RE: I am not buying it (Full Version)

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



Message

subrob1967 -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 9:59:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So in Indiana as long as a condition threatens your life you can get treatemnt.....but if something just impacts your "quality" of life.....tough shit?
As I said we disagree on the definition of basic health care.One more disagreement amidst many.[8|]


Sorry, you may want cradle to grave nanny status, but it's not for me.
Like I stated previously, "No they don't cover yearly check up's, if you're too poor to pay $60 for a yearly check up, I'd suggest you drop your internet, cable tv or cell phone for a month, instead of burdening the rest of us with the bill"



FirmhandKY -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:01:25 PM)

[sm=champ.gif]



Malkinius -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:14:33 PM)

Greetings hertz.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

I don't understand why there is an argument about this. Either it is a lie that the poor cannot get medical care, or it is a lie that they can. I still don't know which it is, and I don't understand why some of you believe different stuff than others about what should be a simple matter of fact.


The sad truth is that both are lies as stated. The real answer is that just about anyone in the US can get some care most of the time. So make it most of the people most of the time.

quote:

Some people suggest that tens of millions of people in the US have no access to health care. fact, or fiction?


The usual thing here is that some number of millions of people in the US do not have health insurance. The lie comes in when it is stated that that many people don't have any insurance and can not get it. The truth is that many of those people had insurance and will have it again so whatever number is given is partially a pass through amount. In other words, if someone is between jobs for a month and their company insurance lapses then they are counted even tho in a short time they will have it again. Treat EVERY number given with full suspicion and assume it is wrong without hard facts backing it up and assume it is a snapshot number of those without insurance at the time the information was compiled, not that many people who will never have insurance unless "something is done", usually by the government.

The sad part is that all the above is obvious to those who are not blinded by partisan demagoguery and who do their own fact checking. All sides distort things for their own purposes. How blindly someone follows the party line (watch actions, not claims) tells you how reliable their information is.

Opinion: The more strident and insulting a poster is here tells me the less they think for themselves and the more they are trained to spout whatever by their "leaders" (Masters). That includes all the dominant types who are so totally submissive to their ideologies. So all the instant and knee-jerk reactions to any individuals/political parties or ideologies mentioned with all the hate and vituperation spewed forth towards any specific person or group tells me how much a slave they are towards their respective ideological Masters. <grins> Yes, everyone who feels that I just described them or insulted them is correct even if I don't know who they are. Its that old shoe fitting thing.

Be well.....

Malkinius



Charles6682 -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:18:59 PM)

I am not too surprised the Dem's lost the house.That was really expected actually.Still,the way it is designed,it will be hard to dismantle all of it.Sure,the Repub's can try and may get part's of the bill gutted.Still,there will be some benefit's in that healthcare bill's won't want to do without.I don't think American's want the provision that's state's that health insurance can not deny someone based upon prior medical condition's...... Review it,see what's really in it.That's fine.I know the Dem's are just as dirty and as sneaky as the Repub's are.Neither party is that clever with this information society nowaday's.



truckinslave -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:31:18 PM)

quote:

health insurance can not deny someone based upon prior medical condition's


That is, on its face, imo, the absolute worst part of the bill.
You have to buy car insurance before you wreck
Why do people not understand you need to buy health insurance before you get sick?

Btw, I carry a fair amount of life insurance, enough that when I went to buy it I was asked about both smoking and alcoholism. To get a rate I could afford on the amount of insurance I wanted to buy, I had to affirm that I was ten years free from both substances. I had to wait two years to get the policy.... In essence, they required me to prove that my pre-existing conditions, my addictions, were "cured". I considered that to be perfectly reasonable.



tazzygirl -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:40:45 PM)

wontbe cant answer your question... or mine. Its not that he wont, its that he cant because what he says is a lie and he knows it.

Star-Belly Sneetches had stars upon thars!



truckinslave -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:46:22 PM)

quote:

If you go to the ER because you don't have money or insurance, you are taken to court where you can lose your house if you own one and/or have your wages garnished


Under that scenario you have both assets and money. If you decided to gamble- that is, to buy a house, and/or a car, etc- rather than health insurance, and you lost: tough shit. Your lack of judgment does not entitle you to my money. It's called personal responsibility.



Hippiekinkster -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:49:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So in Indiana as long as a condition threatens your life you can get treatemnt.....but if something just impacts your "quality" of life.....tough shit?
As I said we disagree on the definition of basic health care.One more disagreement amidst many.[8|]


Sorry, you may want cradle to grave nanny status, but it's not for me.
Like I stated previously, "No they don't cover yearly check up's, if you're too poor to pay $60 for a yearly check up, I'd suggest you drop your internet, cable tv or cell phone for a month, instead of burdening the rest of us with the bill"
Yep, that 60 bucks is going to cover dialysis or insulin or statins or ACE inhibitors or glaucoma meds (a visual field test is a lot more than 60 bucks)...

What a fucking brilliant solution for the poor. [sm=fingers.gif]



Hippiekinkster -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:52:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

If you go to the ER because you don't have money or insurance, you are taken to court where you can lose your house if you own one and/or have your wages garnished


Under that scenario you have both assets and money. If you decided to gamble- that is, to buy a house, and/or a car, etc- rather than health insurance, and you lost: tough shit. Your lack of judgment does not entitle you to my money. It's called personal responsibility.
So someone who buys a house instead of planning for a heart attack lacks personal responsibility? That is truly fucked up.



tazzygirl -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:54:38 PM)

quote:

No they don't cover yearly check up's, if you're too poor to pay $60 for a yearly check up, I'd suggest you drop your internet, cable tv or cell phone for a month, instead of burdening the rest of us with the bill.


Who the hell are you trying to kid with that rediculous figure! A simple urinalysis costs more than that.



truckinslave -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:54:43 PM)

quote:

So someone who buys a house instead of planning for a heart attack lacks personal responsibility?


They are gambling with their future and they face the consequences.
Choices have consequences. Liberals don't like that.



Hippiekinkster -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 10:59:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

So someone who buys a house instead of planning for a heart attack lacks personal responsibility?


They are gambling with their future and they face the consequences.
Choices have consequences. Liberals don't like that.
I think drug makers shouldn't have to prove their drugs are safe. Proving safety is an unnecessary regulatory burden. You should run the risk of being poisoned and dying next time you pop one of your anti-psychotics. After all, choices have consequences.



truckinslave -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:02:07 PM)

quote:

I think drug makers shouldn't have to prove their drugs are safe. Proving safety is an unnecessary regulatory burden.


Typical deflection attempt, although perhaps more awkward and inappropriate than most.



Toppingfrmbottom -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:03:51 PM)

truckinslave, that would make sense if your medical condition wasn't something you were born with or have had since you were 10.



quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave


Why do people not understand you need to buy health insurance before you get sick?



Toppingfrmbottom -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:06:18 PM)

There's a walk in clinic that will do a basic check upon you here in town for 65 dollars. And a 25 dollar paper work fee. Daddy however believes those dr's in walk in clinics are quacks because if they were compitant dr's why wouldn't they work in a hospital like Kiaser or something and not a walk in clinic.

But that's a comment for another day lol.
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Who the hell are you trying to kid with that rediculous figure! A simple urinalysis costs more than that.



truckinslave -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:11:15 PM)

quote:

something you were born with or have had since you were 10.


Over 300,000,000 people. There are obviously a lot of special cases and circumstances. Correct me where I'm wrong.
1. Poor children have access to medical care in most states. Could the condition not have been treated then?
2. Many large companies have open-enrollment for new hires.
3. The poor have access to MedicAid.

I don't want to get too personal, don't want to ask really intrusive questions, but the condition/circumstances are not covered above?



tazzygirl -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:13:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Toppingfrmbottom

There's a walk in clinic that will do a basic check upon you here in town for 65 dollars. And a 25 dollar paper work fee. Daddy however believes those dr's in walk in clinics are quacks because if they were compitant dr's why wouldn't they work in a hospital like Kiaser or something and not a walk in clinic.

But that's a comment for another day lol.
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Who the hell are you trying to kid with that rediculous figure! A simple urinalysis costs more than that.



And that cost already exceeds the 60 dollars quoted elsewhere. And it doesnt include lab work. They are called Docs in a box... and they arent affiliated with any hospitals... in other words, they dont have admitting priveledges.



Lockit -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:17:23 PM)

Truckinslave, I rarely jump into politics, but you are misinformed or simply do not know about these things. I spent years advocating for the ill, dealing with different programs and finding some way to bring about awareness. Pre-existing conditions are not always understood during childhood and cannot be dealt with in any manner. By the time there are diagnosis done, no insurance company will accept the patient.

As for medicaid, you cannot get it unless you have children in the home or unless you are on disability. I argued this with a number of congress persons and senators and getting those that take applications for medicaid to admit this is at least an hour long process and you have to be good at trapping them in their own words. They don't like admitting that there is discrimination for single adults.

Bottom line, it isn't as simple as you are making it out to be.



tazzygirl -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:21:36 PM)

quote:

3. The poor have access to MedicAid


I posted on that already. Define poor. Can you? I can.

What is Not Covered

Medicaid does not provide medical assistance for all poor persons. Even under the broadest provisions of the Federal statute (except for emergency services for certain persons), the Medicaid program does not provide health care services, even for very poor persons, unless they are in one of the designated eligibility groups. Low income is only one test for Medicaid eligibility; assets and resources are also tested against established thresholds. As noted earlier, categorically needy persons who are eligible for Medicaid may or may not also receive cash assistance from the TANF program or from the SSI program. Medically needy persons who would be categorically eligible except for income or assets may become eligible for Medicaid solely because of excessive medical expenses.

http://www.cms.gov/MedicaidGenInfo/




Toppingfrmbottom -> RE: I am not buying it (11/5/2010 11:22:29 PM)

I suppose if it was a condition that went away with a few treatments early on it could have, but things like life long despression , that's genetic and ran in the family and suicidal tendancies and mental health issues, Even if treated when young for will likely require a life time of treatment.

His family chose to pretend there wasn't an issue however, and not treat or get him help for his depression, even though they knew deep depression and suicidal feelings ran in the family, his mom was suidical, and depressed,  was even hopitalized for trying to kill herself once, and his brother suffers from depression,  and that's maybe why it's so severe now he's 39. I do believe if his family hadn't of been the sort to deny any problem and gotten him help, it wouldn't be so bad as it is today.

Medicade is something you have to qualify for, I think. if you work or make a certain amount you won't qualify for anything like medicade from what I understand. We tried to get him on SSI, or some form of it, so he can at least afford a pych dr and his pych meds for depression, and since he can work none of the programs, like medicare or medical or SSI will help.


Getting it from your employer is again something he can't afford, the health insurance from an employer is 600 a month , and that's almost twice the amount of his paycheck. 
quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

something you were born with or have had since you were 10.


Over 300,000,000 people. There are obviously a lot of special cases and circumstances. Correct me where I'm wrong.
1. Poor children have access to medical care in most states. Could the condition not have been treated then?
2. Many large companies have open-enrollment for new hires.
3. The poor have access to MedicAid.

I don't want to get too personal, don't want to ask really intrusive questions, but the condition/circumstances are not covered above?



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875