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.
Do you think obese/overweight people should pay more for health insurance?
Options
Replies
-
This discussion makes me realise how lucky I am living in Europe.
Loading is not allowed here. If you need medical help its their for you regardless of your situation.
Freeloading is not allowed in Europe?
In some European countries this may be true.
But every time I see Western Europe featured on a news story lately, all I see is freeloaders all over enjoying the free stuff.
Unless you live completely off the grid, you are taking advantage of freebies all over the place, just like the rest of us. You use infrastructure, technology and services developed, maintained and subsidized by others all the time. We all do. That's life in a civilized society.
I, personally, choose not to "keep score" with those around me. I don't worry about who is deserving and who isn't. Takes a load of stress off my mind to not be having to worry about who's getting something I'm not all the time. I'm proud that I've worked to get myself a better standard of living, but I'm also grateful for the many opportunities to be able to do that and the countless benefits I've received just by virtue of being born when and where I was born.
I agree, though, that there are limits to how much and what types of support we can/should provide, and we need ways to make sure the system isn't being abused - and yes, there are always a few bad apples and sadly those are the ones everyone focuses on, even though most people aren't bad apples. I don't need to know that somebody "earned" or "deserves" basic medical care or basic sustenance. We should help the vulnerable people in our society. Basic survival, and minimizing the suffering of our neighbors should be goals of any civilized society. Societies with an "every man for himself" mentality are ugly places to be.13 -
crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »adamgoleafs87 wrote: »crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »
True about the cost, but that's because the health care system charges more because they know that insurance will cover the majority of it. Staying in a hospital bed overnight can cost as much as $7000. That's pretty ridiculous.Packerjohn wrote: »IMO, until the US healthcare system isn't a FOR PROFIT venture, people will end up spending their retirement income and savings on it. See how much it costs to get hospitalized or how much medication costs for people who need it. It's pretty astounding and outrageous.
We could pay for ALL AMERICANS healthcare, it's just that our government chooses to spend more of taxes towards the military might instead.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The issue with health care in the US is spending per person (from all sources) is doube what it is for the rest of the industrialized world.
Profit is a portion of this but nowhere near all. I believe one of our issues is the amont we spend on end of life care. Most other countries will make an 80 year with a serious illness comfortable and leto them die with no treatment. In the US we spend thousands of dollars for an extra couple of months of life with questionable quality.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The bill was actually a little under $7,000 (I rounded up), but the cost covered more than just the hospital bed. It's still pending so I can't see the breakdown yet, but nothing further has come through, (the incident was several weeks ago), so I think that actually may be the total bill, (keeping fingers crossed lol). If so what the $6,696 included (this is the actual bill, before any insurance is factored in)-
-ER triage room from 9:30pm-1am
-private hospital room from 1am-4pm (we were able to stay in the room with her), including dd's food sensitivity friendly breakfast and lunch
-2 ER doctors that did her initial evaluation/came in several times during the triage time and then 1 put in staples in the back of dd's head/cleaned up wound
-nursing staff during triage time
-CT scan (I was expecting a separate bill for this, but nothing so far and the bill for the CT tech bill has already gone through, so I think this is included in the hospital bill?)
-Child Support assistant-we went to a children's hospital and we were assigned a person who stayed with us the whole time, who's job was to calm my dd down, play games with her/colored/did play-dough etc. She also held one of my dd's hands when the staples were going in (my dh held the other-I had to leave the room because there was so much blood and I almost hit the floor
)
-nursing staff for the regular hospital room time
-the staff member (CNA?) who helped clean my dd up-it took 45 minutes to wash all the blood/debris out of her hair, plus she helped get her showered
-speech pathologist who ran some tests because of dd's concussion
-Child Support assistant/Music therapist both came in several times while we were in the hospital room, to keep dd company
And then we found out the policy is that when a kid comes in with a head trauma they immediately put the on-call neurology surgery team on standby, in case there's a need for surgery. Thankfully we didn't need that (and I don't think there will be a charge for this), but knowing that they were ready to go if need be, was a huge relief when we were the midst of things (dd does have a skull fracture but it will heal on its own).
