• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate Bill Fines People More Than $1,000 for Refusing Health Care Coverage

Health care costs more than that, as you know. Or maybe you don't. Does your employer pay your health care? I pay my own for my family. It costs about $15,000 a year. I would appreciate a lower cost alternative, especially as we are rarely sick.

My wife's employer(I am in college) contributes towards healthcare, but we still pay for it as well, well more than $1000 a year. I am well aware that healthcare costs more than $1000 a year. As it should. I don't expect to go to an all inclusive resort, and pay them the same rate I would pay for a roach motel. If they did that, they'd be out of business in the blink of an eye.
 
My wife's employer(I am in college) contributes towards healthcare, but we still pay for it as well, well more than $1000 a year. I am well aware that healthcare costs more than $1000 a year. As it should. I don't expect to go to an all inclusive resort, and pay them the same rate I would pay for a roach motel. If they did that, they'd be out of business in the blink of an eye.



Cancun, was having awesome deals due to the swine flu.... 535 for 3 days all inclusive, including flights. :thumbs:
 
My wife's employer(I am in college) contributes towards healthcare, but we still pay for it as well, well more than $1000 a year. I am well aware that healthcare costs more than $1000 a year. As it should. I don't expect to go to an all inclusive resort, and pay them the same rate I would pay for a roach motel. If they did that, they'd be out of business in the blink of an eye.

I am not aware of any roach motel hospitals. I think they are all on the Sheraton level.
 
I am not aware of any roach motel hospitals. I think they are all on the Sheraton level.

You really don't bother to read about how UHC Hospitals in other countries are faring do you?

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Kent | Working undercover at dirty hospital
Three years ago BBC News reporter Danielle Glavin worked undercover to highlight poor hygiene standards at a hospital run by the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust.
She speaks of her time there after a report said 90 deaths at the trust's hospitals could have been avoided.
WalesOnline - News - Wales News - Hospitals’ dirty secrets uncovered
NURSES are being forced to store vital clean hospital equipment in bathrooms, according to an RCN survey .

A quarter of nurses in Wales said the practice was commonplace, raising concerns about the risk of contamination and the spread of infections, such as MRSA and C.difficile.

It is understand that IV drip stands and commodes are being kept in bathrooms because of a lack of storage space on wards.

A survey commissioned by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) also found that more than a third of nurses charged with decontaminating equipment have not been formally trained to do such work.

Dr Peter Carter, the RCN’s chief executive and general secretary, said: “Having the time and space to clean and then store essential everyday hospital equipment such as IV stands, commodes and patient cushions is crucial in keeping patients safe from dangerous infections. It’s shocking that some nurses have no choice but to store equipment in hospital bathrooms and in sluices.

Ten dirty hospitals get support to clean up | Society | guardian.co.uk
Ten hospitals in England were yesterday named and shamed as facing the biggest struggle to meet cleanliness targets by the health secretary, Alan Milburn, who is sending in professional support teams and delegating extra funds to clean up the poorest performers.

The Department of Health claimed yesterday that standards had risen spectacularly in the last six months: the number of unacceptably dirty hospitals has dropped from 253 to 40.

The drive to clean up hospitals was announced in the government's NHS plan last July, partly in response to patient complaints but also in an effort to reduce the number of infections in hospital, which affect 100,000 people a year, kill 5,000 and cost the NHS about £1bn to treat.


But who gives a damn about dirty hospitals, their FREE!!! Everyone is equal now!


Seriously, people that push for the Government to take over healthcare, piss me off. You don't care about the consequences, you don't care about the damage you'll do, you only care about the political theory being met.
 
Ok, so just so we all understand...

Is the conservative solution to health care to allow everyone to simply choose to buy health coverage, or not as the case may be? And then, if a person shows up at an emergency room or doctor's office with no insurance or cash in hand, refuse to treat them? This is the purely free market solution, isn't it? Let them die if they don't have a way to pay?

Because, if not, and we are going to give them care, or require them to be cared for, we are all paying for that health care one way or another. Care givers have to cover the costs of providing it, and the money doesn't magically appear out of thin air: They charge all the other patients more!

At least with the fine, they have paid us out in advance for covering their risk. This is a solution to please the center of the political spectrum... I would prefer socialized medicine.

So, just so we all understand, please tell us the conservative solution to providing health care, or not, as the case may be. What is your alternative to requiring people to obtain insurance? What would please conservatives?
 
Ok, so just so we all understand...

Is the conservative solution to health care to allow everyone to simply choose to buy health coverage, or not as the case may be? And then, if a person shows up at an emergency room or doctor's office with no insurance or cash in hand, refuse to treat them? This is the purely free market solution, isn't it? Let them die if they don't have a way to pay?

Because, if not, and we are going to give them care, or require them to be cared for, we are all paying for that health care one way or another. Care givers have to cover the costs of providing it, and the money doesn't magically appear out of thin air: They charge all the other patients more!

At least with the fine, they have paid us out in advance for covering their risk. This is a solution to please the center of the political spectrum... I would prefer socialized medicine.

So, just so we all understand, please tell us the conservative solution to providing health care, or not, as the case may be. What is your alternative to requiring people to obtain insurance? What would please conservatives?
Yes, we Conservatvies are cold hearted bastards that think anyone too poor or too stupid to afford Health coverage should die in the streets. You got us.


It couldn't be we want to remove the costlier elements of healthcare, like making ER's no longer "the family doctors" of the poor. No, way, that would make sense, we hate them really.

It couldn't be we detest the fact that if as an American Citizen, with health insurance, if our coverage doesn't cover the entire bill, and even though we paid at the time, they still come after us for small amounts, where as if we were illegals they pay nothing, we wouldn't want to reform that problem... no, we just hate them damn dirty illegals.

It couldn't be that we want tort reform to because we think Doctors and Hospitals spend way too much time, effort and resources covering their asses from lawyers, no we hate consumers and want to allow incompetence to flourish.

It's not that we look at other countries that have tried UHC and find that the costs far outweigh the benefits, it's that we're stingy bastards that don't want to help anyone but our selves.

Yeah, you figured us out... :roll:
 
I am not aware of any roach motel hospitals. I think they are all on the Sheraton level.

Cook county (now John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital) is a ****ing roach motel.

It's also the primary reason I am very, very wary of governemnt health care.
 
Yes, we Conservatvies are cold hearted bastards that think anyone too poor or too stupid to afford Health coverage should die in the streets. You got us.


It couldn't be we want to remove the costlier elements of healthcare, like making ER's no longer "the family doctors" of the poor. No, way, that would make sense, we hate them really.

It couldn't be we detest the fact that if as an American Citizen, with health insurance, if our coverage doesn't cover the entire bill, and even though we paid at the time, they still come after us for small amounts, where as if we were illegals they pay nothing, we wouldn't want to reform that problem... no, we just hate them damn dirty illegals.

It couldn't be that we want tort reform to because we think Doctors and Hospitals spend way too much time, effort and resources covering their asses from lawyers, no we hate consumers and want to allow incompetence to flourish.

It's not that we look at other countries that have tried UHC and find that the costs far outweigh the benefits, it's that we're stingy bastards that don't want to help anyone but our selves.

Yeah, you figured us out... :roll:

Alright, well come on then, what IS your solution? You're partly just pointing out the some flaws to the moderate/liberal solution. The rest of your post is hyperbolic drama. Put yourself out there, let us see what you've got.

How, for instance, would you cease letting ERs be the family doctor for the poor, exactly?

No, I haven't figured you out! That's why I am asking what, specifically, you do want to do. I am having trouble reading your mind, and I can't come up with my own market solution that will address all the problems even you allude to as being part of any truly market solution.

So, let's hear it.
 
How, for instance, would you cease letting ERs be the family doctor for the poor, exactly?

What's the justification for forcing doctors to treat patients?
 
I want a direct quote from the section of the bill that says this. I call BS on Faux News because this information that has been released has said the opposite of this. Prove the article's ideas and let me know. Otherwise, this is more right wing scare tactics.
 
Alright, well come on then, what IS your solution? You're partly just pointing out the some flaws to the moderate/liberal solution. The rest of your post is hyperbolic drama. Put yourself out there, let us see what you've got.

How, for instance, would you cease letting ERs be the family doctor for the poor, exactly?

No, I haven't figured you out! That's why I am asking what, specifically, you do want to do. I am having trouble reading your mind, and I can't come up with my own market solution that will address all the problems even you allude to as being part of any truly market solution.

So, let's hear it.

Actually I gave you answers.


See this is where the Left and Right can never meet, because one side inherinetly believes they have a moral obligation to protect people "from themselves" and the other believes people should be given freedom to succeed or fail.

One side thinks life HAS to be fair, the other believes fair is giving each person the a fair chance.

You don't get that. You are stuck on "CRISIS IN HEALTHCARE" there is no crisis. Period. Is it costly? Yes, can that be addressed? Yes, read through what I wrote above, remove the sarcasm and there in lies the heart of "our fix".

Unlike you, I don't believe that Government taking over will help in anyway, shape fashion or form.
 
Actually I gave you answers.


See this is where the Left and Right can never meet, because one side inherinetly believes they have a moral obligation to protect people "from themselves" and the other believes people should be given freedom to succeed or fail.

One side thinks life HAS to be fair, the other believes fair is giving each person the a fair chance.

You don't get that. You are stuck on "CRISIS IN HEALTHCARE" there is no crisis. Period. Is it costly? Yes, can that be addressed? Yes, read through what I wrote above, remove the sarcasm and there in lies the heart of "our fix".

Unlike you, I don't believe that Government taking over will help in anyway, shape fashion or form.

There is no crisis in Health Care..... :rofl HAHA. I have a bridge to sell you!
 
There is no crisis in Health Care..... :rofl HAHA. I have a bridge to sell you!

What are the aspects of the crisis. Please just list them and don't go on a long tirade. Make your list something like:

1. Uninsured Americans
2. High cost

etc.

This way there can be structure to the debate.
 
Ok, so just so we all understand...

Is the conservative solution to health care to allow everyone to simply choose to buy health coverage, or not as the case may be? And then, if a person shows up at an emergency room or doctor's office with no insurance or cash in hand, refuse to treat them? This is the purely free market solution, isn't it? Let them die if they don't have a way to pay?

Because, if not, and we are going to give them care, or require them to be cared for, we are all paying for that health care one way or another. Care givers have to cover the costs of providing it, and the money doesn't magically appear out of thin air: They charge all the other patients more!

At least with the fine, they have paid us out in advance for covering their risk. This is a solution to please the center of the political spectrum... I would prefer socialized medicine.

So, just so we all understand, please tell us the conservative solution to providing health care, or not, as the case may be. What is your alternative to requiring people to obtain insurance? What would please conservatives?

The conservative idea should be, to leave this issue to the individual states, since it is their legislatures, and their own appointed commissioners who regulate the insurance industry and write its laws. There is no need for federal intervention, because the power to make any necessary changes already exists at the state level. Once again, it is an unecessary growth of government.

Now, for the people that believe they are being overcharged for healthcare, lets make this personal for you, so you all grasp the idea of what you are paying for.

I come to you, asking you to take on the risk of my healthcare needs. In this scenario I have a wife and two kids. I agree that I will pay for the first $1500 of medical care, and will pay for 20% of my healthcare costs up to $7500 at which point you have to pay 100% for everything, up to a 2 million dollar limit. You also agree to cover yearly physicals and dental checkups for all my family members, 100%.

How much do you think you should charge me, with the risk you are assuming on my behalf?
 
For all these people saying that the tax payers will have to pay if I do not have insurance and dont have $KK in the bank and I have some type of medical crisis is not correct. Sure some that may be disabled due to the medical issue will not be able to pay but all hospitals will allow you to make payments if you cannot pay in full at the time.
 
a little fine? some of them should be jailed, put in a chain gang, and made to clean up litter....

I have said this many times, I KNOW many people who have plenty of money to buy family medical insurance, but do not. They would rather have a collection of DVD's, video games, internet, cable TV, cell phones, a jacked up 4x4 that never goes off road, etc.
When the irresponsible stop stealing my contributions to the tax collector, then my taxes MIGHT go down....
OK, that part might be naive, but you get the point.

Can anyone here give me any justification for these kinds of parents NOT being fined?:shock:
 
On a side note, how exactly does this compare to the Government recording my personal phone calls (Patriot Act)?

So exactly what terrorists phone calls are you receiving?
 
So exactly what terrorists phone calls are you receiving?

somebody in Washington D.C. keeps calling me, but when I see it on the caller ID, I don't answer. They don't leave a message either.
Could it be terrorists? space aliens with anal probling on their minds?
or should I fear the worst, somebody from this forum?:confused:
 
somebody in Washington D.C. keeps calling me, but when I see it on the caller ID, I don't answer. They don't leave a message either.
Could it be terrorists? space aliens with anal probling on their minds?
or should I fear the worst, somebody from this forum?:confused:

Gib was the one claiming to be monitored by overseas terrorist tracking tools.


images
 
I don't recall in the election his stating the way he would obtain insurance for everyone is sending people to prison who don't or can't obtain insurance.
 
Ok, so just so we all understand...

Is the conservative solution to health care to allow everyone to simply choose to buy health coverage, or not as the case may be? And then, if a person shows up at an emergency room or doctor's office with no insurance or cash in hand, refuse to treat them? This is the purely free market solution, isn't it? Let them die if they don't have a way to pay?

Because, if not, and we are going to give them care, or require them to be cared for, we are all paying for that health care one way or another. Care givers have to cover the costs of providing it, and the money doesn't magically appear out of thin air: They charge all the other patients more!

At least with the fine, they have paid us out in advance for covering their risk. This is a solution to please the center of the political spectrum... I would prefer socialized medicine.

So, just so we all understand, please tell us the conservative solution to providing health care, or not, as the case may be. What is your alternative to requiring people to obtain insurance? What would please conservatives?





yes this is exactly correct. :roll:



what better way to up the organ donor pool to us rich bastards than to refuse to treat the uninsured. :roll:
 
Cook county (now John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital) is a ****ing roach motel.

It's also the primary reason I am very, very wary of governemnt health care.





So these UHC types, do they think they are gonna get better care than what the VA provides? :doh
 
Back
Top Bottom