Overview
Between 2001 and 2007, an increasing share of adults with private insurance—whether employer-based coverage or individual market plan—spent a large amount of their income on premiums and out-of-pocket medical costs, were underinsured, and/or avoided needed health care because of costs. Those with coverage obtained in the individual market were the most affected. Over the last three years, nearly three-quarters of people who tried to buy coverage in this market never actually purchased a plan, either because they could not find one that fit their needs or that they could afford, or because they were turned down due to a preexisting condition. Even people enrolled in employer-based plans are spending larger amounts of their income on health care and curtailing their use of needed services to save money. The findings underscore the need for an expansion of affordable health insurance options, particularly during a time of mounting job losses.
Citation
M. M. Doty, S. R. Collins, J. L. Nicholson, and S. D. Rustgi, Failure to Protect: Why the Individual Insurance Market Is Not a Viable Option for Most U.S. Families, The Commonwealth Fund, July 2009.
We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
"LIFELINE/SAFELINK FACT SHEET
There is no "Obama phone" or other newly created federal program to provide free cell phones.[/b] As you may know, this is a myth that is now circulating on the Web via email and blog sites. It has been thoroughly debunked by independent groups. (See for example: FactCheck.org at http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/, which notes: "Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it."
The federal "Lifeline" program was created during the Reagan Administration. Lifeline is a federal program created by the Reagan era Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1984...... ..... designed to ensure that quality telecommunications services are available to low-income customers at just, reasonable, and affordable rates.....
Thanks to SafeLink, Lifeline support is now available for wireless phones. Traditionally, the Lifeline program was only available as a discount on a consumer’s landline telephone bill. ..... SafeLink Wireless applies the Universal Service Fund subsidy to an allotment of free airtime minutes and TracFone provides the wireless handset at the company’s expense. ....The cell phone offers in-demand features: voicemail, text, three-way calling, call waiting, caller ID and access to 911. SafeLink phones are not paid for by taxpayers or the federal government. TracFone Wireless pays for the phones and also the cost of promoting its SafeLink program to make sure that eligible consumers know about the program."
We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
thanks for the link redrock. i was looking for this
I had heard about this 'urban legend' and remember checking it out at the time. This is only one example on the way some people 'inform' themselves. Hey.. I read that this person had a heart transplant - the heart was from a serial killer and the recipient of such heart thus became a killer himself. Is that true? Of course not. One can't believe all this things. Referring to the points in this thread most, if not all, of them are verifiable (ie stats, documents, etc.) somewhere. There is no excuse to be ignorant on some of these major points or 'live on' urban legends and myths.
We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
DID YOU READ REDROCK"S POST???
the COMPANIES are either paying for it or offering REDUCED rates...NOT YOU or ANY taxpayers...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
Since your 'we' has usually been in the context of the taxpayer (ie you), this is how it is read. The USA are NOT supplying phones to people on welfare. A non-profit organisation working with telecoms companies have decided that some people on low income could benefit from this (social responsibility). Cable TV is nothing like a phone. An elderly person being able to dial 911 is not a luxury. Subsidy is only for a minimal amounts of minutes - the rest they pay themselves. The phones are meant to be a lifeline, in case of emergencies, to be contactable by potential employers, etc. It's all part of a bigger project. Again, you might like to read the whole article that was linked in my post:
From the 1996 Telecommunications Act: .... "ensure all Americans, including low-income consumers and those who live in rural, insular, high cost areas, shall have affordable service and [to] help to connect eligible schools, libraries, and rural health care providers to the global telecommunications network." So do you think the telecoms companies should stop the work they do with schools, libraries, rural health care providers because it's a PRIVILEGE as you say? If they can't afford full price for calls & equipment, tough for them?
Read both articles - you may understand where all this is coming from, how it's financed, etc. Note: not one mention in my post of 'right'. You're the one going on about this.
If a non-profit org or people on their own decision want to give away or spend their own funds to help lower income people in any manner, how does this effect or upset you? Does it bother you when people give to charity as well? What would be an acceptable form of donation or charity for you? Is there such a thing as helping others being bad? haha Maybe you can also start a charity and garage sale task force..haha
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
If a non-profit org or people on their own decision want to give away or spend their own funds to help lower income people in any manner, how does this effect or upset you? Does it bother you when people give to charity as well? What would be an acceptable form of donation or charity for you? Is there such a thing as helping others being bad? haha Maybe you can also start a charity and garage sale task force..haha
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
uhh. I am all for non-profit and charities. I am not for supplying cell phones to people. Why are you deeming the privilege of owning and paying for a cell phone, a necessity for poor people... Its not. They get Food, Shelter, Soon to be healthcare, and now Phones. Please explain to me their incentive to go out and provide for themselves when everything including privileges are now being provided.
Can anyone provide a link that has a detailed outline of how the healthcare system will work and be funded?
I would like to know also, I am sure they can find a link. :roll:
did you read my links that completely debunk your assertion that health insurance is affordable in this country? i am guessing not...or else you would have commented by now deflecting to about how air conditioners are a right or something...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Can anyone provide a link that has a detailed outline of how the healthcare system will work and be funded?
I would like to know also, I am sure they can find a link. :roll:
did you read my links that completely debunk your assertion that health insurance is affordable in this country? i am guessing not...or else you would have commented by now deflecting to about how air conditioners are a right or something...
Sorry but health insurance is important to me so i worked my ass of and went to school and then college and chose which job i wanted that had certin benefits, one being affordable health insurance. So I work to get health insurance I didn't depend on other people to provide me these thinngs, I went out and achieved. And everything that i did to get this job and insurance, Guess what??? Its available to everybody. Everybody chooses their own paths in life. Is it my job to make sure everybody makes the right decisions in life. Some will have to work hard but the formula is the same. I read your links. I saw the 32% of those uninsured were making over $44,ooo a year. That is plenty of money to afford health insurance. I am not saying that our current system is the template to follow. But its the only one i know and I have yet to have any issues.
Sorry but health insurance is important to me so i worked my ass of and went to school and then college and chose which job i wanted that had certin benefits, one being affordable health insurance. So I work to get health insurance I didn't depend on other people to provide me these thinngs, I went out and achieved. And everything that i did to get this job and insurance, Guess what??? Its available to everybody. Everybody chooses their own paths in life. Is it my job to make sure everybody makes the right decisions in life. Some will have to work hard but the formula is the same. I read your links. I saw the 32% of those uninsured were making over $44,ooo a year. That is plenty of money to afford health insurance. I am not saying that our current system is the template to follow. But its the only one i know and I have yet to have any issues.
hear-ye!!! hear-ye!!!
Hjam has is no pansy and she has not had any problems with her health care...please move on...there are no problems to address anymore...you know since the world revolves around Hjam...
Why are you deeming the privilege of owning and paying for a cell phone, a necessity for poor people... Its not.
I don't think anyone said it was a necessity, just not a luxury anymore. It would also seem that 'people above' think that lifelines for the poor, schools, healthcare providers, libraries are not luxury and therefore they do something good within their capabilities. You really resent less fortunate people being able to survive or maybe even live, don't you? Why do you care? So what if a person earning less that $14.000/individual or $30.000/family of 4 can apply (note: apply - not automatically get) for a phone and a few subsidised minutes and an organisation is willing to help? Hey... where I live, my daughter can apply for a monthly payment of up to £30/week if she stays in full time education after 16. Will she? Hell yes! Why? Because that will help with her travel costs to the school she chose to go to. What would you say? That I should make her go to a local school so she can use her free bus pass (which all kids get in London) so I don't burden the tax payer even further? Oh.. and my husband doesn't work.. what does that make our family? One of 'those'?
Help is available for people who need it. You are again deflecting the issue of healthcare by focusing on a material thing. Systems may be abused but it's not the majority.
Here is a 'poverty' map of the USA. The darkest colour shows more than 40% of the population live at or below the poverty threshold. The lightest is less than 5%. You are going to say all these people are losers and potential scroungers?
What the hell are you even talking about anymore? If OTHER PEOPLE (not you or your funds) or OTHER ORGS (not you or your funds) want to donate whatever good, service, time in any way to help better people in need in any way, shape or form, what does it have to do anything with rights or privileges? You seem to be taking this rights and privileges to some extreme form in which no one is saying or commenting.
Anyways, can we stay on topic - please provide data and facts backing your assumption that healthcare and insurance are affordable in our nation. We're all still waiting.
uhh. I am all for non-profit and charities. I am not for supplying cell phones to people. Why are you deeming the privilege of owning and paying for a cell phone, a necessity for poor people... Its not. They get Food, Shelter, Soon to be healthcare, and now Phones. Please explain to me their incentive to go out and provide for themselves when everything including privileges are now being provided.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Why do you keep insisting that healthcare is affordable despite the evidence that virtually no one in the United States can necessarily afford it? And please back up your response with cited data.
Why do you support a system (private health insurance) where some people pay more than their share and others take more than their share, but reject a such a system only when it would mean coverage for everyone (public health insurance)? How can you reject this system and support the unemployment system?
We are fortunate and proud to live in a nation that has the ability to care for the health of our ENTIRE population. As a rich and proud nation, why on earth would we not choose to care for our own people?
Why do you value your money over the health of others?
No, i was saying that healthcare insurace is affordable, which in turn makes healthcare affordable. Where is your data that healh insurance is not affordable. Just because people don't have it does not mean its not affordable. People have a choice on what to spend their money on, and some don't think that health insurance is that important. I can only support that system that i know and that I have had no issues with. I have had no issue witht he current system and it is the only system that I know. How is that not a good enough answer, I am not going to say taht universial health care is better when i have never experienced it. How can you say that??? We are a fortunate nation that SOME have the ability to pay for health care, others will simply receive a service that they will not pay for. I am not choosing to NOT care for our own people, Its that your using the word RIGHT as a disguise to cover what is really is, and that is dependancy. We can't continue to prop people back up just to continually leach the system. My concern is that I don't see an end to the constant FORCED chairity, And i fear that we are a few generations away from deeming priviliges as rights. We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
I think you have a future in politics, man. You didn't directly answer any of my questions but you somehow worked in cell phones.
So let me get this straight: You DO support the current, for-profit health insurance system and you think health insurance is affordable for everyone. Is that right? Aside from the anecdotes I've already provided, here are the results of just one study about the affordability of health insurance: "The majority of uninsured American families who are not covered by group health insurance through an employer cannot afford to buy health insurance, according to a new study by the Department of Health & Human Services' (HHS) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)." What data do you have to the contrary?
Is "I can only support that system that i know and that I have had no issues with. I have had no issue witht he current system and it is the only system that I know" supposed to be the answer to my question about why you support giving your money away to people who didn't earn it only when it leaves some populations uncovered? I'm saying you SHOULD have a problem with the system you support because you are still subsidizing other people. If your entire argument against universal healthcare is that you can't support a system you have never experienced (lots of room for progress/change there, huh?), then you should stick to that argument. But you have made other arguments about not wanting to subsidize the healthcare of others, so I'm asking you to back those arguments up.
I think you are misunderstanding the concept of "nation" and inserting the word "right" where it doesn't exist. I didn't say (in my question) that anyone has a right to healthcare. I said we as a nations - meaning COLLECTIVELY - undeniably have the ability to care for our entire population. I am asking you to provide a good reason for a country to abandon its people when it has the ability to care for them.
As far as I can tell you didn't respond at all to my fourth question.
And why do you hate people so much...? seriously, you present yourself as angry individual...
Your saying health care is a right and its not. I am simply asking where does it end, and no one can answer me because you keep disguising the word right with dependancy.
Dude, many of us have posted MANY times documents that clearly delineate what are rights. How can you keep saying no one can answer you when we have answered you over and over?? You know everyone else can read our posts too, right, so saying we haven't answered doesn't make our answers disappear. :?
And what have I made up. I have done nothing but express my opinion on the matter? And if you don't think people are lazy then i feel sorry for you. Why do you think I hate people??? because i don't think health care is a right???
I think you know it's about a lot more than just health care, since people have made this observation in threads about many other issues.
I am not an angry individual, you think that because I don't agree with yoru point of view... Sorry, but unlike you I am not a pansy and I think it is time for people to start taking care of them selves. if you can't respect of understand that then quit replying to my posts.
Did you really just call someone a pansy and then in the very next sentence tell him he should be respectful??
Why do you keep insisting that healthcare is affordable despite the evidence that virtually no one in the United States can necessarily afford it? And please back up your response with cited data.
Why do you support a system (private health insurance) where some people pay more than their share and others take more than their share, but reject a such a system only when it would mean coverage for everyone (public health insurance)? How can you reject this system and support the unemployment system?
We are fortunate and proud to live in a nation that has the ability to care for the health of our ENTIRE population. As a rich and proud nation, why on earth would we not choose to care for our own people?
Why do you value your money over the health of others?
No, i was saying that healthcare insurace is affordable, which in turn makes healthcare affordable. Where is your data that healh insurance is not affordable. Just because people don't have it does not mean its not affordable. People have a choice on what to spend their money on, and some don't think that health insurance is that important. I can only support that system that i know and that I have had no issues with. I have had no issue witht he current system and it is the only system that I know. How is that not a good enough answer, I am not going to say taht universial health care is better when i have never experienced it. How can you say that??? We are a fortunate nation that SOME have the ability to pay for health care, others will simply receive a service that they will not pay for. I am not choosing to NOT care for our own people, Its that your using the word RIGHT as a disguise to cover what is really is, and that is dependancy. We can't continue to prop people back up just to continually leach the system. My concern is that I don't see an end to the constant FORCED chairity, And i fear that we are a few generations away from deeming priviliges as rights. We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
here are a couple of slides showing how health care is not affordable for the average person in the united states. the first one shows that a vast mojority of the uninsured are either unemployed or "working poor" meaning they are working but below the poverty level, thus unable to afford health insurance.. http://facts.kff.org/chart.aspx?ch=482
the second one shows the skyrocketing cost of health insurance and if you will notice, the employers are kicking in much more money every year to make it affordable for their employees. so the cost of insurance is cutting into the bottom line of employers, and even at that rate, it is a stretch to say that health insurance is affordable in this country. for you to assume that it is either your employer is paying the majority of it for you. in my line of work, i am paying for all of my premiums myself which puts a definite strain on my budget and i am a health care professional. i have other sources but i am too busy to add them while at work.
i will reply to the rest of your post later. and by the way you never told us of your charity work...i'm still waiting for that..
What?! Facts?!? That's crazy talk! We don't want no stinkin' facts around here! (Thanks for the links. )
Also, Heidi - you have not demonstrated that having health insurance equals having health care any way. So the affordability of health insurance is kind of a moot point.
We are already on that path we are now supplying cell phones to people on welfar. That is a privlige, yet we are now treating that as a right.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
So now you're pissed that PRIVATE companies are spending their money as they see fit??? Unfuckingbelievable.
Sorry but health insurance is important to me so i worked my ass of and went to school and then college and chose which job i wanted that had certin benefits, one being affordable health insurance. So I work to get health insurance I didn't depend on other people to provide me these thinngs, I went out and achieved. And everything that i did to get this job and insurance, Guess what??? Its available to everybody. Everybody chooses their own paths in life. Is it my job to make sure everybody makes the right decisions in life. Some will have to work hard but the formula is the same. I read your links. I saw the 32% of those uninsured were making over $44,ooo a year. That is plenty of money to afford health insurance. I am not saying that our current system is the template to follow. But its the only one i know and I have yet to have any issues.