So, I don't feel that a $7,000 charge for all of that is unreasonable?
Sorry OT, way off track here!
Being from Canada it still shocks me to even imagine having to pay that for a hospital visit.
I believe you pay quite a bit more money for taxes and costs of living though, so while you're not used to seeing hospital bills like that you do pay in other ways. Just going off the grocery threads, what a comparable sized Canadian family spends a year on groceries vs what I pay, would almost cover the hospital bill (if not completely).
Also, while I'm sure the horror stories Americans have heard of Canadian health care are exaggerated, we did receive immediate care and I don't know if you would have had the same experience? We have 3 hospitals in the area and we had choice where to go. When we arrived there was a tech and a police officer standing outside with a wheelchair. They immediately got my daughter inside and they were already enroute to the triage room before I could get her registered. A nurse was waiting for us in the triage room and the first ER doctor was with us in less than 10 minutes of arrival. Our whole visit was like this, as well as follow up care appointments. Very pleased with the care received and the whole experience was as good as it could be, considering the circumstances.
It's really nice that YOU personally have awesome insurance coverage, and abundant options, but that's far from the norm. Some people have crappier coverage or none at all. My husband's stitches and tetanus shot were over $2000 after negotiations to lower the costs. The $50 gauze pads were a bit much, in my opinion.
And there's a perfect example of how our healthcare system is broken.
6 -
This discussion makes me realise how lucky I am living in Europe.
Loading is not allowed here. If you need medical help its their for you regardless of your situation.
Freeloading is not allowed in Europe?
In some European countries this may be true.
But every time I see Western Europe featured on a news story lately, all I see is freeloaders all over enjoying the free stuff.
Unless you live completely off the grid, you are taking advantage of freebies all over the place, just like the rest of us. You use infrastructure, technology and services developed, maintained and subsidized by others all the time. We all do. That's life in a civilized society.
I, personally, choose not to "keep score" with those around me. I don't worry about who is deserving and who isn't. Takes a load of stress off my mind to not be having to worry about who's getting something I'm not all the time. I'm proud that I've worked to get myself a better standard of living, but I'm also grateful for the many opportunities to be able to do that and the countless benefits I've received just by virtue of being born when and where I was born.
I agree, though, that there are limits to how much and what types of support we can/should provide, and we need ways to make sure the system isn't being abused - and yes, there are always a few bad apples and sadly those are the ones everyone focuses on, even though most people aren't bad apples. I don't need to know that somebody "earned" or "deserves" basic medical care or basic sustenance. We should help the vulnerable people in our society. Basic survival, and minimizing the suffering of our neighbors should be goals of any civilized society. Societies with an "every man for himself" mentality are ugly places to be.
Pretty sure you're in the United States and so am I. I was responding to a European poster about Europe. So your response is out of context and baity.
As much as I'd love to respond to your Elitist Lefty speech above, I can't afford the warning. Because I would take it apart piece by piece and I would put it very precisely in its place with crystal clarity.
And I'm not free to do that here, so I'm out.
LOL.
6 -
Just want to plant my flag as an elitist lefty (who isn't elite at all) who is more than grateful for the welfare system of most western societies, was happy to pay into when I was able and will be happy to pay into if and when i am able to again.
Outy.11 -
crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »adamgoleafs87 wrote: »crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »
True about the cost, but that's because the health care system charges more because they know that insurance will cover the majority of it. Staying in a hospital bed overnight can cost as much as $7000. That's pretty ridiculous.Packerjohn wrote: »IMO, until the US healthcare system isn't a FOR PROFIT venture, people will end up spending their retirement income and savings on it. See how much it costs to get hospitalized or how much medication costs for people who need it. It's pretty astounding and outrageous.
