You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 06:38:38 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.  (Read 5522 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dizzied

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #50 on: July 08, 2009, 04:40:47 PM »
The point is they don't have to pay up front, they can make payments, and often times they end up not paying.  I have gone to the ER before because I could not afford a simple doctors visit myself.  No doctor would see myself or my daughter for less than 100 dollars.  We were both running high fevers and finally I decided that we had to be seen so I went to the ER.  We don't have insurance.  Can't afford it.

Think about how many more people are going to go to the ER when it costs nothing.  I don't know how long your wait at the ER was, but I think it will be higher when nobody is paying a penny out of their pocket for it.

Chances are you could afford insurance or health care if the government wasn't driving medical prices up with medicare or medicaid.  Payment plants should be available for clinics or doctors visits.  I'm interested to hear how you can get out of paying for your ER bill altogether, though.  Nothing except bankruptcy comes to mind.

Is there a source or evidence of this?

Half the negative press the NHS gets in the UK is because it can't afford to pay for drugs for people... and off the top of my head I can't think of a single country with a universal health care type system that's stuck a price cap on drugs.

I'm afraid I can't find the video right now, but Peter Schiff said it was likely to happen.  For those who don't know him, Peter Schiff is an excellent economist who accurately predicted our current crisis years ago when everyone was celebrating under the bubble.  (check him out on youtube.)  However, alot of socialized health care systems do currently cap prices.

Currently, the PPRS(Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme) 'regulates' (caps)  prices in the UK to ensure the NHS can afford them.  In Canada, Patent Medicines Pricing Review Board does the same thing.  It changes nothing, though, if a price cap isn't applied.  Service will be scarce, and demand artificially high.  If the UK can't afford drug prices, I imagine its because most drug companies aren't from England, and therefore not subject to all of their regulations.  It's the US drug companies that are on the frontier of medicine.

Offline ShrowdedPoet

  • Sexual Deviant
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Location: Between the dark places in the world
  • Gender: Female
  • Don't tell the pirate that I'm under his bed. . .
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #51 on: July 08, 2009, 04:43:21 PM »
I have never seen a payment plan in a clinic. . .they don't allow it.  And the ER will write you off.  I didn't have to wait at all.  I'm for socialized health care.

Offline Dizzied

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #52 on: July 08, 2009, 04:54:10 PM »
Payment plans should be available; they're available for most other necessary services.  Call up some more clinics.  I don't have dental insurance, but I've never payed up front for a checkup.

I'm glad you didn't have to wait for your care at the ER.  If socialized medicine gets set up, then within a few years you'll probably never see an empty emergency room again.  I don't know what their motivation is for writing off the money you owe them, but it doesn't seem like a sound practice to me.

Again, prices would be lower if the free market was allowed to set a price.  You could afford a regular doctors visit, or health care coverage, if prices weren't so inflated by regulation and intervention from D.C.

Offline ShrowdedPoet

  • Sexual Deviant
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Location: Between the dark places in the world
  • Gender: Female
  • Don't tell the pirate that I'm under his bed. . .
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #53 on: July 08, 2009, 04:58:11 PM »
Payment plans should be available; they're available for most other necessary services.  Call up some more clinics.  I don't have dental insurance, but I've never payed up front for a checkup.

I'm glad you didn't have to wait for your care at the ER.  If socialized medicine gets set up, then within a few years you'll probably never see an empty emergency room again.  I don't know what their motivation is for writing off the money you owe them, but it doesn't seem like a sound practice to me.

Again, prices would be lower if the free market was allowed to set a price.  You could afford a regular doctors visit, or health care coverage, if prices weren't so inflated by regulation and intervention from D.C.

I don't know about your area but there is nowhere in this area with payment plans availiable and everywhere requires up front payment.

When there is really no possibility of them getting their money from me and if they really wanted to force it and go through the court procedure. . .well that's a lot of trouble. 

Offline Dizzied

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #54 on: July 08, 2009, 05:09:31 PM »
I don't know about your area but there is nowhere in this area with payment plans availiable and everywhere requires up front payment.

