Bolas 5 #451 July 4, 2012 Quoteit's not uncommon for accident victims, heart attack patients, etc to be brought to the hospital without ID/insurance cards. If we expect hospitals to verify insurance/bank accounts before beginning to treat critically ill patients, a lot of people will die or be left disabled, including people who are insured but don't have proof on them when the ambulance delivers them to the hospital. Just so everybody understands what "no insurance/no cash = no treatment" will really require. Fine. we rewrite EMTALA so that it only addresses triage and immediate life threatening situations. The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The hospitals need to be able to basically tell them to "go screw" without threat of frivolous lawsuit except in cases of EXTREME gross negligence. Quote Also, personally I disagree with the calculus that your value as a human being is strictly limited by the ratio of size of your bank account to the cost of treating a life-threatening injury or disease. If we go there, is there any limit to the "cost savings to society" we could achieve by discarding those we consider to be not cost effective to keep around? Don We're not "discarding" anyone, we're just letting everyone fend for themselves. Granted this will be harder for some people than others but it's not impossible and it's equal treatment for all versus the insane "if you're capable but still don't do it, we'll do it for you" we have today. Protecting people from themselves just leads to more dependence.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #452 July 4, 2012 QuoteActually, it does lower the cost by mandate. Pity you're so focused on other aspects you didn't notice that. CBO says it'll cost *more* and insurance premiums have *RISEN* in response. SOMEone may be 'so focused on other aspects' that they didn't notice, but it's not LR.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #453 July 4, 2012 QuoteINCORRECT. That is a GOP myth put about to scare ignorant people who can't be bothered to research the facts for themselves. GOP Myth: Health reform will cost $2.6 trillion over a ten year period Reality: The nonpartisan analysis from CBO estimates that the Affordable Care Act will cost $930 billion and reduce the deficit by $210 billion over a ten year period.[CBO, 2/18/2011] I know you really LOVE that 18 month old estimate, but there's newer information out there... like this CBO estimate from March 2012. CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period. Wait... 50 billion LESS than the estimate in March 2011? Looks like CBO shot your 'proof' down the month after they provided it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,147 #454 July 5, 2012 QuoteFine. we rewrite EMTALA so that it only addresses triage and immediate life threatening situations. The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The hospitals need to be able to basically tell them to "go screw" without threat of frivolous lawsuit except in cases of EXTREME gross negligence.Many countries have a system of charity hospitals and clinics, paid for by the government, that are available to all. The lines are long, and the doctors are young. But it's somewhere that the other, paid, hospitals can send non-paying patients to. People with money can buy insurance to go to the private hospitals which also exist. Maybe, just maybe, if there is some alternative for the poor that doesn't involve just walking into the closest emergency room, the overall situation will improve. Maybe not, but since we know that what we're doing now isn't working real well, it's time to start making changes before costs escalate even more. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #455 July 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteFine. we rewrite EMTALA so that it only addresses triage and immediate life threatening situations. The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The hospitals need to be able to basically tell them to "go screw" without threat of frivolous lawsuit except in cases of EXTREME gross negligence.Many countries have a system of charity hospitals and clinics, paid for by the government, that are available to all. The lines are long, and the doctors are young. But it's somewhere that the other, paid, hospitals can send non-paying patients to. People with money can buy insurance to go to the private hospitals which also exist. Maybe, just maybe, if there is some alternative for the poor that doesn't involve just walking into the closest emergency room, the overall situation will improve. Maybe not, but since we know that what we're doing now isn't working real well, it's time to start making changes before costs escalate even more. Wendy P. You mean like a free clinic or public health offices? We have those already.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,147 #456 July 5, 2012 They are not generally available (try looking for one), and they still bill people. What I'm talking about is really a two-tier health system, where basic care is free, and the extras (including non-generic drugs and all the cool operations) require insurance or money. If you don't have insurance or money, you aren't as healthy. But right now, there are people who put off even having clear skin cancers looked at because they know they can't afford medical care. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #457 July 5, 2012 Quote They are not generally available (try looking for one), and they still bill people. What I'm talking about is really a two-tier health system, where basic care is free, and the extras (including non-generic drugs and all the cool operations) require insurance or money. If you don't have insurance or money, you aren't as healthy. But right now, there are people who put off even having clear skin cancers looked at because they know they can't afford medical care. Wendy P. They are available but there would be more if EMTALA was changed or repealed as there'd then be a demand. Currently they just go to the ER as it's 24/7 and "free." If I have a non life threatening situation, I see a primary care doctor during normal hours. They either treat me or refer me. The clinics are like that. Remember this is not a health care bill, it's a health insurance bill. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #458 July 5, 2012 Etch-a-Sketch http://news.yahoo.com/romney-calls-individual-mandate-tax-contradicts-top-aide-174634430--abc-news-politics.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #459 July 5, 2012 Quote Etch-a-Sketch http://news.yahoo.com/romney-calls-individual-mandate-tax-contradicts-top-aide-174634430--abc-news-politics.html You beat me to it! It's rather like the Bible - you can find anything you want in Romney's positions over the years.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #460 July 5, 2012 QuoteQuote Etch-a-Sketch http://news.yahoo.com/romney-calls-individual-mandate-tax-contradicts-top-aide-174634430--abc-news-politics.html You beat me to it! It's rather like the Bible - you can find anything you want in Romney's positions over the years. SO unlike Obama's rock-ribbed consistency on campaign financing, immigration, gay marriage...right?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,427 #461 July 5, 2012 >The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see >a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The problem that develops there: "I have a sore foot. Can you fix it?" "It would cost us $100 to treat it - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . "I have a really sore foot. Can you fix it?" "You have an infection, and it would cost us $1000 to treat it - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . "I have a really really sore foot. Can you fix it?" "Now it's serious. It would cost us $10,000 to treat it - probably need reconstructive surgery - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . . "Hey doc, we're bringing in a guy with a septic leg. He's in pretty bad shape; he'll die unless he's treated." "OK, guess we have to treat him, since his life is threatened. It will cost us $100K though, and he still can't pay. Why didn't someone treat this guy when it would have cost $100?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #462 July 5, 2012 Quote >The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see >a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The problem that develops there: "I have a sore foot. Can you fix it?" "It would cost us $100 to treat it - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . "I have a really sore foot. Can you fix it?" "You have an infection, and it would cost us $1000 to treat it - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . "I have a really really sore foot. Can you fix it?" "Now it's serious. It would cost us $10,000 to treat it - probably need reconstructive surgery - but no, you're not insured. Go home." . . . . "Hey doc, we're bringing in a guy with a septic leg. He's in pretty bad shape; he'll die unless he's treated." "OK, guess we have to treat him, since his life is threatened. It will cost us $100K though, and he still can't pay. Why didn't someone treat this guy when it would have cost $100?" It'd be more like this: "I have a sore foot. Can you fix it?" "This is the Emergency Room. Here's a pamphlet listing local clinics in the area that will treat you for little or no cost." If it would cost $100 in the ER, in a clinic it would be far less. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,427 #463 July 5, 2012 >If it would cost $100 in the ER, in a clinic it would be far less. Agreed. And provided such clinics existed, and could indeed treat the guy for free that's a much better solution. How do you ensure that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #464 July 5, 2012 Quote>If it would cost $100 in the ER, in a clinic it would be far less. Agreed. And provided such clinics existed, and could indeed treat the guy for free that's a much better solution. How do you ensure that? Clinics like this do exist (at least here in Fla if not in Calif). One is being opened just across the street from the ER. Emergency cases are still treated at the ER but non-emergencies are referred to the clinic. If I've read another story correctly (can't find it just now) the patients are entered into the system and assigned a primary care physician for future care and normal doctor visits. Sources of funding that a patient may qualify for, whether Medicaid or some other source, are also pursued. This idea may or may not ultimately work out but there are many such solutions that could be implemented to take the burden off the existing HC "system" without resorting to a necessarily-bloated, gargantuan, sweeping bureaucratic government program. In addition we have this. The federal government could help by allowing insurance access across state lines and passing common sense tort reform among other things. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #465 July 5, 2012 Quote>If it would cost $100 in the ER, in a clinic it would be far less. Agreed. And provided such clinics existed, and could indeed treat the guy for free that's a much better solution. How do you ensure that? Preventive care is even better and less expensive in the long run.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #466 July 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote Etch-a-Sketch http://news.yahoo.com/romney-calls-individual-mandate-tax-contradicts-top-aide-174634430--abc-news-politics.html You beat me to it! It's rather like the Bible - you can find anything you want in Romney's positions over the years. SO unlike Obama's rock-ribbed consistency on campaign financing, immigration, gay marriage...right? Well, looks like he's flopping again. First it's not a tax, then it's a tax because Roberts says so, now Roberts is "inaccurate". Heisenberg would be proud.