So, for folks who don't have access to anything more than the emergency room....just tell them, "hang on, we're getting to you."?
EXACTLY!! The reason they're going to the ER is that they don't have any other access to healthcare!
We can't afford to keep providing ER only healthcare to people. It will be more cost effective to find a way to get them in to an actual practitioner's office.
The folks "happily living off the system" have health care via Medicaid. We're already paying for them. That's another problem to address entirely.
It's the working poor and lower middle class that doesn't have access to health care since they are either uninsured or under-insured). They're trying to pay into the system....but just can't afford it. So, they go to the ER instead and get incredibly expensive, lousy primary care. (not saying that ED's provide lousy care....just that they provide lousy primary care)
No, you dont tell them to hang on. You politely tell them, "Hey, you!....yeah you with the iphone. Go get a job...that thing where you do manual labor for money in return.....yeah that thing...good we are on the same page.... So go get one of those and then with the money you EARN you pay for some health insurance." And if they dont like it, they dont get it. Its pretty simple.
Listen, its not that expensive to go on blue cross' website and get basic health insurance. Its like 100 bucks here in California. So im not rolling over sorry for these people who "dont have it." they probably just have other things they choose to spend the money on. Also, we can keep people from going to the ER for the standard cold if we made it easier for these hospitals to put these people in collections and attach wages, even if its gov assistance. Making sure people are legal citizens would be the next step in the process (this one is hard and will come with a ton of flack I know. But they skip out on ER payments at the highest rate). So while it may not be popular to refuse care to them, if they cant provide some proof that they can and will pay. Maybe we should.
A lot of the people on the system are not grandma and grandpa. There are plenty of young, healthy, able bodied individuals out there suckling the teet of our system. IF you make them work and pay into it, the system will work and the working poor and lower middle class will be helped out. But telling them they are going to work hard and then have the same health care as someone who is lazy doesnt inspire the desire to get out and work hard when you can just get it for free. Anything unearned will never be respected.
Its also funny how you make reference to lousy primary care. Freudian slip if ive ever heard one. So lets address that too shall we? Some primaries do provide sub standard care. So we should get this bill going, in which case the good and great primaries will get tired of being told "this is all you can make for your hard work" and they will retire, leave, move to another country. But the lousy ones will stay....and then they will have ten times the patients....care will continue to go down...so how is this health care bill providing quality health care again? And remember, its SOOOOO good that Obama and his family and all the politicians WONT be on it.
No, you dont tell them to hang on. You politely tell them, "Hey, you!....yeah you with the iphone. Go get a job...that thing where you do manual labor for money in return.....yeah that thing...good we are on the same page.... So go get one of those and then with the money you EARN you pay for some health insurance." And if they dont like it, they dont get it. Its pretty simple. , its not that expensive to go on blue cross' website and get basic health insurance. Its like 100 bucks here in California. So im not rolling over sorry for these people who "dont have it." they probably just have other things they choose to spend the money on.
Hmmmm....the folks I was speaking of (remember my post just above, the one you replied to) the working poor....yeah, they have a job already. They're using all $8/hr they get paid to do it to pay for all sorts of luxuries.....like living inside, oh and food for them and their kids. I don't have time to pull the stat for it just now, but there are far more working poor than there are unemployed.
First off....$100/month is for one person right? So, not so useful for a family. Even if $100 a month was for a family.....at low hourly wages...$100/month can be out of reach. Thirdly, (and one thing this bill is changing) it's not $100/month for someone with a pre-existing condition ( I found that out when I, a young, single person at the time....was trying to buy a single policy....but I have an auto-immune condition....they wanted nearly a thousand a month).
So yes, a young, single, healthy person can get insurance for $100/month......however everyone else is screwed.
Additionally, what does that $100/month pay for? When I was a care-giver for an adult foster home (making $8.00/hr) and had health insurance.....with a deductible of $2,500. When I got URI's I had to go and wait in line at the free clinic (I have asthma, so really need meds for URI's) there was no way for me to afford to go to the Doctor. I couldn't consider even a bi-annual well-visit. Under-insured is almost as big of a problem as uninsured.
Also, we can keep people from going to the ER for the standard cold if we made it easier for these hospitals to put these people in collections and attach wages, even if its gov assistance. Making sure people are legal citizens would be the next step in the process (this one is hard and will come with a ton of flack I know. But they skip out on ER payments at the highest rate). So while it not be popular to refuse care to them, if they cant provide some proof that they can and will pay. Maybe we should.