We could pay for ALL AMERICANS healthcare, it's just that our government chooses to spend more of taxes towards the military might instead.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The issue with health care in the US is spending per person (from all sources) is doube what it is for the rest of the industrialized world.
Profit is a portion of this but nowhere near all. I believe one of our issues is the amont we spend on end of life care. Most other countries will make an 80 year with a serious illness comfortable and leto them die with no treatment. In the US we spend thousands of dollars for an extra couple of months of life with questionable quality.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The bill was actually a little under $7,000 (I rounded up), but the cost covered more than just the hospital bed. It's still pending so I can't see the breakdown yet, but nothing further has come through, (the incident was several weeks ago), so I think that actually may be the total bill, (keeping fingers crossed lol). If so what the $6,696 included (this is the actual bill, before any insurance is factored in)-
-ER triage room from 9:30pm-1am
-private hospital room from 1am-4pm (we were able to stay in the room with her), including dd's food sensitivity friendly breakfast and lunch
-2 ER doctors that did her initial evaluation/came in several times during the triage time and then 1 put in staples in the back of dd's head/cleaned up wound
-nursing staff during triage time
-CT scan (I was expecting a separate bill for this, but nothing so far and the bill for the CT tech bill has already gone through, so I think this is included in the hospital bill?)
-Child Support assistant-we went to a children's hospital and we were assigned a person who stayed with us the whole time, who's job was to calm my dd down, play games with her/colored/did play-dough etc. She also held one of my dd's hands when the staples were going in (my dh held the other-I had to leave the room because there was so much blood and I almost hit the floor )
-nursing staff for the regular hospital room time
-the staff member (CNA?) who helped clean my dd up-it took 45 minutes to wash all the blood/debris out of her hair, plus she helped get her showered
-speech pathologist who ran some tests because of dd's concussion
-Child Support assistant/Music therapist both came in several times while we were in the hospital room, to keep dd company
And then we found out the policy is that when a kid comes in with a head trauma they immediately put the on-call neurology surgery team on standby, in case there's a need for surgery. Thankfully we didn't need that (and I don't think there will be a charge for this), but knowing that they were ready to go if need be, was a huge relief when we were the midst of things (dd does have a skull fracture but it will heal on its own).
So, I don't feel that a $7,000 charge for all of that is unreasonable?
Sorry OT, way off track here!
Being from Canada it still shocks me to even imagine having to pay that for a hospital visit.
I believe you pay quite a bit more money for taxes and costs of living though, so while you're not used to seeing hospital bills like that you do pay in other ways. Just going off the grocery threads, what a comparable sized Canadian family spends a year on groceries vs what I pay, would almost cover the hospital bill (if not completely).
Also, while I'm sure the horror stories Americans have heard of Canadian health care are exaggerated, we did receive immediate care and I don't know if you would have had the same experience? We have 3 hospitals in the area and we had choice where to go. When we arrived there was a tech and a police officer standing outside with a wheelchair. They immediately got my daughter inside and they were already enroute to the triage room before I could get her registered. A nurse was waiting for us in the triage room and the first ER doctor was with us in less than 10 minutes of arrival. Our whole visit was like this, as well as follow up care appointments. Very pleased with the care received and the whole experience was as good as it could be, considering the circumstances.
It's really nice that YOU personally have awesome insurance coverage, and abundant options, but that's far from the norm. Some people have crappier coverage or none at all. My husband's stitches and tetanus shot were over $2000 after negotiations to lower the costs. The $50 gauze pads were a bit much, in my opinion.
I'd like to rock up places like that, invoice in hand (all moot given I have the NHS but anyway) and hand them some gauze I bought myself for a few pennies and ask to have it written off. That's ridiculous.3 -
-
VintageFeline wrote: »
I'd like to rock up places like that, invoice in hand (all moot given I have the NHS but anyway) and hand them some gauze I bought myself for a few pennies and ask to have it written off. That's ridiculous.