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #467 July 5, 2012 Quote ...... Well, looks like he's flopping again. First it's not a tax, then it's a tax because Roberts says so, now Roberts is "inaccurate". Nothing inconsistent here. First it's not a tax,... --it's a mandate like Obama said. .....then it's a tax because Roberts says so,..... --exactly, that's how that works. The SC has spoken. .....now Roberts is "inaccurate". --Romney's opinion, which was trumped by Roberts' activist opinion. This just looks like another one of that folk-singer's flash cards in the other thread. (That wasn't you, was it? If so I apologize about the guitar comment.) Quote Heisenberg would be proud. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,427 #468 July 5, 2012 >This idea may or may not ultimately work out but there are many such solutions that >could be implemented to take the burden off the existing HC "system" . . . . Agreed, provided the funding issues are addressed. I hope one of the outcomes of this decision is that people will start looking more seriously at such alternatives. Moving the conversation from "evil socialism! Revoke Obamacare!" to "here are the problems with it and here's how to fix them" would help us find such solutions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #469 July 5, 2012 Quote >This idea may or may not ultimately work out but there are many such solutions that >could be implemented to take the burden off the existing HC "system" . . . . Agreed, provided the funding issues are addressed. I hope one of the outcomes of this decision is that people will start looking more seriously at such alternatives. Moving the conversation from "evil socialism! Revoke Obamacare!" to "here are the problems with it and here's how to fix them" would help us find such solutions. The biggest issue most had with Obamacare is that it didn't address the core reasons why healthcare is expensive, it just shifted how it's paid for and mandated everyone buy health insurance It's similar to raising taxes but not cutting spending. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #470 July 5, 2012 Quote >This idea may or may not ultimately work out but there are many such solutions that >could be implemented to take the burden off the existing HC "system" . . . . Agreed, provided the funding issues are addressed. I hope one of the outcomes of this decision is that people will start looking more seriously at such alternatives. Moving the conversation from "evil socialism! Revoke Obamacare!" to "here are the problems with it and here's how to fix them" would help us find such solutions. I guess you must be referring to all that transparent discussion congress had about the bill before it was passed. Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #471 July 5, 2012 shortreports.rsmjournals.com/content/2/7/60.full.pdf+html... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #472 July 5, 2012 Quote Quote ...... Well, looks like he's flopping again. First it's not a tax, then it's a tax because Roberts says so, now Roberts is "inaccurate". Nothing inconsistent here. First it's not a tax,... --it's a mandate like Obama said. .....then it's a tax because Roberts says so,..... --exactly, that's how that works. The SC has spoken. .....now Roberts is "inaccurate". --Romney's opinion, which was trumped by Roberts' activist opinion. This just looks like another one of that folk-singer's flash cards in the other thread. (That wasn't you, was it? If so I apologize about the guitar comment.) Quote Heisenberg would be proud. So you see no inconsistency when Romney says "it's a tax because Roberts says so" and 2 days later Romney says "Roberts was inaccurate". Romney just wants to have it all ways, so he shakes the Etch-a-Sketch on a daily schedule. Scott Walker is even worse though, he just lies all the time.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #473 July 5, 2012 And your hero Barry is just the model of consistency....please. Would you like to start a comparison thread? It could be fun.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #474 July 5, 2012 Quote........ So you see no inconsistency when Romney says "it's a tax because Roberts says so" and 2 days later Romney says "Roberts was inaccurate"...... Well, it is a tax because Roberts said so, whether I or Romney or anyone else likes it or not. Romney does not agree with that ruling that it is a tax (and neither do I) but that doesn't matter ...it is a tax now. But, really, all the squabbling over whether the "mandate" is or is not a tax is not the real issue (other than that it allowed the measure to stand in the SC and neither the President nor Congress asked for that. And it was not Roberts job to write law anyway.) The fact is that the ACA itself is, in effect, a tax increase to the tune of 1.1 trillion and probably much more. And it does nothing directly to decrease the cost of HC ...it only adds layers of bureaucratic nonsense to the notion of "universal coverage". I doubt it will even come close to providing universal care. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #475 July 5, 2012 Quote Quote Quote ...... Well, looks like he's flopping again. First it's not a tax, then it's a tax because Roberts says so, now Roberts is "inaccurate". Nothing inconsistent here. First it's not a tax,... --it's a mandate like Obama said. .....then it's a tax because Roberts says so,..... --exactly, that's how that works. The SC has spoken. .....now Roberts is "inaccurate". --Romney's opinion, which was trumped by Roberts' activist opinion. This just looks like another one of that folk-singer's flash cards in the other thread. (That wasn't you, was it? If so I apologize about the guitar comment.) Quote Heisenberg would be proud. So you see no inconsistency when Romney says "it's a tax because Roberts says so" and 2 days later Romney says "Roberts was inaccurate". Romney just wants to have it all ways, so he shakes the Etch-a-Sketch on a daily schedule. Scott Walker is even worse though, he just lies all the time. What's inconsistent? He's saying it's a tax because the SC says it is but he disagrees with them. He's acknowledging that it is what it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