Once and for all - can you fucking prove that statement??? I vote that you not be allowed to keep making the same statement over and over again until you have actually provided some sort of data to back it up. You're infringing on my right to not read a bunch of nonsense over and over and over and over and over and over again. I guess it's my fault for reading your posts at all, thinking you may actually post something new or factual. Could you at least write a disclaimer - kind of like the opposite of a spoiler alert - when your post is going to repeat the same line again with absolutely nothing to back it up?? Thanks in advance.
Sorry but health insurance is important to me so i worked my ass of and went to school and then college and chose which job i wanted that had certin benefits, one being affordable health insurance. So I work to get health insurance I didn't depend on other people to provide me these thinngs, I went out and achieved. And everything that i did to get this job and insurance, Guess what??? Its available to everybody. Everybody chooses their own paths in life. Is it my job to make sure everybody makes the right decisions in life. .
Well pat yourself on the back. Good for you that you were able to study and that you have a job. Maybe you and your wife will be lucky and will keep your jobs, maybe you won't. Some are not so lucky. 85.000 layoffs in a month.... Since December 2007, the economy has shed 7.3 million jobs. Of course one also has to add under-employment - another reason for poverty. A lot of the 'lower' jobs do not have any benefits attached to them, actually not just the lower jobs.... But yeah.... we are all born equal with equal opportunities. :roll:
But getting back to healthcare... one poster did mention that whilst one may have health insurance, it doesn't mean one will get the health care needed.
Actually, if you REALLY informed yourself, you will see you are talking rubbish again. But I guess you already knew that.... WE are not supplying anything (ie no one is using YOUR money). Organisations have come together and are helping people and being socially responsible.
Man you really, really need to learn how to read my posts. WE (as in THE USA) are supplying cell phones to people on welfare. I never said i was paying for it BUT someone is. And my point is that if you can't afford a CELL PHONE, then you don't deserve one. Cell Phones are a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Same as cabel TV, etc. Do you support this???
So now you're pissed that PRIVATE companies are spending their money as they see fit??? Unfuckingbelievable.
Not sure why you are shocked...many people get pissed off all the time at the way PRIVATE companies choose to spend their money.
This is a funny conversation....I've enjoyed reading. Thanks for some of the good info presented. I think the 1 point from heidijam that I certainly agree with is you can't just keep giving and giving things to people. There has to be a limit and I think many people are so afraid to be called out for "hating people" (sound familiar?) that they never set those limits.
I think Heidijam is very accurate about some things...I just don't agree when it comes to health care. And it's ok to have some entitlement programs (though they should have certain requirements to be met in order to keep receiving the entitlements) and Health care is one area where something needs to change.
Why do you keep insisting that healthcare is affordable despite the evidence that virtually no one in the United States can necessarily afford it? And please back up your response with cited data.
Why do you support a system (private health insurance) where some people pay more than their share and others take more than their share, but reject a such a system only when it would mean coverage for everyone (public health insurance)? How can you reject this system and support the unemployment system?
We are fortunate and proud to live in a nation that has the ability to care for the health of our ENTIRE population. As a rich and proud nation, why on earth would we not choose to care for our own people?
Why do you value your money over the health of others?
No, i was saying that healthcare insurace is affordable, which in turn makes healthcare affordable. Where is
Health insurance isn't healthcare, necessarily.
It's only health care if the insurance company actually decides to cover you.
And that's not 100% guaranteed.
Ok, can someone please stifle the "rite" argument already?
Apparently its all or none here,
If you have the right to vote you have the right to mobile communication!
If you have the right to free speech you have the right to air conditioning!
Government subsidized rootbeer floats for everyone! Woooo!
It sounds so stupid! Clearly if we give the right to have affordable healthcare, we should start giving people the right to satellite TV! And yet it comes up on every page! AND in 2 threads!
Health insurance isn't healthcare, necessarily.
It's only health care if the insurance company actually decides to cover you.
And that's not 100% guaranteed.
Exactly.
My husband suffered a massive brain hemorrhage a couple of years back (aged 49). You may read from some of my other posts that my husband had, and still continues to have, incedible care via a National healthcare system. We did not have to fork out any money for his care (and still don't). Financially, as a family we are OK. Naturally we struggle as my husband was the main bread winner and the loss of his salary is really felt. But we're OK. We have our home, my kid can still have her music lessons, my husband can continue his rehab, etc. Same thing happened to an aquaintance in the US (though not as bad). Well covered by insurances, etc. Well... so he/his family thought. A stroke/brain hemorrhage can be caused by high blood pressure. Though he was never diagnosed with it (how many people are?), the insurances didn't pay because it was a pre-existing condition/possibly hereditary. The reason they didn't pay is that they looked at his parents' health history and it turned that at one time, his father took a daily blood pressure tablet (low dose), though he was no longer on these tablets. When filling in the forms, this person was not aware of it. His parents live in a different country and don't really discuss minor medication they take at any time of their life but the insurance company did checks. Though he tried to argue this, the insurance companies considered this non-disclosure (therefore the pre-existing condition) and refused to pay. He lost his home, he can't afford rehab (occupational therapist, physio, speech therapists), he still can't work and a family of 5 who was really well off are now living at poverty level. Can you see the difference between his situation and my husband's?
This should NOT happen in a country like the US. Maybe if american health was taken a bit more seriously, there would be less people relying on benefits. Healthcare isn't a luxury and it should be available equally to all, regardless of ability to purchase cover.
So those who think they have all angles covered... don't be so sure.
I got this letter at work today from one of our three major private health insurance companies / hospitals. Seems somewhat topical.
Dear Healthcare Providers:
...Effective July 26, 2010, all members/patients who enter the Emergency Department at [Our] Hospital will receive a medical screening exam to determine their appropriate level of care. Patients with conditions that are not emergencies will be directed to an onsite patient navigator, who will make an appointment for patients to be seen quickly in a primary care provider's office or refer patients to urgent care if the primary care provider appointment is not timely enough.
If members/patients still wish to be treated in the Emergency Department after being informed that their condition is not an emergency, they will be required to pay for services at the time of treatment. Under these circumstances, the health plan will not likely reimburse the member if they have health insurance coverage....
Comments
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content ... otect.aspx
Overview
Between 2001 and 2007, an increasing share of adults with private insurance—whether employer-based coverage or individual market plan—spent a large amount of their income on premiums and out-of-pocket medical costs, were underinsured, and/or avoided needed health care because of costs. Those with coverage obtained in the individual market were the most affected. Over the last three years, nearly three-quarters of people who tried to buy coverage in this market never actually purchased a plan, either because they could not find one that fit their needs or that they could afford, or because they were turned down due to a preexisting condition. Even people enrolled in employer-based plans are spending larger amounts of their income on health care and curtailing their use of needed services to save money. The findings underscore the need for an expansion of affordable health insurance options, particularly during a time of mounting job losses.
Citation
M. M. Doty, S. R. Collins, J. L. Nicholson, and S. D. Rustgi, Failure to Protect: Why the Individual Insurance Market Is Not a Viable Option for Most U.S. Families, The Commonwealth Fund, July 2009.
here is the link to the pdf of the actual study....please look through it if you have the time...
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media ... _ib_v2.pdf
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
thanks for the link redrock. i was looking for this
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I had heard about this 'urban legend' and remember checking it out at the time. This is only one example on the way some people 'inform' themselves. Hey.. I read that this person had a heart transplant - the heart was from a serial killer and the recipient of such heart thus became a killer himself. Is that true? Of course not. One can't believe all this things. Referring to the points in this thread most, if not all, of them are verifiable (ie stats, documents, etc.) somewhere. There is no excuse to be ignorant on some of these major points or 'live on' urban legends and myths.
the COMPANIES are either paying for it or offering REDUCED rates...NOT YOU or ANY taxpayers...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Since your 'we' has usually been in the context of the taxpayer (ie you), this is how it is read. The USA are NOT supplying phones to people on welfare. A non-profit organisation working with telecoms companies have decided that some people on low income could benefit from this (social responsibility). Cable TV is nothing like a phone. An elderly person being able to dial 911 is not a luxury. Subsidy is only for a minimal amounts of minutes - the rest they pay themselves. The phones are meant to be a lifeline, in case of emergencies, to be contactable by potential employers, etc. It's all part of a bigger project. Again, you might like to read the whole article that was linked in my post:
From the 1996 Telecommunications Act: .... "ensure all Americans, including low-income consumers and those who live in rural, insular, high cost areas, shall have affordable service and [to] help to connect eligible schools, libraries, and rural health care providers to the global telecommunications network." So do you think the telecoms companies should stop the work they do with schools, libraries, rural health care providers because it's a PRIVILEGE as you say? If they can't afford full price for calls & equipment, tough for them?