Hah! So, you want to attach to their wages of $8/hr? Yeah, that will make a HUGE difference in revenue.....and put people out of their homes for not paying their rent since the money went to pay the ED bill! Phenomenal solution! Can't imagine why you're not in office
There's a reason they don't bother to attach to the wages of folks who are coming in to the ED instead of seeing their Doc......they don't have any money! If they did, they would go see a doctor instead of waiting for hours and hours to get their URI treated in the ED.
lot of the people on the system are not grandma and grandpa. There are plenty of young, healthy, able bodied individuals out there suckling the teet of our system.
There may very well be a lot of young and unemployed people. So, we should penalize the rest of the working poor (again, far greater numbers here) because we haven't found a way to get young people to work?
B]IF you make them work and pay into it, the system will work and the working poor and lower middle class will be helped out.[/b] But telling them they are going to work hard and then have the same health care as someone who is lazy doesnt inspire the desire to get out and work hard when you can just get it for free. Anything unearned will never be respected.
First off....how? How does getting young, able bodied folks (your words) who are presumably healthy pay for their use of the healthcare system....help the working poor? Do you really think that health care prices nationwide are just going to plummet? No, they're not going down by themselves. Healthcare is a for-profit business. If they start bringing in more revenue, their answer is not going to be to lower prices.
So, say by the end of next week we enact what you suggest. Presto!
The working poor are still in the same place. They still can't afford to access health care.
Its also funny how you make reference to lousy primary care. Freudian slip if ive ever heard one. So lets address that too shall we? Some primaries do provide sub standard care. So we should get this bill going, in which case the good and great primaries will get tired of being told "this is all you can make for your hard work" and they will retire, leave, move to another country. But the lousy ones will stay....and then they will have ten times the patients....care will continue to go down...so how is this health care bill providing quality health care again? And remember, its SOOOOO good that Obama and his family and all the politicians WONT be on it.
Hmmm....no Freudian slip on my part I sadi that ED's (Emergency Departments) provide lousy primary care....which they do. That's not what they're set up for. They're set up for trauma and casualty.....for life threatening situations.
My overall response to your reply....is go back and read mine again. Either reading comprehension is an area that you're still working on....or you skimmed my post looking for key words and then filled in the rest in your head.
It seems you so worried about someone getting something for nothing.....that you're willing to sacrifice all the folks who are really trying to make things work and just can't in our current health care system.
We are always going to have folks who don't want to work....always have, always will. We're also always going to have folks who are poor, and working their butts off. Why throw the latter under the bus to spite the former?
People who cannot afford health care should not be having families. Its one thing to birth a child. It is a complete other to be a parent. It isnt anyone elses responsibility to pay for healthcare for kids that arent theirs. And you misquoted me. I addressed the working poor. My comments were in regard to able bodies people not working. If they paid into the system prices would come down from the lack of loss.
To end this crying game with you. I will just ask for three reasons the responsible people in this country should have to suffer for those that are irresponsible? Where does it say anywhere that it is our duty (the citizens) to provide for those who are too lazy to provide for themselves?
People who cannot afford health care should not be having families. Its one thing to birth a child. It is a complete other to be a parent. It isnt anyone elses responsibility to pay for healthcare for kids that arent theirs.
So, only the wealthy should have children? Really? Because there are large sections of the middle class that can't afford health insurance.
There have been political movements throughout history that thought they had the right to say who should and shouldn't have kids.....you sure you want to align yourself there?
And you misquoted me. I addressed the working poor. My comments were in regard to able bodies people not working. If they paid into the system prices would come down from the lack of loss.
I didn't misquote you....I know you were talking about able bodied folks not working (in fact, I specifically said you were speaking about able bodied folks not working). You said if these mythical able bodied folks who aren't working were and were paying their ED bills that suddenly, things would get better for the working poor. I asked how?
I said, that you get your way...and the only change to the current health care system is that now the hospital is getting paid for all the patients in the ED....Presto magic. How does this help the working poor (as you proposed it would)?
To end this crying game with you.
Do you need a tissue? Sorry I've upset you.
I will just ask for three reasons the responsible people in this country should have to suffer for those that are irresponsible? Where does it say anywhere that it is our duty (the citizens) to provide for those who are too lazy to provide for themselves?
First off, it's a ridiculous question filled with misinformation. The first assumption in the question is that folks with money are responsible....hello, ENRON anyone???
The second is the assumption that folks who can't afford to use the healthcare system as it stands are somehow automatically irresponsible? So, folks working as housekeepers, care-givers, landscaping, factory workers, etc....all irresponsible solely because they can't afford to use the health care system? Really?
We as a nation are more successful when we have educated, healthy citizens. People are more productive when they are healthy. (are you as productive when ill?)
The system is so broken right now, that the folks who are lazy and live off the system get free health care! It's the working poor that can't afford to use it.
Change takes time, and it's difficult to inform the public that they need to change their former habit of going to EDs for minor illnesses.
Has anyone noticed that EDs take everyone that lands on their doorsteps?
Hospitals aren't about to give that income up - yet the law is that care must be provided only those whose conditions merit ED treatment, who are in life or death situations, need immediate treatment (like women in advanced labor, usually with no previous prenatal care), etc. I haven't heard of EDs turning anyone away, whose conditions are less dramatic.
Only when people are told what conditions are appropriate and require ED treatment (a list all ED staff should have available), when they show up there; and are referred elsewhere for anything else, will the nonstop long line at those doors, disappear. Then fewer scheduled staff will be there and it will be necessary to have prepared reserve workers available for major disasters......
I would hope someone would come to the Ed if "they" thought "they" had a possible STD ( esp.if there is no pcp). But it sounds like your being more specific about the type of person that comes to your Ed
for any of these problems. As a nurse, I wouldnt make judgement on anyone who steps in to the hospital for help regardless if its something small or not. Regardless of fake nails, gucci bag, " Draped in gold", cell phone ( which almost everyone has BTW). Just maybe someone will not have a payment at the time of service( I dont remember payment arrangements in any of my nursing curriculum) Your suppose to be an Advocate for your patients and Not a Critic.
*Sincerely, A Nurse*
VOMIT:barf01::barf01:When you get some real life ER experience and see the real health care abuse out there, you'll be better informed.
Specializes in LTC, CPR instructor, First aid instructor..
People who cannot afford health care should not be having families.
What if the pregnancy was accidental between a married couple because they are poor, but are both working, but all are part time jobs because that's all they can get?
"people who cannot afford health care should not be having families"
are you kidding? what an outrageous, elitist comment. people might work hard, for years, and not see much $ for their effort. does that mean they shouldn't have children? children are not reserved for the wealthy. also, your comment goes to show that you think it is all in your hands whether you are monetarily successful or not. guess what--there are plenty middle class people who work hard, struggle like crazy, and don't make big bucks.
but that doesn't mean the average guy has to pay for their care, either. that is what community and family are supposed to be for. it is due to the breakdown of family that we have such a horrible situation in this country, not poverty.
So, only the wealthy should have children? Really? Because there are large sections of the middle class that can't afford health insurance.
First off, it's a ridiculous question filled with misinformation. The first assumption in the question is that folks with money are responsible....hello, ENRON anyone???
The second is the assumption that folks who can't afford to use the healthcare system as it stands are somehow automatically irresponsible? So, folks working as housekeepers, care-givers, landscaping, factory workers, etc....all irresponsible solely because they can't afford to use the health care system? Really?
We as a nation are more successful when we have educated, healthy citizens. People are more productive when they are healthy. (are you as productive when ill?)
The system is so broken right now, that the folks who are lazy and live off the system get free health care! It's the working poor that can't afford to use it.
If you are considered middle class and cannot afford health insurance for a child, then you have some SERIOUS priority issues.
And
Its not a ridiculous question its a simple question. And its not filled with anything other than what you choose to fill it with. Also, where did I say people with money are responsible? I can name quite a few that are not. That is YOU assuming responsible people are people that have money. Would you like the definition of responsible? Because having money isnt in there.
So now all housekeepers, care-givers, landscapers, and factory workers cant afford health care? Im guessing thats not accurate either. Ive figured out where the misinformation is coming from; your mind.
I never said people who absolutely cant afford health care are irresponsible. I have said that people who choose other options like expensive clothes and luxuries other than health care are irresponsible. Also people who cannot afford health care for their children could be viewed as irresponsible I think.
All these things I say are not directed at the working poor. I applaud anyone who works and makes a contribution no matter how small. My issue is with people that dont even attempt to do so. Id love for everyone to have health care, just not the kind that is now offered at the expense of the taxpayers. Its not fair to the working poor or to any tax payer to pay into a system and let free loaders benefit from it.
"people who cannot afford health care should not be having families"
are you kidding? what an outrageous, elitist comment. people might work hard, for years, and not see much $ for their effort. does that mean they shouldn't have children? children are not reserved for the wealthy. also, your comment goes to show that you think it is all in your hands whether you are monetarily successful or not. guess what--there are plenty middle class people who work hard, struggle like crazy, and don't make big bucks.
but that doesn't mean the average guy has to pay for their care, either. that is what community and family are supposed to be for. it is due to the breakdown of family that we have such a horrible situation in this country, not poverty.
elitist comment? how about logical comment. unless im in a fantasy world, children cost money. and they need health care. if you cannot provide it to your child, doesnt it seem irresponsible to have one? if you couldnt afford clothes for your child wouldnt it be considered irresponsible? there are things kids need. and not being able to provide that for them should be a concern for parents.
you dont have to make big bucks to afford children. im not sure where you are getting that from. but we do agree that citizens shouldnt have to pay for their care. but then you add community....why should a community provide for someone elses child if they are struggling to provide for their own? i agree family can help, but shouldnt they do that when its necessary and not feel obligated to do so?
lets keep in mind that children do not spontaneously combust into a womans womb.....it takes two people and some friction to make a child. so the "whoops" factor is just an excuse for people not taking the proper precautions and being careless. there are too many ways available (free at that) to men and women to keep from having the "oops" moments. so if having the ability to prevent an accident is readily available and you are too lazy to use them, yet not lazy enough to make a baby...thats considered irresponsible to me. but what do i know...im just a middle class parent.
The biggest mistake people are making is that they think they have a right to health care. You don't. All the arguments about being poor or pre-existing conditions are superfluous. The easiest way to figure out if something is a right or not is to look at how you pay for it. A lot of our rights have been paid for in the blood of our founders, troops, etc.. But if you have to pay in cash, it's not a right, its a product/service.
My main objection to the public Option is that it is unconstitutional, and is being forced on us. The majority don't want it, and have said so. We were ignored. The Federal Government doesn't have the authority to supply health care to the public, and absolutely doesn't have any authority to make anyone buy a product/service. Yet they plan to jail or fine us if we fail to do just that.
People have been saying that its not fair that I can have a good health care plan and others can't. Well guess what, I earned it. I work for it. I deserve it. If you want it, go work for it. Its like I can steak, you eat mac & cheese. Its not fair so we both get to eat lunch meat. There are too many out there who aren't even trying, and the result is the ones who deserve help get lost in the flood.
There is a problem, and taking my health care from me, and forcing me to buy a garbage plan won't fix it. We need reform, but not this way.
68drop
53 Posts
No, you dont tell them to hang on. You politely tell them, "Hey, you!....yeah you with the iphone. Go get a job...that thing where you do manual labor for money in return.....yeah that thing...good we are on the same page.... So go get one of those and then with the money you EARN you pay for some health insurance." And if they dont like it, they dont get it. Its pretty simple.
Listen, its not that expensive to go on blue cross' website and get basic health insurance. Its like 100 bucks here in California. So im not rolling over sorry for these people who "dont have it." they probably just have other things they choose to spend the money on. Also, we can keep people from going to the ER for the standard cold if we made it easier for these hospitals to put these people in collections and attach wages, even if its gov assistance. Making sure people are legal citizens would be the next step in the process (this one is hard and will come with a ton of flack I know. But they skip out on ER payments at the highest rate). So while it may not be popular to refuse care to them, if they cant provide some proof that they can and will pay. Maybe we should.
A lot of the people on the system are not grandma and grandpa. There are plenty of young, healthy, able bodied individuals out there suckling the teet of our system. IF you make them work and pay into it, the system will work and the working poor and lower middle class will be helped out. But telling them they are going to work hard and then have the same health care as someone who is lazy doesnt inspire the desire to get out and work hard when you can just get it for free. Anything unearned will never be respected.
Its also funny how you make reference to lousy primary care. Freudian slip if ive ever heard one. So lets address that too shall we? Some primaries do provide sub standard care. So we should get this bill going, in which case the good and great primaries will get tired of being told "this is all you can make for your hard work" and they will retire, leave, move to another country. But the lousy ones will stay....and then they will have ten times the patients....care will continue to go down...so how is this health care bill providing quality health care again? And remember, its SOOOOO good that Obama and his family and all the politicians WONT be on it.