Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Its the government that said everyone must get care, so your argument has little to no value to me when it comes to the idea it costs us one way or the other.
Still, all groups cost the hospital and the people money. Its just a matter of how much.
Not really. Government didn't just decide these things. People did. Take not turning people away from emergency rooms. There was a time when hospitals did just that, even in life threatening situations. Not all did, but because they could, it happened. Those without insurance were sent to charity hospitals, even if they were too far away, costing lives. Again, there were good people who defied such thinking and treated and then sent, but the law allowed them to be shipped off. I remember one case in Georgia before the law was even intorduced that upset people a great deal, and people wrote letters and lobbied for laws to prevent such tragedy. So, it wasn't a case of government simply jumping to this conclusion. it was bore out of events that cased peole to take notice. People decided.
But, like in most cases, they discionnect themselves from what the actions cost. Because they didn't required, hell didn't even want to hear about, any cost issues, they did this with no organized plan on how to handle the cost, as if the treratment would be free. It's not. We all pay for everyone who is treated but can't pay. And we have no mechanism to even assess if we're charged fairly.
And while all groups cost, those who pay, pay what they cost. You don't have to ask others to pay for them. They pay their bill, and they pay their premium. So, the larger problem are those who get service but pay nothing, or next to nothing. That means the total cost is passed on. Hosptials don't eat the cost. Sorry.