Read both articles - you may understand where all this is coming from, how it's financed, etc. Note: not one mention in my post of 'right'. You're the one going on about this.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
http://www.healthcare.gov/
hear-ye!!! hear-ye!!!
Hjam has is no pansy and she has not had any problems with her health care...please move on...there are no problems to address anymore...you know since the world revolves around Hjam...
so if you would...please move on...
I don't think anyone said it was a necessity, just not a luxury anymore. It would also seem that 'people above' think that lifelines for the poor, schools, healthcare providers, libraries are not luxury and therefore they do something good within their capabilities. You really resent less fortunate people being able to survive or maybe even live, don't you? Why do you care? So what if a person earning less that $14.000/individual or $30.000/family of 4 can apply (note: apply - not automatically get) for a phone and a few subsidised minutes and an organisation is willing to help? Hey... where I live, my daughter can apply for a monthly payment of up to £30/week if she stays in full time education after 16. Will she? Hell yes! Why? Because that will help with her travel costs to the school she chose to go to. What would you say? That I should make her go to a local school so she can use her free bus pass (which all kids get in London) so I don't burden the tax payer even further? Oh.. and my husband doesn't work.. what does that make our family? One of 'those'?
Help is available for people who need it. You are again deflecting the issue of healthcare by focusing on a material thing. Systems may be abused but it's not the majority.
Anyways, can we stay on topic - please provide data and facts backing your assumption that healthcare and insurance are affordable in our nation. We're all still waiting.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I think you have a future in politics, man. You didn't directly answer any of my questions but you somehow worked in cell phones.
So let me get this straight: You DO support the current, for-profit health insurance system and you think health insurance is affordable for everyone. Is that right? Aside from the anecdotes I've already provided, here are the results of just one study about the affordability of health insurance: "The majority of uninsured American families who are not covered by group health insurance through an employer cannot afford to buy health insurance, according to a new study by the Department of Health & Human Services' (HHS) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)." What data do you have to the contrary?
Is "I can only support that system that i know and that I have had no issues with. I have had no issue witht he current system and it is the only system that I know" supposed to be the answer to my question about why you support giving your money away to people who didn't earn it only when it leaves some populations uncovered? I'm saying you SHOULD have a problem with the system you support because you are still subsidizing other people. If your entire argument against universal healthcare is that you can't support a system you have never experienced (lots of room for progress/change there, huh?), then you should stick to that argument. But you have made other arguments about not wanting to subsidize the healthcare of others, so I'm asking you to back those arguments up.
I think you are misunderstanding the concept of "nation" and inserting the word "right" where it doesn't exist. I didn't say (in my question) that anyone has a right to healthcare. I said we as a nations - meaning COLLECTIVELY - undeniably have the ability to care for our entire population. I am asking you to provide a good reason for a country to abandon its people when it has the ability to care for them.
As far as I can tell you didn't respond at all to my fourth question.
Dude, many of us have posted MANY times documents that clearly delineate what are rights. How can you keep saying no one can answer you when we have answered you over and over?? You know everyone else can read our posts too, right, so saying we haven't answered doesn't make our answers disappear. :?
I think you know it's about a lot more than just health care, since people have made this observation in threads about many other issues.
Did you really just call someone a pansy and then in the very next sentence tell him he should be respectful??
What?! Facts?!? That's crazy talk! We don't want no stinkin' facts around here! (Thanks for the links.
Also, Heidi - you have not demonstrated that having health insurance equals having health care any way. So the affordability of health insurance is kind of a moot point.
So now you're pissed that PRIVATE companies are spending their money as they see fit??? Unfuckingbelievable.
Didn't I provide a bunch of links about this in a thread a couple of weeks ago?
Once and for all - can you fucking prove that statement??? I vote that you not be allowed to keep making the same statement over and over again until you have actually provided some sort of data to back it up. You're infringing on my right to not read a bunch of nonsense over and over and over and over and over and over again. I guess it's my fault for reading your posts at all, thinking you may actually post something new or factual. Could you at least write a disclaimer - kind of like the opposite of a spoiler alert - when your post is going to repeat the same line again with absolutely nothing to back it up?? Thanks in advance.
Well pat yourself on the back. Good for you that you were able to study and that you have a job. Maybe you and your wife will be lucky and will keep your jobs, maybe you won't. Some are not so lucky. 85.000 layoffs in a month.... Since December 2007, the economy has shed 7.3 million jobs. Of course one also has to add under-employment - another reason for poverty. A lot of the 'lower' jobs do not have any benefits attached to them, actually not just the lower jobs.... But yeah.... we are all born equal with equal opportunities. :roll:
But getting back to healthcare... one poster did mention that whilst one may have health insurance, it doesn't mean one will get the health care needed.
I know, right...
As the Captain says...Some men you just can't reach...which is the way he wants it...
Not sure why you are shocked...many people get pissed off all the time at the way PRIVATE companies choose to spend their money.
This is a funny conversation....I've enjoyed reading. Thanks for some of the good info presented. I think the 1 point from heidijam that I certainly agree with is you can't just keep giving and giving things to people. There has to be a limit and I think many people are so afraid to be called out for "hating people" (sound familiar?) that they never set those limits.
I think Heidijam is very accurate about some things...I just don't agree when it comes to health care. And it's ok to have some entitlement programs (though they should have certain requirements to be met in order to keep receiving the entitlements) and Health care is one area where something needs to change.
It's only health care if the insurance company actually decides to cover you.
And that's not 100% guaranteed.
Apparently its all or none here,
If you have the right to vote you have the right to mobile communication!
If you have the right to free speech you have the right to air conditioning!
Government subsidized rootbeer floats for everyone! Woooo!
It sounds so stupid! Clearly if we give the right to have affordable healthcare, we should start giving people the right to satellite TV! And yet it comes up on every page! AND in 2 threads!
Exactly.
My husband suffered a massive brain hemorrhage a couple of years back (aged 49). You may read from some of my other posts that my husband had, and still continues to have, incedible care via a National healthcare system. We did not have to fork out any money for his care (and still don't). Financially, as a family we are OK. Naturally we struggle as my husband was the main bread winner and the loss of his salary is really felt. But we're OK. We have our home, my kid can still have her music lessons, my husband can continue his rehab, etc. Same thing happened to an aquaintance in the US (though not as bad). Well covered by insurances, etc. Well... so he/his family thought. A stroke/brain hemorrhage can be caused by high blood pressure. Though he was never diagnosed with it (how many people are?), the insurances didn't pay because it was a pre-existing condition/possibly hereditary. The reason they didn't pay is that they looked at his parents' health history and it turned that at one time, his father took a daily blood pressure tablet (low dose), though he was no longer on these tablets. When filling in the forms, this person was not aware of it. His parents live in a different country and don't really discuss minor medication they take at any time of their life but the insurance company did checks. Though he tried to argue this, the insurance companies considered this non-disclosure (therefore the pre-existing condition) and refused to pay. He lost his home, he can't afford rehab (occupational therapist, physio, speech therapists), he still can't work and a family of 5 who was really well off are now living at poverty level. Can you see the difference between his situation and my husband's?
This should NOT happen in a country like the US. Maybe if american health was taken a bit more seriously, there would be less people relying on benefits. Healthcare isn't a luxury and it should be available equally to all, regardless of ability to purchase cover.
So those who think they have all angles covered... don't be so sure.