When there is really no possibility of them getting their money from me and if they really wanted to force it and go through the court procedure. . .well that's a lot of trouble. 

I understand your situation.  I guess the ER was your best option, since thats the only place that would take you.  But socialization won't make things better for you.

Health care will only degrade in quality, and increase in price for you (through taxes, most likely) if health care gets socialized.  The answer isn't more government; it never is.  It's less government.  Don't listen to what Washington tells you.  All they want is your vote, and if they can convince you there's a simple solution to your problems, they'll do it. 

Offline ShrowdedPoet

  • Sexual Deviant
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Location: Between the dark places in the world
  • Gender: Female
  • Don't tell the pirate that I'm under his bed. . .
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #55 on: July 08, 2009, 05:12:43 PM »
I don't listen to what candidates say.  I research and I look into things.  I believe in socialized health care. 

Offline consortium11

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #56 on: July 08, 2009, 05:12:59 PM »
I'm afraid I can't find the video right now, but Peter Schiff said it was likely to happen.  For those who don't know him, Peter Schiff is an excellent economist who accurately predicted our current crisis years ago when everyone was celebrating under the bubble.  (check him out on youtube.)  However, alot of socialized health care systems do currently cap prices.

Lol at Schiff being an excellent economist. Sure he predicted the crisis... as every single other Austrain theorist does. It gets especially easy when your arguement is "well some time in the future things are going to go wrong..." which is what his pieces amounted to.

What makes it even worse is that Euro Pacific Capital (his investment firm) lost its clients anywhere between 40 and 70% of their investment in 2008... which is far worse than "traditional" firms generally did. Schiff got every aspect of the crises wrong... from hyperinflation to decoupling to commodities (apart from Gold) to foreign currencies (outside the yen) to world interest rates to foreign equities. He got virtually everything wrong.

I like Austrain theory and I liked Ron Paul's presidential campaign (which is where so many people seem to get the idea Schiff is in any way important or knowledgeable) but Schiff is an abject failure. He couldn't capitalise on the boom the way others could, and now that he's in the time he should be doing well (according to his own literature) he is losing his clients money hand over fist and screwing up royally. Every half-specific prediction he made has gone wrong.

So "excellent economist"... not really. He's up there with Jim Cramer on Bear Stearns.

Currently, the PPRS(Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme) 'regulates' (caps)  prices in the UK to ensure the NHS can afford them.  In Canada, Patent Medicines Pricing Review Board does the same thing.  It changes nothing, though, if a price cap isn't applied.  Service will be scarce, and demand artificially high.  If the UK can't afford drug prices, I imagine its because most drug companies aren't from England, and therefore not subject to all of their regulations.  It's the US drug companies that are on the frontier of medicine.

The PPRS is entirely voluntary. The pharma companies signed up and agreed to it. It doesn't force people to sell at low prices, it doesn't prevent things being sold at a higher price. If the PPRS was really capping prices at an unmarketable level then there wouldn't be the need for NICE or any of the other bodies overviewing what drugs the NHS should offer.

And of the top 10 pharma companies in the world 5 are based in Europe and 2 (Glaxo and Astra) are based in the UK... and they're both considered leaders when it comes to R&D. The reason the UK can't afford drugs is exactly as you say... they're expensive and not cost-efficiant to offer under the NHS. As I said earlier in the thread you actually have better access to many top level drugs in the US then you do in the Uk... as in the UK you've already paid for the NHS in taxes (that won't give you the drugs...) and then you have to pay for insurance for access... which has similar problems to the US system. However, at no stage does that mean "no drugs" for those who are able to afford them.

Offline Rhapsody

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #57 on: July 08, 2009, 06:07:43 PM »
Naturally, with 300 million people in the country with free healthcare (a small chunk of which are non-citzens, I might add),

Do you mean non-citizens, or non-residents?  There is a difference.

Either way, in Canada, you have to be a legal resident of your province in order to be covered by the provincial health plans.  You have a card and everything that you have to present to doctors, to hospitals.  Your drug plans use the same number.  If you have low-income emergency dental, it uses that number.   If you don't have a provincial health card or equivalent proof of insurance, you still have to pay for everything yourself.

Offline Dizzied

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #58 on: July 08, 2009, 07:53:49 PM »
Lol at Schiff being an excellent economist. Sure he predicted the crisis... as every single other Austrain theorist does. It gets especially easy when your arguement is "well some time in the future things are going to go wrong..." which is what his pieces amounted to.

What makes it even worse is that Euro Pacific Capital (his investment firm) lost its clients anywhere between 40 and 70% of their investment in 2008... which is far worse than "traditional" firms generally did. Schiff got every aspect of the crises wrong... from hyperinflation to decoupling to commodities (apart from Gold) to foreign currencies (outside the yen) to world interest rates to foreign equities. He got virtually everything wrong.

I like Austrain theory and I liked Ron Paul's presidential campaign (which is where so many people seem to get the idea Schiff is in any way important or knowledgeable) but Schiff is an abject failure. He couldn't capitalise on the boom the way others could, and now that he's in the time he should be doing well (according to his own literature) he is losing his clients money hand over fist and screwing up royally. Every half-specific prediction he made has gone wrong.

So "excellent economist"... not really. He's up there with Jim Cramer on Bear Stearns.

The PPRS is entirely voluntary. The pharma companies signed up and agreed to it. It doesn't force people to sell at low prices, it doesn't prevent things being sold at a higher price. If the PPRS was really capping prices at an unmarketable level then there wouldn't be the need for NICE or any of the other bodies overviewing what drugs the NHS should offer.

And of the top 10 pharma companies in the world 5 are based in Europe and 2 (Glaxo and Astra) are based in the UK... and they're both considered leaders when it comes to R&D. The reason the UK can't afford drugs is exactly as you say... they're expensive and not cost-efficiant to offer under the NHS. As I said earlier in the thread you actually have better access to many top level drugs in the US then you do in the Uk... as in the UK you've already paid for the NHS in taxes (that won't give you the drugs...) and then you have to pay for insurance for access... which has similar problems to the US system. However, at no stage does that mean "no drugs" for those who are able to afford them.

The Austrian argument isn't "Something will go wrong eventually."  If you really want to hear their point of view, which accounts for both human nature (it's also called the psychological school) and business cycles, I suggest checking out http://mises.org/

Schiff's company faces some trouble, but I'm not trying to deify him.  Of course he's not some omniscient overseer of the economy.  He simply knows economics; tried and true, real economics, rather than the Keynesian hogwash that is so widespread these days.  You don't have to believe him if you don't want to, and I personally don't care.  But when hyperinflation occurs, just remember he told you so.  :-\

The PPRS and it's kin are 'voluntary' as much as the legal alcohol age in the united states is.  The states are allowed to set whatever age they want, but if they set anything other than 21, they lose massive federal funding for their roads.  Likewise, any company that didn't agree to the PPRS won't have their drugs bought by the NHS.  Essentially, it's a government enforced cartel.  Which, as we all know, doesn't benefit the consumer.

Do you mean non-citizens, or non-residents?  There is a difference.

Either way, in Canada, you have to be a legal resident of your province in order to be covered by the provincial health plans.  You have a card and everything that you have to present to doctors, to hospitals.  Your drug plans use the same number.  If you have low-income emergency dental, it uses that number.   If you don't have a provincial health card or equivalent proof of insurance, you still have to pay for everything yourself.

I mean non-citizens.  If you don't pay US taxes, you shouldn't get the benefits that those who do receive.

From what I've seen, the health care plan we're building doesn't turn anyone down.  It doesn't matter if you're a legal resident of the US or an alien, you still get care. 

I feel a need to illustrate the worst point here, though.  If this monopoly health care system gets set up, we essentially give the government control over our health.  They can decide what drugs to give people, what treatments to administer, etc...

Am I the only one reluctant to give that power to the government?  I'm not really a conspiracy nut, but I see no benefit in removing that power from the private sector and giving it to the government.  If a private hospital lets me down, I'll go somewhere else.  The first hospital will need to make a profit, so they'll strive not to let the customer down.  If the monopoly hospital lets me down...well, too bad for me, right?  I don't' really have any other options for health care.  They don't compete with anyone.  Competition drives prices down, and the quality of service up.  A universal health care system will end up like our post office.  Slow and inefficient. 

