|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
Pizza it is.  |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:56 pm |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Public D schreef:
Dave asks:
"Can you name anyone that was refused treatment because they didn't have insurance?"
Is that a joke? Have you done any research about the issue you're railing against? Here's a start:
http://www.workingamerica.org/healthcarehustle/story.cfm?appState=liststories
Would you mind telling the class exactly how much your daughter's treatment cost? Would you mind telling us what her plan would have been if she needed treatment for a health issue that wasn't the result of somebody else's negligence?
I can't remember the exact number, about $17,000.00. The hospital turned the bill over to a collection agency. If she had been working at the time, they would have garnisheed her paycheck. With her leg in a cast, she couldn't get a job, and she wasn't eligible for any assistance. For any other health issue she would have gone to the ER and been treated, just like any other resident of Flint.
After her claim was paid, I addressed the Council & asked them how many feet of sidewalk could have been replaced for that money. By the way, that particular section of sidewalk has still not been repaired, and is in worse shape now than it was when she was hurt. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 7:51 am |
|
|
Public D
F L I N T O I D
|
$17,000 is a lot of money, Dave. If she'd hurt herself but wasn't able to sue anybody, or if she'd lost this particular lawsuit, you're right, her future wages would be garnished, her credit would suffer, the credit checks employers do with more and more frequency on job applicants might have hurt her ability to even get a job, which means there would be no wages to garnish, no job to pay for all of life's other expenses, no employer-paid health care, etc.
So while you may be right, the ER will treat uninsured patients for such accidents, they still come after the money you owe them. She's very lucky to have been able to file a lawsuit and win damages against the city to pay her hospital bill.
For far too many people, the previous scenario is their reality. And the reason why single-payer national health care is so important. If your daughter had slipped in her own bathtub, her story might very well be the same. I'm glad for your family that it isn't.
Incidentally, what's her take on the issue (if you don't mine my asking)? |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:53 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
She was happy the settlement was enough to pay the bills. If it hadn't, she would have had financial problems for a long time.
As far as a single payer system goes, something along the lines of Medicare might work. Provide coverage for everyone like Medicare does for Seniors now. Bill the Government rather than an insurance company. If a person wants to buy extra coverage, that would be their option.
My concern about a national Health Care plan is that the government will just add another layer of bureaucracy that will suck more money out of the system, plus add another layer of regulations that do nothing to help people. care has to be taken to avoid a system that rations care.
I have Medicare and insurance provided by my former employer, and I have Medicare premiums deducted from my pension as well as copays. I get my prescriptions through the mail with a copay. What I don't like is the fact that my prescription coverage doesn't pay for all drugs. I was taking Please delete me!, which worked really well. But, my insurance no longer pays for Please delete me!. They switched me to a generic that is cheaper, but doesn't work. My cholesterol is now back to where it was before I started Please delete me!. If i want it back down, I'll have to pay for the Please delete me! myself. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:19 pm |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Dave Starr schreef:
I get my prescriptions through the mail with a copay. What I don't like is the fact that my prescription coverage doesn't pay for all drugs. I was taking Please delete me!, which worked really well. But, my insurance no longer pays for Please delete me!. They switched me to a generic that is cheaper, but doesn't work. My cholesterol is now back to where it was before I started Please delete me!. If i want it back down, I'll have to pay for the Please delete me! myself.
Isn't that a result of the VEBA plan for GM retirees? Was there any provision in that plan for DAW (Dispense as Written) order from doctor? If you can't get a DAW prescription and you don't have money to pay for it yourself, would doctor's office give you free samples? Or contact the website of the drug maker and tell them your dilemma, maybe they'd make you a deal. If all responses are in the negative, then it looks like it's up to you to reduce cholesterol with diet and exercise.
Not related to your case, but it brings to mind the thought I had as I watched another prescription commercial on TV this morning. The U.S should be called "Valley of the Dolls" as all the pharmaceutical commercials on TV seem to imply we need a different drug for everything in our daily existence. |
|
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:04 pm |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| Not the VEBA, it won't take effect for a while, yet. It's Blue Care Network & their drug plan through Medco. The Doctor can write a letter explaining why a "non-formulary" drug is required. But, my guess is too many of those letters and a Doctor would be dropped from the plan, so it probably wouldn't get written. I'll have to check the price & see if I can afford to pay for it myself. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:57 pm |
|
|
Demeralda
F L I N T O I D
|
Okay, first of all.
GAH!!!
1) While the hospital may not let you BLEED TO DEATH, you have no arrangements for ongoing care. I know this personally because it happened to me. Is someone supposed to visit the ER every time they need dialysis?
Not only did I not have insurance, the surgery the hospital performed was unnecessary. So $15000 to be worse off than I began. How's that for the greatest care in the world?
2) Twotap, I admire and despise your bulldog-like pursuit of articles to prove your points, but I have to tell you: If you have to dig out articles FROM 2002!!! you've lost dude! Get with the modern world! If you can't make the claim you want, you don't dig through 20 years of archives to find the one hold out that supposedly proves your point. It actually hurts your credibility. Furthermore, amid all those horrors -- the muggings, robberies, etc. -- there were no MURDERS listed! So "crime rate" is a relative term; I think most of us are worried about violent crime, seriously.
Lastly...
NO ONE WANTS YOUR GUN DUDE. RELAX. |
|
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:55 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
NO ONE WANTS YOUR GUN DUDE. RELAX.
Really, now your starting to sound like Gore, Kerry, Hillary and Baracko. Check out their voting records on 2nd ammendment issues and get back with us. I cant wait to see a camo clad Baracko or Hillary sloshing around in some duck marsh with a borrowed $5000 overunder carrying a couple of ducks someone else shot telling us that they really didnt mean all those antigun statements and votes they made and how much they support our 2nd ammendment rights. I find it also interesting that you somehow try to make light of those of us determined to defend the constitution against the Barackos and Hillarys out there and apparently refuse to look at their records yet come unglued if anyone mentions regulating a supposed right near and dear to your heart that is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. By the way 2002 is only 6 years in the past not 20 and a disarmed England still has a huge crime problem. Of course if you can find a recent article dissputing that I will concede. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:31 pm |
|
|
Demeralda
F L I N T O I D
|
Dude, people posture on a lot of points, but do you think it would actually come to pass? I can't think of any politician in America who would actually say we should be gun free. NOT ONE.
But still, honestly, are these the two issues that keep us up at night? Maybe for you. For me, I'm way more worried about the 3 people I've heard got laid off last week.
I didn't say your article was 20 years old, I said you had to go through 20 years of articles to find one 
Furthermore, your argument seems to be that it's not enough to simply leave it alone; that, in fact, for anyone to prove "support" they have to be out with an uzi shooting at pigeons. And the irony here is that they can't win: if they did, you'd say poser (as you already have), and if they don't, they're *obviously* against you.
I know paranoid people do have enemies, but this might be taking it a bit far.
I don't know what needs to be disputed here. The Brits were shocked at the availability of guns... so what? I was shocked I had to go to the state liquor store in Canada to buy my booze. My sister was shocked she couldn't buy a peach in New Zealand.
But it's irrefutable that England does NOT have mass school shootings, mall shootings, snipers on the roadside, and I doubt they spend what we do on incarceration. So why is this society so horrible? (Other than their imperial actions of the past and their hegemony over the western world...) |
|
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:23 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
I sleep fine at night. You obviously didnt or will not check on the voting record of say Baracko. England disarmed its populus on the assumption that crime would go down. The Uzi shooting pigeons comment is pretty juvenile coming from you. The Britz said they were shocked at the avaliabilty of handguns at Wallyworld.  Never happened Wally world does not and has not sold handguns except for their Alaska stores. Comment made for shock benefit? Probably.
I can't think of any politician in America who would actually say we should be gun free. NOT ONE.
Try this.
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban,
picking up every one of them... "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,
"I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
--U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95
"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
--U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93
Friday, February 22, 2008
BARACK OBAMA
Looking at Obama on Guns and on Crime
Bob Owens details how Barack Obama is really tough on gun owners and dealers... while strangely soft on those who actually use guns to commit crimes:
In his answers to the 1998 Illinois State Legislative National Political Awareness Test, Obama said he favored a ban on “the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.”
By definition, this would include all pistols ever made, from .22 target pistols used in the Olympics to rarely-fired pistols kept in nightstands and sock drawers for the defense of families, and every pistol in between. Obama’s strident stand would also ban all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, whatever their previously legal purpose.
In 1999, Obama proposed to make it a felony for the gun owner if a firearm stolen from his residence and used in a crime was not “securely stored” — effectively negating the homeowner’s right to self-defense.
That same year, Obama bravely voted “present” on a law that would require teens 15 and older to be tried as adults for firing weapons on or near school grounds. Obama also proposed the idea of banning businesses that sell firearms from operating within five miles of a park or school — restrictions that would treat gun shops worse than “adult” businesses trafficking in pornography.
I note also:
On gun control, Obama answered the same 1996 Illinois questionnaire by endorsing a statewide ban on handguns
. He soon disavowed that position, claiming that a staffer had filled out the survey in error, but he was still calling for a national ban on carrying handguns as a U.S. Senate candidate in 2004, according to a Chicago Tribune report.
Let's also note that Obama opposes mandatory minimum sentencing, and was given a rating of 75 by the National Criminal Justice Association in 2005, which is the bare minimum to qualify for a "mixed" record on crime; 74 or lower is deemed a "soft on crime" record by the organization.
02/22 09:47 AM |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:57 pm |
|
|
tricky mutha
F L I N T O I D
|
| TT- do you get a commission every time someone buys cold steel? |
_________________
"Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there"- John Steinbeck |
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:25 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
| I wish but than of course I would have the alky tobakky firearms gang knocking at my door. Actually I couldnt care less who decides to purchase a firearm for protection but dont expect those of us who do to sit idly by while some anti 2nd ammendment clown like Baracko or Hillary try to slide in under their antigun radar into the Prez s chair. Oh ya by the way in the world of us self defense practioners the term "Cold Steel" is usually used in reference to an edged weapon. |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:45 pm |
|
|
Demeralda
F L I N T O I D
|
twotap, my comment is not juvenile, it's hyperbole. That means I exaggerated it to point out how far you could take it.
So someone caught Diane Feinstein with a funny quote (which could be from any context). But touche, I did say NOT ONE. A touch of hyperbole again, but I think you get the gist of what I'm saying.
You brought this up yesterday, and I didn't touch it until I could think about it.
"I find it also interesting that you somehow try to make light of those of us determined to defend the constitution against the Barackos and Hillarys out there and apparently refuse to look at their records yet come unglued if anyone mentions regulating a supposed right near and dear to your heart that is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. "
I don't think it requires a rigid defense, because I don't think it's GOING ANYWHERE!! You've made my point for me, exactly. It's in the constitution. It's never going to be taken out of the constitution. My funny little undeserved right, however, is subject to the whim of the governing. So technically, yes, I SHOULD be worried.
I don't take voting records much to heart, mostly because I know that the outcome is predetermined. They already KNOW what's going to pass or not when they go to vote, so weird little votes like that are sometimes just like statements of conscience.
But, let's try this one other way:
Despite what Hillary or Barack or even what GOD thinks, Do you really think, in your heart of hearts, any politicians are going to take up the standard for a gun ban? IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
But that never satisfies NRA megalomaniacs. God forbid someone suggests that the recently released pedophilic sharpshooter should have to wait a whole day to buy his AK-47. |
|
|
|
Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:49 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
[quote]But that never satisfies NRA megalomaniacs. God forbid someone suggests that the recently released pedophilic sharpshooter should have to wait a whole day to buy his AK-47.[/quote
Show me where and how that can be tied to the NRA or how in the world you came up with that??? If there is one organization that calls for and demands tough laws against felons owning and commiting crimes with firearms it is the NRA. Show me where either of the two front runners have ever demanded tougher penaltys for felons commiting crimes. And if you dont judge a candidate on his or her past record what do you judge them on?
quote:
So someone caught Diane Feinstein with a funny quote
I assure you no one who supports the 2nd ammendment found DI Fis comment to be humorous. Apparently you found some humor in it that most of us missed.
I just had to move your comment on the ELF terrorist organization to this thread since you seem to hold them in higher regard than the millions of honest law abiding NRA members.
quote:
I don't approve of their methods particularly, but they are most certainly not wacko.
"Particularly" means what by the way? 
|
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:14 am |
|
|
Demeralda
F L I N T O I D
|
The NRA only cares about incidents that make them look bad. Luckily, they have their partners in the media to turn the blame elsewhere. I don't think the NRA are wackos either, I just think they're myopic.
You're right, all we have is a record, but that's why I don't cherry pick votes out; it's more of a general philosophy.
If you don't believe that the PENALTIES are deterrents, why would you do that? What makes *YOU* think that's the answer? Sorry, it's not. It doesn't matter what the GD "tougher laws" are after the guy pops 10 people and then offs himself. That jail time is really going to scare him, I tell ya!
FUNNY doesn't always mean ha-ha funny. It means odd, quixotic, strange.
On ELF: While an NRA member lies in bed at night, gently stroking Lucy his assault rifle and worrying about how to protect her, those ELF peeps are worried about the habitat, the creatures, the water, and the flora and fauna that are being destroyed by the Mcmansions and the endless pursuit by the bourgeoisie of MORE MORE MORE to prove to the world that YES, they RULE! So while I'm not crazy about the whole arson thing, and I certainly think it could result in an injury, I won't shed a tear over lost symbols of economic conquest.
And in some ways, I do hold them in higher regard, sorry. At least they're worried about things that are really going to happen, not paranoid about losing a right that I promise will endure as long as this country does (or until we end up in the FEMA camps, eh?). |
|
|
|
Tue Mar 04, 2008 10:19 am |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
