ForumGarden

WASHINGTON – The Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed far-reaching health care legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard-won victory on his chief domestic priority though the road ahead in the Senate promises to be rocky.

The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

Link for full story: Tough road ahead in Senate for health care bill - Yahoo! News

Government should govern, not change our diapers and suckle us cradle to grave.

hoppy;1260766 wrote: Government should govern, not change our diapers and suckle us cradle to grave.


I'd suggest that hospitals shouldn't carry people to their graves but they don't even do that!

Hospitals charge what they wish because they don't have other hospitals they'd lose their clientele to. In any society that virtue proves to be horribly immoral!

The biggest load of crap I ever heard regarding heath-care was when I went to the local hospital for blood work this past sumer. They actually have signs telling you that reduced rates are available for theuninsured....EXCUSE me?



I pay for insurance - so they gouge me and MY rates go up every year and the uninsured pays a fraction of what I do?



I seriously question why anyone bothers to work for a living in this country anymore.

flopstock;1261046 wrote: The biggest load of crap I ever heard regarding heath-care was when I went to the local hospital for blood work this past sumer. They actually have signs telling you that reduced rates are available for theuninsured....EXCUSE me?



I pay for insurance - so they gouge me and MY rates go up every year and the uninsured pays a fraction of what I do?



I seriously question why anyone bothers to work for a living in this country anymore.


Those insured would drive your premiums down. It's what happens when health care has an alternative as opposed to how they charge you now, which is how much they wish so they can afford that yacht.

flopstock;1261046 wrote: The biggest load of crap I ever heard regarding heath-care was when I went to the local hospital for blood work this past sumer. They actually have signs telling you that reduced rates are available for theuninsured....EXCUSE me?



I pay for insurance - so they gouge me and MY rates go up every year and the uninsured pays a fraction of what I do?



I seriously question why anyone bothers to work for a living in this country anymore.


What would happen if you lost your job and couldn't pay for insurance would you still consider it unfair? Just curious and really not trying to wind you up. I don't understand the American system at all-it does seem kind of brutal in that that no money means you just get left without medical care-at least it is constantly portrayed as that way. I can't quite follow your logic-are you advocating the uninsured be denied treatment altogether? What if it was you that was unemployed through no fault of your own?

Most people in the UK would I think find it unacceptable that anyone is denied medical treatment because they can't pay for it. I've paid for medical care all my working life and have only recently had occasion to use it so on one level I have been paying for all the chain smoking fat people who are alive because I've been paying for them.

I found this on another site. It's a letter from a Texas congressman to the poster.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After months of objections by Americans across our great country, a slim majority in Congress ignored the will of the people and voted to pass H.R. 3962 by a vote of 220-215.

"I VOTED NO!! This legislation will cost taxpayers over a trillion dollars, raise taxes, create 111 new federal bureaucracies and lead to a government takeover of our healthcare system. I stood with you today and voted AGAINST another government takeover.

Rest assured tonight, this is far from over. As a former judge, I have serious questions regarding the constitutionality of this legislation. The bill forces every American to buy health insurance or be penalized with a tax. If you don’t want to or refuse to buy insurance, then you will be in violation of the IRS code and will be subject to tax evasion charges punishable up to $250,000 and up to five years in prison.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it allow for the government to force us to buy anything. If you thought you didn’t like the IRS before, wait until they become the new healthcare police.

gmc;1261067 wrote: What would happen if you lost your job and couldn't pay for insurance would you still consider it unfair? Just curious and really not trying to wind you up. I don't understand the American system at all-it does seem kind of brutal in that that no money means you just get left without medical care-at least it is constantly portrayed as that way. I can't quite follow your logic-are you advocating the uninsured be denied treatment altogether? What if it was you that was unemployed through no fault of your own?



Most people in the UK would I think find it unacceptable that anyone is denied medical treatment because they can't pay for it. I've paid for medical care all my working life and have only recently had occasion to use it so on one level I have been paying for all the chain smoking fat people who are alive because I've been paying for them.


You've misdirected my anger. My anger is towards the hospital, not the unemployeed. Their service should be worth something... end of discussion. That is the price that should be charged - to everyone using that service.

But while we are on the subject - $1500 deductible per,up to $4500 - then its 80/20 on what they will actually cover... so for all intents and purposes, I AM uninsured except for major medical items.

flopstock;1261081 wrote: You've misdirected my anger. My anger is towards the hospital, not the unemployeed. Their service should be worth something... end of discussion. That is the price that should be charged - to everyone using that service.

