Page 100 of 122 FirstFirst ... 50909899100101102110 ... LastLast
Results 991 to 1,000 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #991
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    At one time the only hospitals that would treat patients (even in ER) without proof of insurance were government funded hospitals. Then it was decided if a hospital received any government money, even reimbursement for services covered under Medicare and Medicaid, they would also be required to treat anyone asking for emergency services whether they had insurance or not. Reimbursement for those services is not guaranteed by the government. If this healthcare law is struck down should we also repeal the law requiring hospitals to treat anyone?
    Yes. Let's get the government completely out of the health care business. Completely.

    Why do you believe someone should have his neighbors pay for something he or she wants?

  2. #992
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Ah yes, you're referring to the universal health care bill signed into law by Ronald Reagan.
    I can almost see you licking your chops.

  3. #993
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    No. Everyone deserves medical treatment regardless if they have insurance or not. The problem here is that you are assuming that just because someone doesn't have insurance that automatically means that they won't pay thier medical bill. The other problem here is that you are assuming that the few that don't pay their medical bill (according to the arguements that I read during the SCOTUS hearings it was about 20% of uninsured that didn't pay their bills) are what is mainly driving up the costs of healthcare. They're not. Sure they do to a degree...but minor compared to other things. Like over regulation. When doctors spend more time on filling out forms than they do taking care of patients then I'd say that there is a problem. Medical lawsuits is another big problem. Because of them doctors often perform unnecessary tests just so that they will have a less likely chance of being sued.

    I'm sure that there are other things besides the over regulation and law suits that drive up the cost of healthcare. Why doesn't the government take care of those before putting all the blame on those that are uninsured? If after those are fixed then maybe, if it is still such a huge deal that it is now, we start looking to fixed the uninsured "problem"?
    This is unfair. You have driven me to two likes just this evening. How shall I continue to dislike you in the face of all this reasonable argumentation?

  4. #994
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    I have no idea why you play these games or what you get out of it, but it's pretty pathetic.

    Or, perhaps it's you who simply doesn't understand what I wrote. You've never bothered to respond to it, so that's as good a theory as any.
    He did mention Alzheimer's disease. I am inclined to believe him.

  5. #995
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Yes. Let's get the government completely out of the health care business. Completely.

    Why do you believe someone should have his neighbors pay for something he or she wants?
    I happen to have a great appreciation for the National Institutes of Health. Much of the research they have done and funded has contributed to the betterment of my quality of life as well as millions of others. And in turn I'm willing to bet people that have benefitted from the NIH endeavors have also contributed to your quality of life in a positive way.

  6. #996
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    anti-selection, or as that poster called it "adverse selection", simply means that people that are sick and need insurance are the ones most likely to purchase insurance. Those that do not have a condition and will not need it, do not currently foresee needing it are the least likely to purchase. So, IMO, Harshaw is correct.
    There, I fixed it for you. No one can know what's coming next so saying the "will not need it" is just flap.



    As for the final comment, what you're saying is NOT what Hawshaw is saying.
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 04-06-12 at 12:46 AM.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  7. #997
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    My first inclination is to point out that you are an ignorant fool. But that would be impolite of me.

    So let us agree to disagree.
    Sure! I agree to disagree with short-sighted people all the time, so why not you, too?
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  8. #998
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Why do you believe someone should have his neighbors pay for something he or she wants?
    jabberwocky
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  9. #999
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    How do you define "government benefits"? Personally, I don't call reimbursement by the government for services rendered as "getting government benefits".
    Reimbursement by the government is in a way "insurance". The hospital get paid right? Through "reimbursement"? So why is it that if they are getting paid, whether its through the government, the insurance company, or the individual, that all of a sudden its "driving the price of healthcare up" so bad that they need the government to set up this monstrosity of a bill? If they're getting paid then how is it that they can claim that they are not getting paid? Easy of course...just blame it on the individuals that don't pay and ignore that they do get paid by the government. Of course this is also not counting the fact that hospitals/collection agencies sue the crap out of those that don't pay and then they lose everything in order for it to get paid. So what? Are they getting twice the money now? The government "reimbursement" AND the law suit?

    And yes, government reimbursement by the government is a form of government benefit. For the simple fact that without that reimbursement then the hospital wouldn't get paid at all unless of course they sued the person oweing them.

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Does Lockheed Martin get government benefits by selling Uncle Sam an F-22? Could we force Lockheed Martin to deliver 12 F-22's to Japan with no contract or guarantee of payment?
    The government buying an F-22 does not equal reimbursing a hospital. Horrible analogy there Dan.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #1000
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    I can almost see you licking your chops.
    I can absolutely see you trying to divert attention from the fact that Reagan signed the universal health care law.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •