Should people without health insurance, etc. be allowed to die?

[stars2heaven]

Ok, so, if the person was well off enough, why shut them off for not having insurance? (the person in a coma example.) If he has the money, he can pay for it.

 

I'm sure it is possible for a person to be in the position of being able to afford to pay for insurance but not necessarily the direct costs of medical bills. There is, after all, a significant difference in prices with even the most minor of procedures.

[Ghogiel]

Ok, so, if the person was well off enough, why shut them off for not having insurance? (the person in a coma example.) If he has the money, he can pay for it.

 

I'm sure it is possible for a person to be in the position of being able to afford to pay for insurance but not necessarily the direct costs of medical bills. There is, after all, a significant difference in prices with even the most minor of procedures.

imho, The default in this circumstance should be to fix the man first, then he can worry about paying off med bills.

[HeyYou]

Ok, so, if the person was well off enough, why shut them off for not having insurance? (the person in a coma example.) If he has the money, he can pay for it.

 

I'm sure it is possible for a person to be in the position of being able to afford to pay for insurance but not necessarily the direct costs of medical bills. There is, after all, a significant difference in prices with even the most minor of procedures.

 

That's just it though..... I would be REAL curious to know what the difference was between what it actually costs them for X procedure, vs. how much they actually CHARGE for it. Friend of mine had to be in the hospital for a bit. One part of the bill, from just one department.... was 5000 dollars. She didn't have that kind of scratch, so, the hospital offered her a deal, pay 500 dollars, and they would 'write off' the rest.

 

Not to mention the sheer number of bills she got, just for a two day stay at the hospital. There were over 40 separate bills, each from a different entity. Now, consider the administration that needs to be in place to bill insurance companies for even just that little bit..... Holy smoke.

 

Health care costs here in the US have skyrocketed..... more so than ANY other anglo country. Now, the government, in their infinite wisdom..... seem to think they can control costs by REQUIRING folks to purchase insurance... (which I view as unconstitutional, but, that's a topic for another thread) Insurance companies add nothing BUT cost to health care..... Want to reduce cost? Increase SUPPLY, NOT demand. Silly government.....

[DeadMansFist849]

Then there's also the fact that some insurers refuse to cover certain procedures because apparently it's OK to not cover something that someone might need in order to remain alive and sane just because the head of the insurance company has a moral objection.

[Ghogiel]

Man comes into ER, unconscious, needs attention, has no medical cover, Who is it that decides what this man is worth? is there someone with a calculator saying, well Ghogiel earns this amount, the treatment would cost X, so in theory he can pay it off at a rate of Y by 2025. Ok lets go to work, save his life.

 

What if I was in between jobs?

Edited September 13, 2011 by Ghogiel

[draconix]

The matter should be taken care of at the state-level, if at all, not federally. People shouldn't have to pay taxes towards saving the lives of irresponsible people. However I see no reason that Churches couldn't practice what they preach should they so choose to, and decide to help out their fellow men and women in need. Isn't that the kinds of thing that offerings and tithing are supposed to go to, rather than church-empire building?

 

However, I also think that in a perfect world, insurance shouldn't be necessary to cover the cost of most illnesses. I think that it's the availability of health insurance that jacks up the prices of medicines and treatments. Doctor X can charge a thousand dollars because they know that their insurance company can pay it.

[greywaste]

The matter should be taken care of at the state-level, if at all, not federally. People shouldn't have to pay taxes towards saving the lives of irresponsible people. However I see no reason that Churches couldn't practice what they preach should they so choose to, and decide to help out their fellow men and women in need. Isn't that the kinds of thing that offerings and tithing are supposed to go to, rather than church-empire building?

 

However, I also think that in a perfect world, insurance shouldn't be necessary to cover the cost of most illnesses. I think that it's the availability of health insurance that jacks up the prices of medicines and treatments. Doctor X can charge a thousand dollars because they know that their insurance company can pay it.

 

Well said, and that's coming from me - a 20 a day smoker for about 19 years now (Incidentally for those that conveniently forget, So far I've paid somewhere in the region of $31,000 in govt taxes on my filthy habit too).

Regarding the Church stuff, they do give a lot out, but I think most of it is going overseas. Don't have any exact figures here but I'd agree that I'm sure more could be done.

 

And to address a generalisation stated earlier : The argument people make is that by giving people healthcare, they are no longer free due to not taking responsibility for their actions. This of course is a incorrect statement, since sometimes it is not their actions that cause problems.

Err no. For most it's actually the fact that your health is not my responsibility unless I choose to help you. The same applies to my health.

 

For the broader topic, huffpo leapt all over it because it's great ammunition for them, but I saw it as more of a rhetorical expression of principle. Your health and with it your life should be your most treasured possession. Getting other people to carry you through life is becoming all too common though.

 

 

To answer the initial question over letting someone die: Of course not, heal him up and then send him the bill later. If he can't pay, give him more time or a payment plan, there are plenty of ways of recovering debt.

[ub3rman123]

I'll just leave this here.

[HeyYou]

I'll just leave this here.

 

A similar case in Michigan recently prompted the state to offer some minor dental help for those on medicare/caid.

 

@greywaste:

 

As for the whole "less free" thing..... Let's take a look at where your taxes go, without your consent.

 

Iraq.

Afghanistan.

Libya.

Yemen.

Saudi Arabia.

Israel

Egypt

 

And a HOST of others. For Egypt, and Israel, the bulk of the aid is MILITARY aid. So, your tax dollars are buying weapons for other countries. (which of course, they buy from us...... for the most part.)

 

So you don't have an issue buying weapons for foreign nations, but, you DO have an issue with your tax dollars going to help fellow americans? (I am assuming you are american....)

[greywaste]

@greywaste:

 

As for the whole "less free" thing..... Let's take a look at where your taxes go, without your consent.

 

Iraq.

Afghanistan.

Libya.

Yemen.

Saudi Arabia.

Israel

Egypt

 

And a HOST of others. For Egypt, and Israel, the bulk of the aid is MILITARY aid. So, your tax dollars are buying weapons for other countries. (which of course, they buy from us...... for the most part.)

 

So you don't have an issue buying weapons for foreign nations, but, you DO have an issue with your tax dollars going to help fellow americans? (I am assuming you are american....)

I never talked about being less "free", but anyway...

 

Believe it or not I'm aware that there are things called foreign aid, military spending etc. Frankly I'm not happy about a great deal of it (I don't recall saying anywhere that I was..), but this topic is about healthcare and I was adressing the principle beyond that.

(I'm living just above poverty level by the way too in case anybody thinks I'm just some "greedy heartless fat cat")

 

And no, I'm not an American. I'm a British expat living in a country with some of the worlds highest taxes that has taxpayer funded healthcare. A healthcare system in which more and more health related and biological issues are being deemed "necessary" to be taxpayer funded.

In the upcoming election here, if the opposition wins, Fertility treatment is going to become taxpayer funded. - This is the kind of thing I believe will happen in America if Obamacare isn't repealed and I don't believe any country can handle those kind of costs sustainably because the cost will grow and grow just like it does with poorly administered welfare.

Edited September 14, 2011 by greywaste