But while we are on the subject - $1500 deductible per,up to $4500 - then its 80/20 on what they will actually cover... so for all intents and purposes, I AM uninsured except for major medical items.


If you don't have enough money to pay do you think someone in that position should be turned away?

No they won't be turned away Hospital have to treat them that is issue. Hospital are hoping if they have no insurance they might be able to pay something. Usually they don't and get it free or apply for medical and get free everything. Hospital pass the cost on to the insured and the insured insurance companies they have to somehow get some of the cost back that is the problem.

Don't retire or quit your job and expect to get what they get for free won't happen. :-5:-5

gmc;1261090 wrote: If you don't have enough money to pay do you think someone in that position should be turned away?


Do you think it fair to turn the Irish away from the hospitals in Scotland?

flopstock;1261093 wrote: Do you think it fair to turn the Irish away from the hospitals in Scotland?


What makes you think we do?

gmc;1261116 wrote: What makes you think we do?
Exactly, dear..:yh_rotfl

flopstock;1261122 wrote: Exactly, dear..:yh_rotfl


But aren't your hospitals for emergencies only or need referral from a GP?

flopstock;1261093 wrote: Do you think it fair to turn the Irish away from the hospitals in Scotland?


Would you turn away someone who was starving at your door ?

gmc;1261161 wrote: But aren't your hospitals for emergencies only or need referral from a GP?
NO, are yours?

flopstock;1261170 wrote: NO, are yours?


Well yes. You go to hospital in an emergency or if referred by your GP to see a specialist. You can go to the emergency room if you want but if it's something you should normally see a GP about and it's not an emergency-well why would you go to hospital with it?

gmc;1261215 wrote: Well yes. You go to hospital in an emergency or if referred by your GP to see a specialist. You can go to the emergency room if you want but if it's something you should normally see a GP about and it's not an emergency-well why would you go to hospital with it?


Because they have to see you and treat you if you show up at the hospital emergency room... insured or not - unlike a doctors office where you need an appointment.



Doctors office 85$ - Emergency Room - min 500$ - patient doesn't care because they aren't gonna pay anyways.:rolleyes:

flopstock;1261046 wrote: The biggest load of crap I ever heard


That kind of hurts my feelings. I thought I was the biggest load of crap youve ever heard.

flopstock;1261302 wrote: Because they have to see you and treat you if you show up at the hospital emergency room... insured or not - unlike a doctors office where you need an appointment.



Doctors office 85$ - Emergency Room - min 500$ - patient doesn't care because they aren't gonna pay anyways.:rolleyes:


So universal healthcare would be cheaper then? Here an employee earning £40,000 pays roughly £3300 a year in national insurance-an employer would pay £4,500 roughly £650 a month . it's on a sliding scale and the figures aren't spot on either and and it's different for the self employed but generally speaking how does that stack up with the cost of healthcare in the US?

Mind you national insurance is also for state pensions, and other state benefits as well not just the NHS. You can still end up bankrupt and destitute because of long term illness but getting medical care is actually the least of your problems in those circumstances

hoppy;1260766 wrote: Government should govern, not change our diapers and suckle us cradle to grave.


So are you against social security and medicare?

It is time to get some sort of national health care. Right now for me my wife and my youngest boy I pay over $800.00 a month. I have to pay $50.00 to visit a doctor and a minimum of $500.00 to go to the hospital for an emergency.



I was just informed by my insurance carrier (Blue Cross) that they will not renew my policies because not enough of my employees opt for insurance. I no have to get my insurance and the employees that want it independently. I have no idea what that will be.



A few months ago I turned 50, my wife signed me up for a physical because I had not been to the doctor for any reason for 13 years. I paid my $50.00 plus had to pay for blood work. The doctors office advised me that I was in fine health but it would be a good idea to get a colonoscopy since I had never had one and I am now 50 yrs old. I made an appointment. The hospital called me to inform me that I would need to bring $2500.00 with me to pay the hospital for my procedure since I had not fulfilled my $5000.00 deductible (i think) I told them to kiss my ass I have spent over $100,000.00 on insurance for the last 13 years never using it and I cant even get some preventative procedure for less than $2500.00. You have got to be kidding me.



This doesn't even bring into account the employees that work for me and cant afford insurance. They don't have enough left over to pay $200.00 a month or more out of their checks. When they do need a doctor they go to the hospital and get treated. Then the hospital sues them for the money owed and garnish their checks, now have they even less money for insurance because they are being garnished. Not to mention their credit rating are crap now.

YZGI;1261359 wrote: It is time to get some sort of national health care. Right now for me my wife and my youngest boy I pay over $800.00 a month. I have to pay $50.00 to visit a doctor and a minimum of $500.00 to go to the hospital for an emergency.



I was just informed by my insurance carrier (Blue Cross) that they will not renew my policies because not enough of my employees opt for insurance. I no have to get my insurance and the employees that want it independently. I have no idea what that will be.



A few months ago I turned 50, my wife signed me up for a physical because I had not been to the doctor for any reason for 13 years. I paid my $50.00 plus had to pay for blood work. The doctors office advised me that I was in fine health but it would be a good idea to get a colonoscopy since I had never had one and I am now 50 yrs old. I made an appointment. The hospital called me to inform me that I would need to bring $2500.00 with me to pay the hospital for my procedure since I had not fulfilled my $5000.00 deductible (i think) I told them to kiss my ass I have spent over $100,000.00 on insurance for the last 13 years never using it and I cant even get some preventative procedure for less than $2500.00. You have got to be kidding me.



This doesn't even bring into account the employees that work for me and cant afford insurance. They don't have enough left over to pay $200.00 a month or more out of their checks. When they do need a doctor they go to the hospital and get treated. Then the hospital sues them for the money owed and garnish their checks, now have they even less money for insurance because they are being garnished. Not to mention their credit rating are crap now.


My question being is a colonoscopy truly worth $2500? Including labor.:rolleyes:

K.Snyder;1261360 wrote: My question being is a colonoscopy truly worth $2500? Including labor.:rolleyes:
Not sure. Damn sure worth it if it finds a early problem that can be treated. Not worth it if it finds a healthy poop shoot.

YZGI;1261363 wrote: Not sure. Damn sure worth it if it finds a early problem that can be treated. Not worth it if it finds a healthy poop shoot.Can't you tell the doc it's suspected hemmroids and get it covered?

flopstock;1261370 wrote: Can't you tell the doc it's suspected hemmroids and get it covered?
I have no idea. I would assume my GP would have to do something like that.

flopstock;1261370 wrote: Can't you tell the doc it's suspected hemmroids and get it covered?
I'm not having any problems or anything. I have a cousin who is just now getting over (thankfully) colon cancer and wifey thought it would be a good idea. He is not a blood relative cousin so it isn't a family thing.

YZGI;1261372 wrote: I'm not having any problems or anything. I have a cousin who is just now getting over (thankfully) colon cancer and wifey thought it would be a good idea. He is not a blood relative cousin so it isn't a family thing.


Trick is to find it early dear.



Check into other outpatient options. It's a sad fact , but you need to start taking care of yourself!:p

flopstock;1261377 wrote: Trick is to find it early dear.



Check into other outpatient options. It's a sad fact , but you need to start taking care of yourself!:p
Can't afford to take care of yourself in this country anymore.

YZGI;1261363 wrote: Not sure. Damn sure worth it if it finds a early problem that can be treated. Not worth it if it finds a healthy poop shoot.


Cost should be nothing to do with the results - does the cost of administering the procedure plus checking the results plus a reasonable profit margin for the hospital come to $2,500.

If yes, fair enough but I would suspect that the profit margin is far from reasonable.

YZGI;1261363 wrote: Not sure. Damn sure worth it if it finds a early problem that can be treated. Not worth it if it finds a healthy poop shoot....Bryn Mawr;1261442 wrote: Cost should be nothing to do with the results - does the cost of administering the procedure plus checking the results plus a reasonable profit margin for the hospital come to $2,500.

If yes, fair enough but I would suspect that the profit margin is far from reasonable.


My thoughts exactly...

Basing logic on the outcome of a situation is not,..well,..logical. :wah:

I've been into that before, it's not pretty!

YZGI;1261386 wrote: Can't afford to take care of yourself in this country anymore.


Well you're not getting back in to europe. We have enough problems without american medical refugees coming here for free treatment. :sneaky:

gmc;1261533 wrote: Well you're not getting back in to europe. We have enough problems without american medical refugees coming here for free treatment. :sneaky:
Oh well, I couldn't live on haggis anyways..:wah: