Liberal free for all coming to an end

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Since the beginning, humans have abused themselves with alcohol, drugs, food and yes sex, you name it and somebody has abused it and caused health problems.
...

Tracy, if you get laid off from your good (government?) job, lose your health insurance and need an expensive operation in order to stay alive, how are you going to feel?

Since you begin this stating that humans have abused themselves, I assume when you say I need an expensive operation you're talking about an operation for a self inflicted condition. I have read a lot about exactly how to avoid that kind of thing and live a healthy life. If I am in this predicament it means I have not followed it well, so I would be really pissed. I would wish I could go back and do better. But then I would be glad that I'm still on Cobra.

If I'm not on Cobra, then the law is that if you go to a physician, or a hospital for emergency treatment, and you do indeed, have an emergency, they are required by law to treat you until you are stable and can either be discharged or transferred to another facility, such as a state owned hospital. This is regardless of whether or not you have insurance.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Since you begin this stating that humans have abused themselves, I assume when you say I need an expensive operation you're talking about an operation for a self inflicted condition. I have read a lot about exactly how to avoid that kind of thing and live a healthy life. If I am in this predicament it means I have not followed it well, so I would be really pissed. I would wish I could go back and do better. But then I would be glad that I'm still on Cobra.

If I'm not on Cobra, then the law is that if you go to a physician, or a hospital for emergency treatment, and you do indeed, have an emergency, they are required by law to treat you until you are stable and can either be discharged or transferred to another facility, such as a state owned hospital. This is regardless of whether or not you have insurance.

Not all medical conditions are the result of abuse. Genetics can be a problem and physical injuries are are often unavoidable. I suppose a true libertarian would refuse medical attention from a tax supported institution and would avoid insurance coverage since it is a community effort to help individual members. The true libertarian would refuse all help unless paid for directly out of pocket.

[TracyCoxx]

Good luck in your bid for House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi. You're a fantastic creator of jobs for republicans.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Good luck in your bid for House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi. You're a fantastic creator of jobs for republicans.

I wonder how Nancy and Barak are going to get along the next two years if she leads the liberal Dems and he is after the GOP mods.

[franalexes]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Good luck in your bid for House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi. You're a fantastic creator of jobs for republicans.

For this reason, I hope she gets it.

[smc]

It's unfortunate that the thread is again reverting to a discussion that is not about the issues. We were doing so well for a brief while.

[Tread]

If I'm not on Cobra, then the law is that if you go to a physician, or a hospital for emergency treatment, and you do indeed, have an emergency, they are required by law to treat you until you are stable and can either be discharged or transferred to another facility, such as a state owned hospital. This is regardless of whether or not you have insurance.

Am I getting this right? Everyone is paying with their taxes for people who are not insured and need an emergency treatment. You don?t want to pay others regular treatment with a new healthcare program, but want to keep the old system where you pay in an emergency.
Usually it is cheaper to maintain something than wait until a constructive total loss and than try to fix it.

What are the advantages in your old health care system? Or what I don?t get or get wrong?
it is by far the most expensive one,
your treatment quality is comparable to other high developed countries,
if you or your company can?t pay the insurance anymore, you only get treated in an absolute emergency,
the ones who are not insured are screwed and/or weight the tax payer, too,
your insurance companies decide how much you have to pay or even can refuse you,
it is bureaucratic to make the different accounts and to decide who gets what, because of your different insurance systems/emergency cases.
You can decide to not have an insurance, spent your money otherwise, and if you really need help the tax payer have to pay your treatment.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Since you begin this stating that humans have abused themselves, I assume when you say I need an expensive operation you're talking about an operation for a self inflicted condition. I have read a lot about exactly how to avoid that kind of thing and live a healthy life. If I am in this predicament it means I have not followed it well, so I would be really pissed. I would wish I could go back and do better.

There is no way to avoid that, you can only lower or raise the risk to something. You can get fat and lazy without any problems, or can stay fit as Bruce Lee and die however.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Tread

Am I getting this right? Everyone is paying with their taxes for people who are not insured and need an emergency treatment. You don?t want to pay others regular treatment with a new healthcare program, but want to keep the old system where you pay in an emergency.
Usually it is cheaper to maintain something than wait until a constructive total loss and than try to fix it.

Once Obama care is fully implemented my health insurance payments go up to around $1000 or more a year. Plus it adds another $trillion to our debt. This is less expensive how? Rather than the government paying for everyone's health maintenance costs in addition to emergency care, why not do something smarter like outlawing high-fructose sugar? As the use of this sugar spread throughout the US obesity has also spread in exactly the same way. You get rid of this sugar and you greatly decrease all the problems that come with obesity, like heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, fatigue, etc. 1/3 of the people in this country are now obese, and it is still climbing. It used to be that 1-2% of children were obese. Now it's 13%! People would be healthier and feel better. Isn't that a lot cheaper?

There is no way to avoid that, you can only lower or raise the risk to something. You can get fat and lazy without any problems, or can stay fit as Bruce Lee and die however.

Yes that's true but I'm not as quick to throw out statistics as you are.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

It's unfortunate that the thread is again reverting to a discussion that is not about the issues. We were doing so well for a brief while.

You mean about Pelosi? The liberal free for all has her name written all over it.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

You mean about Pelosi? The liberal free for all has her name written all over it.

I don't understand this endless hatred of Pelosi.
I have heard her talk about issues, she is intelligent and articulate.
I think the conservatives are just jealous that they can't come up with some one with equal intelligence to represent them.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

You mean about Pelosi? The liberal free for all has her name written all over it.

Discourse about issues can be productive, and perhaps even lead to solving problems. Discourse about people involved in those issues is usually counterproductive, especially if it is in the form of invective, or name calling, or blame -- unless the objective is for the individual who engages in it to feel better about himself or herself. At least that's my observation over the course of my life, and I've rarely found anyone who can mount a convincing argument to the contrary.