Lawgator calls Boortz

#2
#2
I only listened up to the point where the guy claimed that Bush and Cheney should be executed. Obviously, he's a frutrated person with some problems.

I will say, however, that he's correct (and Boortz' absolutism is wrong) on the issue of the amount of care that an uninsured person can expect. While hospitals don't dump people at risk of imminent emergency, they do not provide long-term outpatient care to people who are chronically ill but uninsured. Or who may have some health problem, but that has not reached emergency levels.
 
#4
#4
lawgator1 said:
I only listened up to the point where the guy claimed that Bush and Cheney should be executed. Obviously, he's a frutrated person with some problems.

I will say, however, that he's correct (and Boortz' absolutism is wrong) on the issue of the amount of care that an uninsured person can expect. While hospitals don't dump people at risk of imminent emergency, they do not provide long-term outpatient care to people who are chronically ill but uninsured. Or who may have some health problem, but that has not reached emergency levels.
Click to expand...

You have just changed the callers argument, he specifically said that there were people being turned away from receiving medical care. This is false if you need medical attention the hospital is required to give it to you.

You have put another meaning to this mans words. I think I know what he was trying to say (your assessment of his words), but this man was so ignorant on so many other points during this discussion that I find it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt.
 
#5
#5
lawgator1 said:
I only listened up to the point where the guy claimed that Bush and Cheney should be executed. Obviously, he's a frutrated person with some problems.

I will say, however, that he's correct (and Boortz' absolutism is wrong) on the issue of the amount of care that an uninsured person can expect. While hospitals don't dump people at risk of imminent emergency, they do not provide long-term outpatient care to people who are chronically ill but uninsured. Or who may have some health problem, but that has not reached emergency levels.
Click to expand...

that's a load of crap.

Amanda Carpenter : Viral Video on Immigration Costs - Townhall.com

In 2001, we had a Guatemalan, an illegal patient in our hospital. He was there from 2001 and until 2003. He had over $1.5 million in health care services. We forcibly returned him to his home county of Guatemala at our own cost of $30,000. You ask why am I telling you about a case that happened in 2003? Because today that case is not over. We have spent and are spending up to a quarter of a million dollars in legal fees because his family here in the United States is suing us because they think it as inappropriate for us to return this illegal patient to his home country.

Currently, as of today, I have a patient from Mexico who has been in my hospital for 760 days. He has severe brain damage, has no family, no friends. His charges to date for almost two years is $1.5 million and we have contacted the Mexican Consulate four times, we have contacted Immigration and nobody will help us return this patient to Mexico. We are even willing to spend our own $30,000 to return this patient. We can’t get anyone to help us with that.

In 2007, the Florida Hospital Association estimates that there was $100 million in costs for illegal care. That affects all of us. One of the major problems that health care institutions have today that you need to be aware of is ongoing care. If somebody comes into our emergency rooms we don’t turn them away. But if someone comes into our emergency room and they have renal failure and they require dialysis, right now I have six patients, illegal, undocumented patients that we are seeing every three days for renal dialysis. For all this I have talked about we have received no reimbursement. This obviously affects all of us in this room. Our health care costs are severely affected by this. I would also like to end with pointing out that a large percentage of the babies born at our facility are from illegal parents.”
Click to expand...

this is in your own state.
 
#6
#6
KB5252 said:
You have just changed the callers argument, he specifically said that there were people being turned away from receiving medical care. This is false if you need medical attention the hospital is required to give it to you.

You have put another meaning to this mans words. I think I know what he was trying to say (your assessment of his words), but this man was so ignorant on so many other points during this discussion that I find it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...


I don't think you listened to the whole argument.

As to MG1968, you do not know what you are talking about. This is not an immigrant issue. Even Republicans agree with the Dems that a significant cost savings can be achieved by providing more people acess to routine and preventative care. A person with a bad flu case but no insurance is just not going to get admitted to a hospital, nor should they. But they can't get easy acess to a primary care doctor, either. And so they end up going to the hospital when its pneumonia, and then they are admitted and what could have been dealt with for $100 now costs $2,000.

Difference is on how we get those folks better access to much more efficient primary care.
 
#7
#7
lawgator1 said:
I don't think you listened to the whole argument.

As to MG1968, you do not know what you are talking about. This is not an immigrant issue. Even Republicans agree with the Dems that a significant cost savings can be achieved by providing more people acess to routine and preventative care. A person with a bad flu case but no insurance is just not going to get admitted to a hospital, nor should they. But they can't get easy acess to a primary care doctor, either. And so they end up going to the hospital when its pneumonia, and then they are admitted and what could have been dealt with for $100 now costs $2,000.

Difference is on how we get those folks better access to much more efficient primary care.
Click to expand...

whaaa? illegal immigrants regurally got to the emergency room in southern california for the flu.
 
#8
#8
lawgator1 said:
I don't think you listened to the whole argument.

As to MG1968, you do not know what you are talking about. This is not an immigrant issue. Even Republicans agree with the Dems that a significant cost savings can be achieved by providing more people acess to routine and preventative care. A person with a bad flu case but no insurance is just not going to get admitted to a hospital, nor should they. But they can't get easy acess to a primary care doctor, either. And so they end up going to the hospital when its pneumonia, and then they are admitted and what could have been dealt with for $100 now costs $2,000.

Difference is on how we get those folks better access to much more efficient primary care.
Click to expand...

you just changed your own point. I responded to your assertion that people with no ability to pay are being denied long term care, which is demonstrably false.

I agree that access needs to improve, but I don't agree that the solution rests with a massive tax increase and a government take over of the health industry.
 
#10
#10
lawgator1 said:
I don't think you listened to the whole argument.

As to MG1968, you do not know what you are talking about. This is not an immigrant issue. Even Republicans agree with the Dems that a significant cost savings can be achieved by providing more people acess to routine and preventative care. A person with a bad flu case but no insurance is just not going to get admitted to a hospital, nor should they. But they can't get easy acess to a primary care doctor, either. And so they end up going to the hospital when its pneumonia, and then they are admitted and what could have been dealt with for $100 now costs $2,000.

Difference is on how we get those folks better access to much more efficient primary care.
Click to expand...

As I said before, what this caller said (people are being turned away) is false. You gave this man the benefit of the doubt and assumed he meant that care was not equally accessible. I said I have a hard time giving this caller the benefit of the doubt because so much of his other comments were so off base that I viewed this particular comment (people being turned away), more in line with his other statements (idiotic). Maybe you missed it but it was meant to be sarcastic.

I do think you miss the point others are trying to make here, that UHC is not the only option available. There are many more practical and cost effective propositions that have been made over the last 10 years. This is however the option that appeals to a large constituency that doesn't value being self reliant.
 
#11
#11
droski said:
whaaa? illegal immigrants regurally got to the emergency room in southern california for the flu.
Click to expand...

If its emergent in nature, I am sure that happens.

MG1968 said:
you just changed your own point. I responded to your assertion that people with no ability to pay are being denied long term care, which is demonstrably false.

I agree that access needs to improve, but I don't agree that the solution rests with a massive tax increase and a government take over of the health industry.
Click to expand...


Its a matter of degree. Let's say you are right and the guy who could have been handled for $100 instead ends up costing $2,000. That money comes form somewhere -- higher premiums for those of us with private insurance, and higher costs (and therefore taxes) when the payor ends up being Medicare or, more likely, Medicaid.

As a small employer, I can tell you that health insurance premiums have risen every single year for the last 8 years, and on average by more than 10 percent each year. And that's even trimming a little on the benefits or trading for slightly higher deductibles.

I don't want one of the people that works with me to be financially wrecked by some terrible medical problem. On the other hand, I can't wave a magic wand and print money.

So, the logical thing to do is promote a system that makes delivery of care more efficient. The people you speak of are the most costly to some degree because the system erects a barrier on the front end to care that could avoid the big bills to begin with.
 
#12
#12
lawgator1 said:
If its emergent in nature, I am sure that happens.
Click to expand...

bs. they regurally go for non emergency reasons, give a fake name and address (since by law we can't ask for an id), and skip on the bill. why do you think hospitals are shutting down their emergency rooms in record numbers?
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
If its emergent in nature, I am sure that happens.




Its a matter of degree. Let's say you are right and the guy who could have been handled for $100 instead ends up costing $2,000. That money comes form somewhere -- higher premiums for those of us with private insurance, and higher costs (and therefore taxes) when the payor ends up being Medicare or, more likely, Medicaid.

As a small employer, I can tell you that health insurance premiums have risen every single year for the last 8 years, and on average by more than 10 percent each year. And that's even trimming a little on the benefits or trading for slightly higher deductibles.

I don't want one of the people that works with me to be financially wrecked by some terrible medical problem. On the other hand, I can't wave a magic wand and print money.

So, the logical thing to do is promote a system that makes delivery of care more efficient. The people you speak of are the most costly to some degree because the system erects a barrier on the front end to care that could avoid the big bills to begin with.
Click to expand...

Which group of people are the ones that go to the emergency room for a cold or the flu? From what I can tell they are usually those who do not pay for their care, therefore they put no value on it. Illegal immigrants are a part of the problem, but so are those who for one reason or another do not have health insurance. Of these the people that have health issues preventing them, from working are almost always already covered by medicare, blue cross etc. This leaves a large person of people who CHOOSE to work under the table, or who do not have jobs, or those who have jobs but do not take advantage of their employers health insurance.
 
#14
#14
The inherent problem with universal health care is that we cannot afford to give everyone top notch care for whatever it is that may ail them. Rationing will be part of any health care delivery system. Right now the market does the rationing and it sucks for those who do not have the means to get the care they need. Under a government controlled universal system, my guess is that there will be a huge focus on relatively inexpensive preventative care that can be funded by "sacrificing" the people with rare and/or expensive to treat ailments. There will also have to be limits on what care is doled out to those near the ends of thier lives. No sense giving open heart surgery to a 90-year old if doing as much as possible for the many with limited resources is the goal. On the other hand, nobody wants to watch granny die a slow agonizing death so we'll probably see a big push for European-style euthanasia. Basically, if you can avoid getting sick or old you'll be just fine.
 
#15
#15
LG is apparently blogging for the dailyKOS. witness this love-fest for Keith Olberman:

Daily Kos: State of the Nation

Olbermann is not partisan, he is not biased; I hate hearing this from Republicans (and even some Democrats). Just because he covers the side that lies and hates more does not make him biased. When liberals act hatefully, I know I can count on Olbermann to cover it. The thing is, they usually don't.
Click to expand...

Olbermann is a trustworthy, fair, funny, and passionate figure. We know we can trust him to do the right thing, because he spits in the face of hatred and he has the balls to say what all of us are thinking.
Click to expand...

then, now make sure you're sitting down, "gad" offers up an incredible paragraph of complete and utter BS.

As many of you know, it was not very long ago that I was a Republican. And I mean this in the very sense that most of you despise. Far right. Long story short, I had a very touching experience with a homosexual couple that really changed the way I thought. Upon integrating myself further with liberals, I was introduced to Keith Olbermann. Nothing, no television or radio show, has ever motivated me so much to become what I am now. Keith inspired me to be active, to care, and to pursue my political views. He answers my questions, he fights for the truth, and he makes me truly passionate about the issues. I was a mingling liberal, stuck in limbo, until I watched his show. I became addicted, astonished at how many lies and fear-driven smears I had been missing over the years - often times the way to realize truth is not to find what is right, but to find what is wrong. Keith fortunately manages to do both very well.
Click to expand...
 
#16
#16
This person met a homosexual couple and it changed the way they thought...to the point that they went from far right to liberal? A homosexual couple? I hope it was based on more than gay marriage!! Sounds like this person is a lost boat on a rough sea :rofl:
 
#17
#17
TennTradition said:
This person met a homosexual couple and it changed the way they thought...to the point that they went from far right to liberal? A homosexual couple? I hope it was based on more than gay marriage!! Sounds like this person is a lost boat on a rough sea :rofl:
Click to expand...

Or struggles with the truth. In fact, that tale was so tall that it might actually have been penned by Volman38.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top