of emergency departments and inpatient hospital beds. But it also concluded that overcrowding is directly tied to the declining number of primary care physicians, said Manya Newton, M.D., M.P.H., an emergency department physician and one of the primary authors of the study.






Arpig -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:33:43 PM)

quote:

Nope. And since it doesnt happen, shouldnt be a concern. And if you really believe that insurance companies have "incentives to deny legitimate payments", then you don't understand the insurance business...or any other business for that matter.

OK, then why have some states felt it necessary to pass laws prohibiting the practice? I suppose we are expected to take your word over all those below?

http://www.statesurge.com/bills/462492-sb09-103-colorado
http://www.abourezklaw.com/bfl-13.html
http://www.housedems.com/videos/simpson-wrongful-denial-pc
http://www.atlanet.org/resources/InsuranceTactics.pdf
http://law-wi.blogspot.com/search?q=farmers
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0071.htm
http://www.kentuckyinjuryattorneyblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=employee+incentive&IncludeBlogs=29&search=
http://www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com/blog/2008/01/farmers-insurance-urged-employees-to.html

I think that should establish that such practices exist, despite your pronouncement from on high to the contrary.





Arpig -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:37:59 PM)

quote:

Again, overpayments are far more frequent then underpayments in the hundreds of claim audits as the office of my former employer I worked out of showed.
Convenient, proof positive that cannot actually be cross-checked. Sorry willbuer, but I may accept such an assertion from some posters, not from you, you have a habit of stating "facts" without providing any back-up. And when those "facts" are checked they turn out to be incorrect most of the time.




Arpig -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:39:48 PM)

quote:

And therefore I take it that you believe the government should not have that power also.
It doesn't have to, even under a universal government run single=payer system. You keep saying that it will happen, but you ignore the various examples around the world where it doesn't happen.




Arpig -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:47:51 PM)

quote:

What is Steven Hawkings' QALY? I think he would tell you that as long as he can think, then his personal assessment of his QALY is 1, but under QALY or Euroquol it sure as hell isn't. So at 67, and a low QALY score, should he be denied a more expensive ALS drug?
Interesting choice of example. Hawking lives in England, and his health care is through the dreaded NHS, which according to you doesn't treat people like him.




tazzygirl -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 8:50:51 PM)

i also recall a practice by Kaiser to discharge new mothers and new borns within 8 hours of delivery. So much for insurance companies not influencing medicine. Jaundice may not even set in for the first 48 hours. It was a nightmare for OB Physicians and nurses during this period. To be honest, many of the Dr's i worked with would fudge patient records to indicate a slight fever in the mother so they both could stay an extra night. yeah, it may have been wrong... but so was the policy.

quote:

The days of new mothers resting in the maternity ward for a week went the way of forceps long ago. In 1970 women stayed, on average, 3.9 days after a complication-free vaginal delivery and the birth of a healthy baby; in 1993 that was down to two days, finds the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Insurers such as the HMOs Oxford Health Plan and U.S. Healthcare often refuse to pay for more than 24 hours of maternity care after a normal delivery, and in Los Angeles a Kaiser Permanente hospital discharges some healthy women and newborns eight hours after the birth. They didn't count on the wrath of legislators dealing with exhausted wives and newborns on hunger strikes, And politicians are always happy to lash out at a target as unpopular as insurance companies. Last week New Jersey Gov. Christine Whitman signed legislation requiring that insurers cover a minimum 48 hours of hospital care for mother and baby. Maryland adopted the requirement in May, and a bill mandating minimum coverage nationally is before the Senate.


http://www.newsweek.com/id/120745/output/print

quote:

Early this summer after a year and a half of study, researchers from a UCSF Kaiser Permanente group reported finding that the early discharge of newborns from the hospital - even less than 24 hours after birth - is not linked to an increase in the occurrence of extreme jaundice in this young population.

These researchers had analyzed data from almost 35,000 infants prior to making this determination. To me it appears that this study was a little more professionally done than a politician reading a couple of press articles.


http://www.prevention-news.com/1997/homesoon.htm





Brain -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 9:15:07 PM)

CANADA HAS SINGLE PAYER
Health Care: Canada vs US

Myths and facts from someone who has lived in both countries.
This was written by a Canadian who has been living in the United States for 17 years.

CanadaCare
doesn't seem so bad, does it?


http://bobaagard.blogspot.com/2009/07/health-care-canada-vs-us.html


http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/06/07-0





MzMia -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 9:21:11 PM)

tazzy, it is funny, when my mom had me a tad over 40 years ago, they kept her
in the hospital at least 10 days.
{C-section}
About 20 years ago, they kept you in the hospital about a week {C-section}.
Now you go home in 2-3 days {C-section}, I think a lot of what goes on is a crime.
 
I have heard many horror stories of women sent home to soon after having a baby.
I even heard of a young woman that died 2 days after giving birth, at home from some infection. The physicians should decide how long a patient needs to stay in the hospital, not the insurance companies.
Final Maternity Length of Stay Rules Published

According to this, the Federal Government is also involved, I guess I am now even more confused.  Did they pass this mandate, to make sure the insurance companies could not kick women out of the hospitals even quicker, after giving birth?

I am fortunate to have very good health coverage NOW.
I have a PPO that is basically an HMO when I go to my primary care provider.
I can see specialists with or without a referral.
 
Though I have the excellent coverage NOW, I have had periods in life with no coverage and limited coverage.
We certainly have a health care crisis in the United States.




ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Why not get the Single Payer Health Care System? (7/30/2009 9:29:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia

tazzy, it is funny, when my mom had me a tad over 40 years ago, they kept her
in the hospital at least 10 days.


Wait a minute.... your profile says your 96. You been puttin' us on?

Anyway, your example doesn't prove anything. They probably kept your mother as long as possible because they knew she'd probably want to take you with her when she went home, and they couldn't stand to let such an adorable baby leave. That's how that happened.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625