Offline Rhapsody

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #59 on: July 08, 2009, 07:56:22 PM »
I mean non-citizens.  If you don't pay US taxes, you shouldn't get the benefits that those who do receive.

Legal immigrants and those with legal residency are not citizens, but they pay taxes.

Offline Dizzied

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #60 on: July 08, 2009, 07:59:54 PM »
Legal immigrants and those with legal residency are not citizens, but they pay taxes.

You know who I mean.  The people who don't pay taxes shouldn't get the benefits taxpayers get. I think we can all agree on that. 

Offline consortium11

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #61 on: July 08, 2009, 09:29:37 PM »
The Austrian argument isn't "Something will go wrong eventually."  If you really want to hear their point of view, which accounts for both human nature (it's also called the psychological school) and business cycles, I suggest checking out http://mises.org/

I know the Austrian Theory isn't based around "something will go wrong eventually". I've read enough Hayek, Mises and Menger to know the basis of the theory and I'm familiar with the Mises Institute. I'm not sure if you missed the part where I said I like Austrian Economics and Theory. It's not the school I'm against... it's Peter Schiff.

Schiff's company faces some trouble, but I'm not trying to deify him.  Of course he's not some omniscient overseer of the economy.  He simply knows economics; tried and true, real economics, rather than the Keynesian hogwash that is so widespread these days.

If he had such a firm grasp on "real" economics shouldn't he have well... got something right while all the other theory based investors (and they're out there) got it wrong. Which is the exact opposite of what occurred... they generally mitigated loss, he continued to encourage it. He got it wrong. It's as simple as that. And when an Austrian Theorist who speaks extensively on the short and long-term effects of current actions gets nearly every single one of the predictions he made on short term effects wrong you really have to step back and say "Damn... maybe this guy isn't everything he was cracked up to be..."

You don't have to believe him if you don't want to, and I personally don't care.

But weren't you using him as your source? If I don't believe him then it pretty much invalidates that...

But when hyperinflation occurs, just remember he told you so.  :-\

You see, this is the problem.

You can't just do that.

You can't say "Oh, there will be hyperinflation sometime in the future..." and then when there is, however far in the future say "I told you so!". Giving that general a prediction doesn't mean anything. I predict that unemployment will rise, but certain banks will recover at some stage... that it will rain in the future... that there will be riots in China... that interest rates will rise... that the markets will fall again.

All of those are near certain to happen at some point in the future... does that make me someone who has a great vision of the future.

It's the equivalent of a conspiracy theorist like Alex Jones going "there will be a terrorist attack somewhere in the world in the next 5 years blamed on Muslims"... and then when there is saying "I told you so, it's a government conspiracy!"

And I'd like to quickly point out that Schiff didn't just predict general hyperinflation. He predicted hyperinflation in 2008 and early 2009... he predicted the world decoupling from the dollar... he predicted a lot of things to happen in 2008 and early 2009... and he got them flat out wrong.

The PPRS and it's kin are 'voluntary' as much as the legal alcohol age in the united states is.  The states are allowed to set whatever age they want, but if they set anything other than 21, they lose massive federal funding for their roads.  Likewise, any company that didn't agree to the PPRS won't have their drugs bought by the NHS. Essentially, it's a government enforced cartel.  Which, as we all know, doesn't benefit the consumer.

Imagine this... there is an Insurance Company... a big one... and it calls up a Pharma company and goes "Listen, we want to offer your drugs... but unless you make them cheaper we won't pay for them for our millions of customers... what ya going to do?"

How is that different other than on one hand you have a government body and the other a private company. Both are in a relative position of strength and both negotiate for the best price they can receive. If the Pharma company isn't getting a price that makes it worthwhile to develop and sell the drugs then they wouldn't... yet they still do. If the NHS was getting such a great price for these drugs, why are they refusing treatment so often due to the cost of the drugs... why does NICE even exist, why are they not avoiding all the bad publicity, all the terminally ill patients appearing on the 6 O'Clock news and asking "why won't the NHS try to save my life"?

If it is a Cartel then it is the single most ineffective cartel I have ever seen in action.

You know who I mean.  The people who don't pay taxes shouldn't get the benefits taxpayers get. I think we can all agree on that.

Are we still talking about just medical/health issues or in general? Because in general is a very big can of worms.

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #62 on: July 08, 2009, 09:42:26 PM »
You know who I mean.  The people who don't pay taxes shouldn't get the benefits taxpayers get. I think we can all agree on that.

I'm not so sure.  Non-taxed labor does still contribute to the economy.  Particularly in agriculture and domestic service, many of the laborers live under conditions which their "managers" might prefer to keep hidden.  Maybe there is less chance these will appear at the hospital door.  But in fairness, they are all serving to keep prices artificially low for the rest of us, while suffering great risk themselves.   


Offline ShrowdedPoet

  • Sexual Deviant
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Location: Between the dark places in the world
  • Gender: Female
  • Don't tell the pirate that I'm under his bed. . .
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #63 on: July 09, 2009, 05:28:06 PM »
I don't care if they pay taxes or are a citizen/resident whatever of the United States.  If they need help I think they should get it.  I still get sick to see people treat other people like this.  A mother with children is the same no matter where they pay taxes.  and I agree with Kylie, they may not contribute taxes but they give other services. 

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #64 on: July 10, 2009, 03:35:23 PM »
To demonstrate the real problem for some here. A friend who is working poor and proud can't even afford to see a doctor for a likely genital infection so he resorts to buying FISH ANTIBIOTICS the same capsules humans get without a prescription and is using that because its simple cold math. A doctor would cost $65 a visit plus tests plus the medication, this cost him $15 for 100 250mg capsule pills. And the internet has the dosing instructions and he is going to guess.

This man works hard in day labor and doing odd jobs, pays for his apartment and other needs but has almost nothing left.

I'm sure his case is not special in the United States.


Offline Zeitgeist

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #65 on: July 12, 2009, 12:00:57 AM »
How about we seriously address fraud, waste and abuse in regards to the current system before we over correct and make matters worse?

Can you even have a discussion about nationalizing health care without addressing illegal immigration? I don't believe you can for any system devised will surely fail under the burden of the influx of people who shouldn't be here.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #66 on: July 12, 2009, 12:44:50 AM »
Not so certain its realistic to put an entire issue like healthcare on hold until another issue is resolved, such as immigration.  Following that logic our country would chase its tail trying to figure out which issue must be solved first so that the others fall in place.  Illegal immigrants are already using the healthcare system in place now.  So I seriously doubt there will be a crushing weight added ontop of a nationalized one.

Offline Rhapsody

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #67 on: July 12, 2009, 07:50:51 AM »
Can you even have a discussion about nationalizing health care without addressing illegal immigration? I don't believe you can for any system devised will surely fail under the burden of the influx of people who shouldn't be here.

You missed the point.  Several times. 

Offline Zeitgeist

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #68 on: July 12, 2009, 09:21:01 AM »
You missed the point.  Several times.

Yeah, the point apparently is an extreme exception to the general rule justifies an over reaching, over arching, over correction, see so-called stimulus package.

For sure you've got to keep several wheels turning at once. Illegal immigrants weigh down the current system and will continue to do so weather it is privatized or nationalized. You cannot address one while not also addressing the other at the same time.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #69 on: July 12, 2009, 03:03:20 PM »
Illegal immigrants are hardly to blame for the current hardship that medicine is going through.  They make up a very small portion of the population that makes use of medical facilities.  Far more impoverished Americans make use of the healthcare system than do illegal immigrants.  While you can make an argument that they are not helping the system, there is little to no chance that they are the ones who broke the system.  They are not a show stopping problem to healthcare.

Offline Serephino

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #70 on: July 12, 2009, 09:01:21 PM »
I'm a citizen that can't afford health care.  Private insurance companies want like $200+ for an intial payment, than like $150/per month, and those plans have 1k deductables.  If anyone knows of a company with better plans, please, point me to them.  But we're living paycheck to paycheck.  We can't afford to give a company that kind of money a month, then shell out $1k when something serious pops up. 

So are you going to tell me that even though I was born in this country I must live with being sick until they figure out what to do about illegal immigrants? I'm one of probably millions of American citizens who have poor health and can't afford to do anything about it but function as best I can on a day to day basis. 

Illegal immigrants can go to free clinics.  It's people like me who are stuck in the middle that are the worst off.  We just barely make too much for free clinics and Medicaid, but there's no way in hell we can afford private insurance.   

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #71 on: July 13, 2009, 02:47:24 AM »

So are you going to tell me that even though I was born in this country I must live with being sick until they figure out what to do about illegal immigrants? I'm one of probably millions of American citizens who have poor health and can't afford to do anything about it but function as best I can on a day to day basis. 

Illegal immigrants can go to free clinics.  It's people like me who are stuck in the middle that are the worst off.  We just barely make too much for free clinics and Medicaid, but there's no way in hell we can afford private insurance.   

I know what you mean about not being able to afford private insurance as the system is structured now.  I can barely afford student rates, and they're mandatory...  It's generally recognized that the US health care system is vastly overpriced.   

While I would understand (logically, not ethically) if a reformed system had a "Phase One: reform for citizens first," and I do not wish to see conservatives use immigration as a wedge to sabotage a more efficient national health plan:  I also do not believe it is just to deny health benefits to migrant workers. 

If migrants were actually employed under fair practices, perhaps we could tally up about what they actually save citizens collectively on food, domestic labor, and menial work and dedicate that toward clinics for all of them.  Unfortunately, since the amount they produce for the country is hidden by the very conditions they exist here under --and the same conditions limit their access to care-- I don't believe that is a viable alternative.     

I'm not convinced that so many migrants have time, legal status, and freedom of movement to attend clinics even if some are free.  (How many are, and what are their rules, I have to wonder?)  As I understand it, we have plenty of agricultural and domestic workers whose movements are restricted, whose conditions are substandard or outright abusive, plus many of them remain illegal. 

There may be amnesty, but historically speaking: Programs to officially extend official "permission" to migrants have generally meant permission for just a few among many who have already suffered long periods unprotected.  Those few have then been allowed to work in more limited capacities while subject to additional bureaucracy and fees, or else the immediate threat of deportation.  They might also be ineligible for lowest-cost services under the current system; I don't know but that would be consistent with the other historical trends.

« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 02:49:31 AM by kylie »

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #72 on: July 13, 2009, 11:28:13 AM »
From personal experience, free clinics require proof of residency and proof of income/lack of income.

Offline Asuras

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #73 on: July 13, 2009, 03:04:08 PM »
There are 300 million Americans and just 12 million illegal immigrants. It's simply silly to suggest that we have to solve illegal immigration before solving health care.

The problem is that the US health care system is simply the most bloated, cost-ineffective health care system on earth. Universal coverage and all that is very nice, but really, I think more importantly, year after year after year health care costs have kept rising, preventative care has withered, and if that continues - if we don't put the kind of controls on this industry that every other developed country has - this will be cancerous to American businesses, which have to bear the cost of health care for their employees, the American government, which has to pay for Medicare/Medicaid, and of course American citizens, who have to pay their HMOs and copays and whatever their insurance doesn't cover.

Would it be better if we had a solution for both illegal immigration and health care at once? Yes. But the political process is notoriously bad at getting even one thing done, let alone two at once. So even if it means letting some free-riders slip through, I think we need to keep our priorities straight and take care of the biggest problems first.

Offline Zeitgeist

Re: Rescission and the glories of privatized health care.
« Reply #74 on: July 13, 2009, 05:28:41 PM »
I think some grossly underestimate the cost to our health care system when you consider illegal immigrants.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275

Specifically:

In fact, the increasing number of illegal aliens coming into the United States is forcing the closure of hospitals, spreading previously vanquished diseases and threatening to destroy America's prized health-care system, says a report in the spring issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.

The article is from 2005. Please tell me how the situation has improved since then...?