That is why we don't need healthcare reform, we need insurance reform. Hospitals charge those prices because of the agreements with the insurance companies. If you go into a hospital with no insurance, you get charged full price for things. Insurance companies get discounts so the hospital makes less money from insured people than they do uninsured (assuming the uninsured can pay). That $50 gauze will be covered at about $15 by the insurance company and the hospital "eats" the rest. Insurance companies have such a stranglehold on our healthcare that people get penalized if they don't have it and prefer to self-pay.
The ACA tried to address many of these things but it got watered down. At least it was able to tell the insurers what they were required to cover.
9 -
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.2 -
No not confused. It's NOT subsidized. It's offered by the owner of the condominiums to help offer opportunity hard working families. There are some restrictions. No one can live there with a felony. A maximum of 4 to a home. Must never had any late payments for rent.Packerjohn wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.
I looked into this because I thought it was interesting and note worthy.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
6 -
I answered it in a previous post. It's NOT subsidized. I inquired about it.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You have no idea how this works. It IS paid for by tax payer money. The owner of the building...the developer...receives property tax breaks from the state or city (this is taking money from the taxpayers.) In return, they are REQUIRED to set aside units for welfare or low income people. So those people pay little or nothing, but people in other units pay market rent. This is fundamentally unfair to people who work hard and save to live in places like this.
And you know this to be 100% true right? Remember, this is CALIFORNIA where a lot of society do work with each other for the betterment of communities.No property developer is going to charge below market rent just out of the goodness of their heart because they really like poor people. These people need to earn a living as well, and they have investors who expect a positive return.
I'm not rich. If I were I'D TRAIN POOR PEOPLE FOR FREE. Why? Because money isn't everything to me. There are people in the world who do actually care about the misfortunes of others and try to help even if it means putting some volunteer time in.Do you give training to poor people for free? If not, why don't you? Why should the poor be excluded from your valuable training services just because they don't have money. Maybe the government should require you to train 1/3 of your clients for free. Then "society" would benefit from your efforts instead of just your bank account balance. And I'm sure your clients who save and budget and perhaps make hard choices to cut back on other expenses so that they can afford your services won't mind that the guy you train right before them gets it for free.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 16 -
crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »adamgoleafs87 wrote: »crazyycatladyy1 wrote: »
True about the cost, but that's because the health care system charges more because they know that insurance will cover the majority of it. Staying in a hospital bed overnight can cost as much as $7000. That's pretty ridiculous.Packerjohn wrote: »IMO, until the US healthcare system isn't a FOR PROFIT venture, people will end up spending their retirement income and savings on it. See how much it costs to get hospitalized or how much medication costs for people who need it. It's pretty astounding and outrageous.
We could pay for ALL AMERICANS healthcare, it's just that our government chooses to spend more of taxes towards the military might instead.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The issue with health care in the US is spending per person (from all sources) is doube what it is for the rest of the industrialized world.
Profit is a portion of this but nowhere near all. I believe one of our issues is the amont we spend on end of life care. Most other countries will make an 80 year with a serious illness comfortable and leto them die with no treatment. In the US we spend thousands of dollars for an extra couple of months of life with questionable quality.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The bill was actually a little under $7,000 (I rounded up), but the cost covered more than just the hospital bed. It's still pending so I can't see the breakdown yet, but nothing further has come through, (the incident was several weeks ago), so I think that actually may be the total bill, (keeping fingers crossed lol). If so what the $6,696 included (this is the actual bill, before any insurance is factored in)-
-ER triage room from 9:30pm-1am
-private hospital room from 1am-4pm (we were able to stay in the room with her), including dd's food sensitivity friendly breakfast and lunch
-2 ER doctors that did her initial evaluation/came in several times during the triage time and then 1 put in staples in the back of dd's head/cleaned up wound
-nursing staff during triage time
-CT scan (I was expecting a separate bill for this, but nothing so far and the bill for the CT tech bill has already gone through, so I think this is included in the hospital bill?)
-Child Support assistant-we went to a children's hospital and we were assigned a person who stayed with us the whole time, who's job was to calm my dd down, play games with her/colored/did play-dough etc. She also held one of my dd's hands when the staples were going in (my dh held the other-I had to leave the room because there was so much blood and I almost hit the floor )
-nursing staff for the regular hospital room time
-the staff member (CNA?) who helped clean my dd up-it took 45 minutes to wash all the blood/debris out of her hair, plus she helped get her showered
-speech pathologist who ran some tests because of dd's concussion
-Child Support assistant/Music therapist both came in several times while we were in the hospital room, to keep dd company
And then we found out the policy is that when a kid comes in with a head trauma they immediately put the on-call neurology surgery team on standby, in case there's a need for surgery. Thankfully we didn't need that (and I don't think there will be a charge for this), but knowing that they were ready to go if need be, was a huge relief when we were the midst of things (dd does have a skull fracture but it will heal on its own).
So, I don't feel that a $7,000 charge for all of that is unreasonable?
Sorry OT, way off track here!
Being from Canada it still shocks me to even imagine having to pay that for a hospital visit.
I believe you pay quite a bit more money for taxes and costs of living though, so while you're not used to seeing hospital bills like that you do pay in other ways. Just going off the grocery threads, what a comparable sized Canadian family spends a year on groceries vs what I pay, would almost cover the hospital bill (if not completely).
Also, while I'm sure the horror stories Americans have heard of Canadian health care are exaggerated, we did receive immediate care and I don't know if you would have had the same experience? We have 3 hospitals in the area and we had choice where to go. When we arrived there was a tech and a police officer standing outside with a wheelchair. They immediately got my daughter inside and they were already enroute to the triage room before I could get her registered. A nurse was waiting for us in the triage room and the first ER doctor was with us in less than 10 minutes of arrival. Our whole visit was like this, as well as follow up care appointments. Very pleased with the care received and the whole experience was as good as it could be, considering the circumstances.
It's really nice that YOU personally have awesome insurance coverage, and abundant options, but that's far from the norm. Some people have crappier coverage or none at all. My husband's stitches and tetanus shot were over $2000 after negotiations to lower the costs. The $50 gauze pads were a bit much, in my opinion.
I wouldn't say it's awesome, but it is decent, and my husband chose to work at his current company, in part because of the insurance/benefits package. His old job changed their insurance package and since we didn't care for it, we decided to change employers. If someone has employer based insurance and isn't happy with their insurance package, then it may be time to look at other options. We've also gone the self-insured route, when dh was self-employed, and that may be an option for some as well. And if someone is stuck with the current government plan (like my parents), then hopefully that will continue to be tweaked until a solid system is formulated, (I have very low expectations of our federal government, but one can hope ). 3 -
No not confused. It's NOT subsidized. It's offered by the owner of the condominiums to help offer opportunity hard working families. There are some restrictions. No one can live there with a felony. A maximum of 4 to a home. Must never had any late payments for rent.Packerjohn wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.
I looked into this because I thought it was interesting and note worthy.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
If it's significantly below market rent and has the restrictions described, it is subsidized by someone or some organization.
Would think this a very rare circumstance to be done by the owner just out of the kindness of his/her heart, without some sort of government incentive going to the the owner. May happen but again, not very widespread. If it does it's great.
According to this measurement California one of the least charitable states:
https://wallethub.com/edu/most-and-least-charitable-states/8555/
2 -
It does present a slippery slope as before mentioned. I do like the idea of incentives for reaching certain health markers though. For example coupons and discounts to health clubs, massages, groceries if you lower your bp or blood sugar levels or lose x amount of weight.1
-
This discussion makes me realise how lucky I am living in Europe.
Loading is not allowed here. If you need medical help its their for you regardless of your situation.
Freeloading is not allowed in Europe?
In some European countries this may be true.
But every time I see Western Europe featured on a news story lately, all I see is freeloaders all over enjoying the free stuff.
Unless you live completely off the grid, you are taking advantage of freebies all over the place, just like the rest of us. You use infrastructure, technology and services developed, maintained and subsidized by others all the time. We all do. That's life in a civilized society.
I, personally, choose not to "keep score" with those around me. I don't worry about who is deserving and who isn't. Takes a load of stress off my mind to not be having to worry about who's getting something I'm not all the time. I'm proud that I've worked to get myself a better standard of living, but I'm also grateful for the many opportunities to be able to do that and the countless benefits I've received just by virtue of being born when and where I was born.
I agree, though, that there are limits to how much and what types of support we can/should provide, and we need ways to make sure the system isn't being abused - and yes, there are always a few bad apples and sadly those are the ones everyone focuses on, even though most people aren't bad apples. I don't need to know that somebody "earned" or "deserves" basic medical care or basic sustenance. We should help the vulnerable people in our society. Basic survival, and minimizing the suffering of our neighbors should be goals of any civilized society. Societies with an "every man for himself" mentality are ugly places to be.
I agree with your last line.
It breaks my heart when they say on the news that some kids go with little food during school holidays. I guess some people on here wouldnt give two hoots.8 -
havent seen anyone mention heavy drinkers. dont they add pressure to health services?5
-
Would make sense that California isn't a CHARITABLE state. A lot of set ups here are designed to help the less fortunate already. Is it a perfect system? Nope. Are there people who take advantage of it who don't need to? Yep. And I attribute that more to the lack of enforcement rather than the program itself.Packerjohn wrote: »
No not confused. It's NOT subsidized. It's offered by the owner of the condominiums to help offer opportunity hard working families. There are some restrictions. No one can live there with a felony. A maximum of 4 to a home. Must never had any late payments for rent.Packerjohn wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.
I looked into this because I thought it was interesting and note worthy.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
If it's significantly below market rent and has the restrictions described, it is subsidized by someone or some organization.
Would think this a very rare circumstance to be done by the owner just out of the kindness of his/her heart, without some sort of government incentive going to the the owner. May happen but again, not very widespread. If it does it's great.
According to this measurement California one of the least charitable states:
https://wallethub.com/edu/most-and-least-charitable-states/8555/
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
I'm fat I don't want to pay more4
-
Would make sense that California isn't a CHARITABLE state. A lot of set ups here are designed to help the less fortunate already. Is it a perfect system? Nope. Are there people who take advantage of it who don't need to? Yep. And I attribute that more to the lack of enforcement rather than the program itself.Packerjohn wrote: »
No not confused. It's NOT subsidized. It's offered by the owner of the condominiums to help offer opportunity hard working families. There are some restrictions. No one can live there with a felony. A maximum of 4 to a home. Must never had any late payments for rent.Packerjohn wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.
I looked into this because I thought it was interesting and note worthy.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
If it's significantly below market rent and has the restrictions described, it is subsidized by someone or some organization.
Would think this a very rare circumstance to be done by the owner just out of the kindness of his/her heart, without some sort of government incentive going to the the owner. May happen but again, not very widespread. If it does it's great.
According to this measurement California one of the least charitable states:
https://wallethub.com/edu/most-and-least-charitable-states/8555/
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yep must be local laws. I would think in most places not renting to someone based on their income too high would be housing discrimination unless the said housing was under some government program.1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I'd like to rock up places like that, invoice in hand (all moot given I have the NHS but anyway) and hand them some gauze I bought myself for a few pennies and ask to have it written off. That's ridiculous.
That is why we don't need healthcare reform, we need insurance reform. Hospitals charge those prices because of the agreements with the insurance companies. If you go into a hospital with no insurance, you get charged full price for things. Insurance companies get discounts so the hospital makes less money from insured people than they do uninsured (assuming the uninsured can pay). That $50 gauze will be covered at about $15 by the insurance company and the hospital "eats" the rest. Insurance companies have such a stranglehold on our healthcare that people get penalized if they don't have it and prefer to self-pay.
The ACA tried to address many of these things but it got watered down. At least it was able to tell the insurers what they were required to cover.
Around here it's literally even worse. All of our hospitals are owned by 2 competing insurance companies, it was such a problem that the state actually had to step in and create law that they couldn't turn down each other's insurance for emergencies. Ironically both of them are "non-profits" that make hundreds of millions each year in prof...I mean excess.
There's plenty broken at all of the levels. From a policy standpoint I see the ACA mostly as insurance industry corporate welfare. I had marketplace insurance for a while and it was absolutely garbage. Prior to that when I was offered an individual plan for something along the lines of $250/mo for literally no coverage (2 md visits a year), I kindly told them to go pound salt. Afterwards I was forced to buy a similar plan at similar cost.8 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
Would make sense that California isn't a CHARITABLE state. A lot of set ups here are designed to help the less fortunate already. Is it a perfect system? Nope. Are there people who take advantage of it who don't need to? Yep. And I attribute that more to the lack of enforcement rather than the program itself.Packerjohn wrote: »
No not confused. It's NOT subsidized. It's offered by the owner of the condominiums to help offer opportunity hard working families. There are some restrictions. No one can live there with a felony. A maximum of 4 to a home. Must never had any late payments for rent.Packerjohn wrote: »
There is NO taxpayer money involved at all. The owners of the buildings limit who can live there based on income. My wife and I went there (condominiums) and the the places were great, clean and gated. Problem was your INCOME could not exceed $80,000 a year to live there, so we could live there even if we wanted to. When we got shown around, many of the people already living there we waving hands and smiling saying "hi" to us as they were thinking we may be moving in. So is this bad because it's PROVIDED by the owners of the properties? Again it's NOT a hand out but an opportunity.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
Actually I live in a quite expensive area. However there are places in my area where people who don't have high incomes, can still live in the same area at a reduced cost based on their income. This gives their children a chance to go to schools in the area and do activities and possibly have opportunities that they may not have had living in places where their income only allowed them. Put kids and people in good environments and they usually take on the expectation and quality of that environment. And vice versa.MoiAussi93 wrote: »
So your neighbor can somehow live next to you rent/mortgage free? How does that work unless you live in section 8 housing?heiliskrimsli wrote: »Instead of wasting so much time and energy coveting our neighbor's goods, we should be working to make society work better for everyone.
Then my neighbor needs to work, not stand around with a hand out expecting me to hand over what I've earned. I'm not asking them to fork over the fruit of their labor for free, but that's what they're calling me selfish as they demand entitlement to what I've earned.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You clearly don't live in a large city. In many places, including New York...welfare people live in nice buildings right next door to people who actually pay their own rent. The welfare people, of course, don't pay rent. That is part of what is screwed up with this country. People think they deserve to be handed the same nice things as people who work hard for a living.
And yes while there are people who do believe they are entitled, it's a small percentage compared to the majority of Americans who bust their *kitten* day to day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't support policies like that. Handing people a lifestyle they can't afford on their own...and using taxpayer money to do it... is not the way to teach personal responsibility. Why should anybody go to work everyday and work hard if they can live in the same place on welfare? If they want to live in a better building, then they should do it the way everybody else does...with their own money and work.
We have decades of experience with these handouts...they need to end.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
You are misunderstanding. If you cannot love someplace because your uncimeincome is too high it there is some sort of subsidizing going on.
I looked into this because I thought it was interesting and note worthy.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
If it's significantly below market rent and has the restrictions described, it is subsidized by someone or some organization.
Would think this a very rare circumstance to be done by the owner just out of the kindness of his/her heart, without some sort of government incentive going to the the owner. May happen but again, not very widespread. If it does it's great.
According to this measurement California one of the least charitable states:
https://wallethub.com/edu/most-and-least-charitable-states/8555/
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yep must be local laws. I would think in most places not renting to someone based on their income too high would be housing discrimination unless the said housing was under some government program.
I think it's probably LIHTC too, but income is not a suspect category, you can discriminate based on it (unless it's a really a way to discriminate in some non-permitted way, instead).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions