Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

I don't support the fat acceptance/plus size movement.

1…1112141617…19

Replies

  • peckchris3267
    peckchris3267 Posts: 368 Member
    JeepHair77 wrote: »
    Alatariel75 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    To the people who think socialized medicine or group pays are a bad thing, you have a rude awakening coming when you get older. you are going to beg for someone younger to help you stay alive.
    Socialized medicine is a bad thing. Look at the countries that have it, it doesn't work. I am on two medical forums that are based out of the U.K. and people from all over the world are on it. One is a hip replacement forum and the other is a hemochromatosis forum. I have talked to many people from countries about the issues they have had with socialized medicine and it is not good at all.

    My dad is alive because of it. So you are completely ignorant.
    anecdotal evidence does not make it the norm or make me completely ignorant. How many cancer patients die each year waiting for treatment. I'll tell you what the norm is. Someone with stage 3 cancer waiting so long for an appointment that by the time they see the doctor they have advanced to stage 4 cancer and then has to make another appointment and start the waiting all over again.

    Average wait time in USA from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 35+ days
    Average wait time in Canada from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 28 days.

    You can believe the spin all you want, its still better than the crap healthcare you have.

    "Waiting for treatment has become a defining characteristic of Canadian health care. In order to document the lengthy queues for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures in the country, the Fraser Insti-tute has—for over two decades—surveyed specialist physicians across 12 specialties and 10 provinces.

    This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have not improved since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 18.3 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—slightly longer than the 18.2 week wait reported in 2014. This year’s wait time is 97% longer than in 1993 when it was just 9.3 weeks.

    There is a great deal of variation in the total waiting time faced by patients across the provinces. Saskatchewan re-ports the shortest total wait (13.6 weeks), while Prince Edward Island reports the longest (43.1 weeks). Results for the latter province should be interpreted with caution since data is not available for certain specialties because of either a lack of response or an absence of doctors practising some specialties.

    There is also a great deal of variation among specialties. Patients wait longest between a GP referral and orthopae-dic surgery (35.7 weeks).

    The total wait time that patients face can be examined in two consecutive segments.

    The first segment occurs from referral by a general practitioner to consultation with a specialist. The waiting time in this segment is 8.5 weeks this year, roughly the same as in 2014. This wait time is 130% longer than in 1993, when it was 3.7 weeks. The shortest waits for specialist consultations are in Saskatchewan (6.7 weeks) while the longest occur in Prince Edward Island (28.3 weeks).
    The second segment occurs from the consultation with a specialist to the point at which the patient receives treatment. The waiting time in this segment is roughly the same as last year, 9.8 weeks. This wait time is 76% longer than in 1993 when it was 5.6 weeks, and almost three weeks longer than what physicians consider to be clinically “reasonable”. The shortest specialist-to-treatment waits are found in Saskatchewan (6.9 weeks), while the longest are in Newfoundland & Labrador (20.5 weeks)."

    Medically necessary and life threatening are two COMPLETELY different things. Anyways im done with you, i dont need to win the internet argument.

    Enjoy dying early when you run out of money.
    Yeah, those pesky little facts got in your way again.

    You clearly have excellent insurance coverage, and it almost sounds like you think everyone else here does, too. I had to wait 11 weeks just to get an initial primary care appointment...in the U.S. Not specialty care, not surgery. Just getting in to see a GP. My brother-in-law went bankrupt after an emergency appendectomy - even with his crappy insurance coverage. It's not all roses and rainbows here in the USA. In case you didn't know... ;)

    Yeah, my cousin lost his house over injuries from a car accident and an Aunt passed away from a completely foreseeable aneyrism because her insurance wouldn't pay for the scan that would have detected it.

    A close friend of mine, who had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time, lost her house and nearly went bankrupt over medical bills following the birth of a child with moderate brain malformities, requiring extended care and multiple surgeries. They lived with her parents for years to get back on their feet (and not everyone has that option), and will likely be paying those medical bills for many more years. The child in question is 13, now, and doing quite well.

    I'll repeat - they had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time.

    And I'll add - that child will forever have a "pre-existing health condition."

    Good thing they live here in the U.S.A. with all of our excellent health care. /sarcasm

    You may lose your house and go into debt but even after you have exhausted all your resources, the state comes in with Medicaid and takes things from there. It seems you are equating losing your possessions and racking up debt with being left on the street to die. We have a system in place that prevents that, that picks up the tab after you have liquidated your assets to pay your bill.

    The poor in this country get free medical care in the form of Medicaid . I know this for a fact. I am a single father with full custody of my two daughters. My income level is low enough that all their medical and dental is 100% free with the states Medicaid. I am on VA healthcare but when I lost my job due to medical issues, the state sent me a Medicaid card and all of my medical needs would have been free had I needed it. That IS the way it works in the US. The problem is that everyone thinks they should be able to keep their BMW and vacation fund and not put those toward their medical bills.

  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    edited June 2017
    estherdragonbat wrote: »
    I hope you're not implying that people who need socialized medicine are lazy or flighty like the grasshopper in said fable. Pity there isn't a third character in there who works and sweats and scrimps and saves... but because of a large family, a need to flee predators, thieves stealing thier food stores, etc. finds themself with insufficient food to get through the winter and now faces, not only starvation but the stigma of being judged a lazy parasite.

    An evaluation needs to take place in each case, especially when attempting to take resources by force from one party to another. Otherwise you are replacing justice of law with....what exactly is your rationale for this theft? Taking from those who have done no wrong and giving to those who have not been wronged?

    Your third character would and should rely on charity and give their fellow man the opportunity to be charitable.





  • estherdragonbat
    estherdragonbat Posts: 5,283 Member
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    estherdragonbat wrote: »
    I hope you're not implying that people who need socialized medicine are lazy or flighty like the grasshopper in said fable. Pity there isn't a third character in there who works and sweats and scrimps and saves... but because of a large family, a need to flee predators, thieves stealing thier food stores, etc. finds themself with insufficient food to get through the winter and now faces, not only starvation but the stigma of being judged a lazy parasite.

    An evaluation needs to take place in each case, especially when attempting to take resources by force from one party to another. Otherwise you are replacing justice of law with....what exactly is your rationale for this theft? Taking from those who have done no wrong and giving to those who have not been wronged?

    Your third character would and should rely on charity and give their fellow man the opportunity to be charitable.





    And how much disposable income does the fellow man have? One sick person with inadequate funding for medical care is a tragedy, a call to action, etc. A hundred? A thousand? A million? Those are dismal and overwhelming statistics. According to https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html, In 2014, there were an estimated 14,738,719 people living with cancer of any site in the United States.

    From https://www.agingcare.com/articles/why-cancer-patients-cannot-afford-treatment-139136.htm
    "Over 11 million people in the U.S. have been diagnosed with cancer and it is one of the five most costly medical conditions. This forces many patients to make decisions about their health care and cancer treatment based on finances not on what is best for their health," says Dr. Richy Agajanian, M.D. of the Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation.

    "Once diagnosed with cancer, whether insured or not, people face significant and sometimes devastating hurdles to receiving timely, affordable treatment in our health care system," he says. "Cancer patients require a lot of services - infusion therapy, medication, surgery, ongoing care from doctors and nurse practitioners. Many don't have insurance, or they aren't reimbursed by their insurance company, so they are forced to do without treatment."
    One in eight people with advanced cancer turned down recommended care because of the cost, according to a new analysis from Kaiser Foundation. And one in four cancer patients or their families said they used up all or most of their savings to pay for treatment.



    That's cancer. There are plenty of other diseases and medical conditions that are costly to treat.

    So. How many people can a charity help before it has to turn everyone else away?

    I'm not even getting to people who would rather die than accept charity. Though I suppose that if they do that, they'll "decrease the surplus population," no?
  • peckchris3267
    peckchris3267 Posts: 368 Member
    rheddmobile wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    JeepHair77 wrote: »
    Alatariel75 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    To the people who think socialized medicine or group pays are a bad thing, you have a rude awakening coming when you get older. you are going to beg for someone younger to help you stay alive.
    Socialized medicine is a bad thing. Look at the countries that have it, it doesn't work. I am on two medical forums that are based out of the U.K. and people from all over the world are on it. One is a hip replacement forum and the other is a hemochromatosis forum. I have talked to many people from countries about the issues they have had with socialized medicine and it is not good at all.

    My dad is alive because of it. So you are completely ignorant.
    anecdotal evidence does not make it the norm or make me completely ignorant. How many cancer patients die each year waiting for treatment. I'll tell you what the norm is. Someone with stage 3 cancer waiting so long for an appointment that by the time they see the doctor they have advanced to stage 4 cancer and then has to make another appointment and start the waiting all over again.

    Average wait time in USA from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 35+ days
    Average wait time in Canada from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 28 days.

    You can believe the spin all you want, its still better than the crap healthcare you have.

    "Waiting for treatment has become a defining characteristic of Canadian health care. In order to document the lengthy queues for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures in the country, the Fraser Insti-tute has—for over two decades—surveyed specialist physicians across 12 specialties and 10 provinces.

    This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have not improved since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 18.3 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—slightly longer than the 18.2 week wait reported in 2014. This year’s wait time is 97% longer than in 1993 when it was just 9.3 weeks.

    There is a great deal of variation in the total waiting time faced by patients across the provinces. Saskatchewan re-ports the shortest total wait (13.6 weeks), while Prince Edward Island reports the longest (43.1 weeks). Results for the latter province should be interpreted with caution since data is not available for certain specialties because of either a lack of response or an absence of doctors practising some specialties.

    There is also a great deal of variation among specialties. Patients wait longest between a GP referral and orthopae-dic surgery (35.7 weeks).

    The total wait time that patients face can be examined in two consecutive segments.

    The first segment occurs from referral by a general practitioner to consultation with a specialist. The waiting time in this segment is 8.5 weeks this year, roughly the same as in 2014. This wait time is 130% longer than in 1993, when it was 3.7 weeks. The shortest waits for specialist consultations are in Saskatchewan (6.7 weeks) while the longest occur in Prince Edward Island (28.3 weeks).
    The second segment occurs from the consultation with a specialist to the point at which the patient receives treatment. The waiting time in this segment is roughly the same as last year, 9.8 weeks. This wait time is 76% longer than in 1993 when it was 5.6 weeks, and almost three weeks longer than what physicians consider to be clinically “reasonable”. The shortest specialist-to-treatment waits are found in Saskatchewan (6.9 weeks), while the longest are in Newfoundland & Labrador (20.5 weeks)."

    Medically necessary and life threatening are two COMPLETELY different things. Anyways im done with you, i dont need to win the internet argument.

    Enjoy dying early when you run out of money.
    Yeah, those pesky little facts got in your way again.

    You clearly have excellent insurance coverage, and it almost sounds like you think everyone else here does, too. I had to wait 11 weeks just to get an initial primary care appointment...in the U.S. Not specialty care, not surgery. Just getting in to see a GP. My brother-in-law went bankrupt after an emergency appendectomy - even with his crappy insurance coverage. It's not all roses and rainbows here in the USA. In case you didn't know... ;)

    Yeah, my cousin lost his house over injuries from a car accident and an Aunt passed away from a completely foreseeable aneyrism because her insurance wouldn't pay for the scan that would have detected it.

    A close friend of mine, who had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time, lost her house and nearly went bankrupt over medical bills following the birth of a child with moderate brain malformities, requiring extended care and multiple surgeries. They lived with her parents for years to get back on their feet (and not everyone has that option), and will likely be paying those medical bills for many more years. The child in question is 13, now, and doing quite well.

    I'll repeat - they had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time.

    And I'll add - that child will forever have a "pre-existing health condition."

    Good thing they live here in the U.S.A. with all of our excellent health care. /sarcasm

    You may lose your house and go into debt but even after you have exhausted all your resources, the state comes in with Medicaid and takes things from there. It seems you are equating losing your possessions and racking up debt with being left on the street to die. We have a system in place that prevents that, that picks up the tab after you have liquidated your assets to pay your bill.

    The poor in this country get free medical care in the form of Medicaid . I know this for a fact. I am a single father with full custody of my two daughters. My income level is low enough that all their medical and dental is 100% free with the states Medicaid. I am on VA healthcare but when I lost my job due to medical issues, the state sent me a Medicaid card and all of my medical needs would have been free had I needed it. That IS the way it works in the US. The problem is that everyone thinks they should be able to keep their BMW and vacation fund and not put those toward their medical bills.
    This is not true in my state, or in many states which refused to expand Medicaid.

    What I find most confusing is that you object to socialized medicine, while using it yourself.
    We don't have socialized medicine so I'm not using socialized medicine. As soon as I make above a certain amount those benefits will get smaller and smaller then gone.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    estherdragonbat wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    estherdragonbat wrote: »
    I hope you're not implying that people who need socialized medicine are lazy or flighty like the grasshopper in said fable. Pity there isn't a third character in there who works and sweats and scrimps and saves... but because of a large family, a need to flee predators, thieves stealing thier food stores, etc. finds themself with insufficient food to get through the winter and now faces, not only starvation but the stigma of being judged a lazy parasite.

    An evaluation needs to take place in each case, especially when attempting to take resources by force from one party to another. Otherwise you are replacing justice of law with....what exactly is your rationale for this theft? Taking from those who have done no wrong and giving to those who have not been wronged?

    Your third character would and should rely on charity and give their fellow man the opportunity to be charitable.





    And how much disposable income does the fellow man have? One sick person with inadequate funding for medical care is a tragedy, a call to action, etc. A hundred? A thousand? A million? Those are dismal and overwhelming statistics. According to https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html, In 2014, there were an estimated 14,738,719 people living with cancer of any site in the United States.

    From https://www.agingcare.com/articles/why-cancer-patients-cannot-afford-treatment-139136.htm
    "Over 11 million people in the U.S. have been diagnosed with cancer and it is one of the five most costly medical conditions. This forces many patients to make decisions about their health care and cancer treatment based on finances not on what is best for their health," says Dr. Richy Agajanian, M.D. of the Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation.

    "Once diagnosed with cancer, whether insured or not, people face significant and sometimes devastating hurdles to receiving timely, affordable treatment in our health care system," he says. "Cancer patients require a lot of services - infusion therapy, medication, surgery, ongoing care from doctors and nurse practitioners. Many don't have insurance, or they aren't reimbursed by their insurance company, so they are forced to do without treatment."
    One in eight people with advanced cancer turned down recommended care because of the cost, according to a new analysis from Kaiser Foundation. And one in four cancer patients or their families said they used up all or most of their savings to pay for treatment.



    That's cancer. There are plenty of other diseases and medical conditions that are costly to treat.

    So. How many people can a charity help before it has to turn everyone else away?

    I'm not even getting to people who would rather die than accept charity. Though I suppose that if they do that, they'll "decrease the surplus population," no?

    I see deliberate avoidance of the question "By what rationale are you justifying theft from one party to give to another?" Moreover what gives anyone the right to demand services provided by another without fair compensation? This is the crux of the matter and the reason why all socialized structures inevitably fail.

    If charity cannot support this, what makes you think government can sustain an even larger population? Either way rationing is coming in to play as you have an unlimited demand and limited supply.

    If someone would reject charity then what is your rationale for them accepting charity from government?

    The root causes of the high cost of medical care in the US is insurance, litigation, and government involvement. You want to lower the cost of medical care you need to decrease nonsensical regulation and implement tort reform. Increasing competition and expanding supply is the only logical response.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    comptonelizabeth wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    To the people who think socialized medicine or group pays are a bad thing, you have a rude awakening coming when you get older. you are going to beg for someone younger to help you stay alive.
    Socialized medicine is a bad thing. Look at the countries that have it, it doesn't work. I am on two medical forums that are based out of the U.K. and people from all over the world are on it. One is a hip replacement forum and the other is a hemochromatosis forum. I have talked to many people from countries about the issues they have had with socialized medicine and it is not good at all.

    My dad is alive because of it. So you are completely ignorant.
    anecdotal evidence does not make it the norm or make me completely ignorant. How many cancer patients die each year waiting for treatment. I'll tell you what the norm is. Someone with stage 3 cancer waiting so long for an appointment that by the time they see the doctor they have advanced to stage 4 cancer and then has to make another appointment and start the waiting all over again.

    Average wait time in USA from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 35+ days
    Average wait time in Canada from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 28 days.

    You can believe the spin all you want, its still better than the crap healthcare you have.

    "Waiting for treatment has become a defining characteristic of Canadian health care. In order to document the lengthy queues for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures in the country, the Fraser Insti-tute has—for over two decades—surveyed specialist physicians across 12 specialties and 10 provinces.

    This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have not improved since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 18.3 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—slightly longer than the 18.2 week wait reported in 2014. This year’s wait time is 97% longer than in 1993 when it was just 9.3 weeks.

    There is a great deal of variation in the total waiting time faced by patients across the provinces. Saskatchewan re-ports the shortest total wait (13.6 weeks), while Prince Edward Island reports the longest (43.1 weeks). Results for the latter province should be interpreted with caution since data is not available for certain specialties because of either a lack of response or an absence of doctors practising some specialties.

    There is also a great deal of variation among specialties. Patients wait longest between a GP referral and orthopae-dic surgery (35.7 weeks).

    The total wait time that patients face can be examined in two consecutive segments.

    The first segment occurs from referral by a general practitioner to consultation with a specialist. The waiting time in this segment is 8.5 weeks this year, roughly the same as in 2014. This wait time is 130% longer than in 1993, when it was 3.7 weeks. The shortest waits for specialist consultations are in Saskatchewan (6.7 weeks) while the longest occur in Prince Edward Island (28.3 weeks).
    The second segment occurs from the consultation with a specialist to the point at which the patient receives treatment. The waiting time in this segment is roughly the same as last year, 9.8 weeks. This wait time is 76% longer than in 1993 when it was 5.6 weeks, and almost three weeks longer than what physicians consider to be clinically “reasonable”. The shortest specialist-to-treatment waits are found in Saskatchewan (6.9 weeks), while the longest are in Newfoundland & Labrador (20.5 weeks)."

    Medically necessary and life threatening are two COMPLETELY different things. Anyways im done with you, i dont need to win the internet argument.

    Enjoy dying early when you run out of money.
    That doesn't happen in the US

    Yes. It does. I live in the UK and suffer from a potentially life threatening autoimmune condition. The American online support groups I'm part of are full of heartbreaking stories about being denied crucial medical care. This does not happen in the uk.The nhs is not perfect and is severely underfunded but no one is denied treatment. I never - never - have to worry about whether or not I can afford my essential medication. Health care should never be subject to market forces;it's essentially unjust.

    It is illegal in the US, so if someone is denied emergency or critical care this is a criminal offense.

    If you have evidence to the contrary provide citation. "I heard it on the internet" is not sufficient evidence.
  • peckchris3267
    peckchris3267 Posts: 368 Member
    JeepHair77 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    JeepHair77 wrote: »
    Alatariel75 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    peckchris3267 wrote: »
    Poisonedpawn78 wrote: »
    To the people who think socialized medicine or group pays are a bad thing, you have a rude awakening coming when you get older. you are going to beg for someone younger to help you stay alive.
    Socialized medicine is a bad thing. Look at the countries that have it, it doesn't work. I am on two medical forums that are based out of the U.K. and people from all over the world are on it. One is a hip replacement forum and the other is a hemochromatosis forum. I have talked to many people from countries about the issues they have had with socialized medicine and it is not good at all.

    My dad is alive because of it. So you are completely ignorant.
    anecdotal evidence does not make it the norm or make me completely ignorant. How many cancer patients die each year waiting for treatment. I'll tell you what the norm is. Someone with stage 3 cancer waiting so long for an appointment that by the time they see the doctor they have advanced to stage 4 cancer and then has to make another appointment and start the waiting all over again.

    Average wait time in USA from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 35+ days
    Average wait time in Canada from diagnosis to surgery for cancer 28 days.

    You can believe the spin all you want, its still better than the crap healthcare you have.

    "Waiting for treatment has become a defining characteristic of Canadian health care. In order to document the lengthy queues for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures in the country, the Fraser Insti-tute has—for over two decades—surveyed specialist physicians across 12 specialties and 10 provinces.

    This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have not improved since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 18.3 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—slightly longer than the 18.2 week wait reported in 2014. This year’s wait time is 97% longer than in 1993 when it was just 9.3 weeks.

    There is a great deal of variation in the total waiting time faced by patients across the provinces. Saskatchewan re-ports the shortest total wait (13.6 weeks), while Prince Edward Island reports the longest (43.1 weeks). Results for the latter province should be interpreted with caution since data is not available for certain specialties because of either a lack of response or an absence of doctors practising some specialties.

    There is also a great deal of variation among specialties. Patients wait longest between a GP referral and orthopae-dic surgery (35.7 weeks).

    The total wait time that patients face can be examined in two consecutive segments.

    The first segment occurs from referral by a general practitioner to consultation with a specialist. The waiting time in this segment is 8.5 weeks this year, roughly the same as in 2014. This wait time is 130% longer than in 1993, when it was 3.7 weeks. The shortest waits for specialist consultations are in Saskatchewan (6.7 weeks) while the longest occur in Prince Edward Island (28.3 weeks).
    The second segment occurs from the consultation with a specialist to the point at which the patient receives treatment. The waiting time in this segment is roughly the same as last year, 9.8 weeks. This wait time is 76% longer than in 1993 when it was 5.6 weeks, and almost three weeks longer than what physicians consider to be clinically “reasonable”. The shortest specialist-to-treatment waits are found in Saskatchewan (6.9 weeks), while the longest are in Newfoundland & Labrador (20.5 weeks)."

    Medically necessary and life threatening are two COMPLETELY different things. Anyways im done with you, i dont need to win the internet argument.

    Enjoy dying early when you run out of money.
    Yeah, those pesky little facts got in your way again.

    You clearly have excellent insurance coverage, and it almost sounds like you think everyone else here does, too. I had to wait 11 weeks just to get an initial primary care appointment...in the U.S. Not specialty care, not surgery. Just getting in to see a GP. My brother-in-law went bankrupt after an emergency appendectomy - even with his crappy insurance coverage. It's not all roses and rainbows here in the USA. In case you didn't know... ;)

    Yeah, my cousin lost his house over injuries from a car accident and an Aunt passed away from a completely foreseeable aneyrism because her insurance wouldn't pay for the scan that would have detected it.

    A close friend of mine, who had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time, lost her house and nearly went bankrupt over medical bills following the birth of a child with moderate brain malformities, requiring extended care and multiple surgeries. They lived with her parents for years to get back on their feet (and not everyone has that option), and will likely be paying those medical bills for many more years. The child in question is 13, now, and doing quite well.

    I'll repeat - they had "good" health insurance through her employer at the time.

    And I'll add - that child will forever have a "pre-existing health condition."

    Good thing they live here in the U.S.A. with all of our excellent health care. /sarcasm

    You may lose your house and go into debt but even after you have exhausted all your resources, the state comes in with Medicaid and takes things from there. It seems you are equating losing your possessions and racking up debt with being left on the street to die. We have a system in place that prevents that, that picks up the tab after you have liquidated your assets to pay your bill.

    The poor in this country get free medical care in the form of Medicaid . I know this for a fact. I am a single father with full custody of my two daughters. My income level is low enough that all their medical and dental is 100% free with the states Medicaid. I am on VA healthcare but when I lost my job due to medical issues, the state sent me a Medicaid card and all of my medical needs would have been free had I needed it. That IS the way it works in the US. The problem is that everyone thinks they should be able to keep their BMW and vacation fund and not put those toward their medical bills.

    My friend did not qualify for Medicaid. At no time, at their lowest point, did they qualify, not that it would have mattered. They also had no BMW and STILL haven't taken a vacation, 13 years later. What are you even talking about?

    But maybe that's the point, if we really get down to it. My friend and her husband, educated, hard-working, LUCKY enough to have good careers and insurance and a little savings, were nearly ruined by one unexpected healthcare crisis. I suppose if they'd been on Medicaid, it would have been fine.

    I don't actually believe that, BTW. But there's a huge, HUGE gap in the impact a healthcare crisis can have on people, based largely on factors outside of their control.
    If they didn't qualify for Medicaid then they made too much money. It is need based, based on income and some assets, they won't make you sell your only means of transportation unless it is excessive ( Lamborghini).
    I've heard many complain about not qualifying for Medicaid, but all the ones who told me their financial information shouldn't have qualified.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories