Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
the illness isnt the point dumbass, the cost is still the cost. fortunately i had insurance, which is what it is there for. so your solution is when you get sick and something is the matter to tough it out? dont ever go to a doctor and get medication or medical advice? well hell then, why do we need health care at all? just tough it out... things will be fine.yup, well when you end up violent vomiting for over and hour straight, they usually call 911. i was just fortunate that it wasnt as serious as it looked. that didnt change the fact that was in the ER for 3 hours. and had a huge hospital billI had food poisoning...I just rode the wave with it, and ate the next day. Didn't cost me anything but the time for a phone call to the place where I ate and let them know.
I was pulling off the freeway going from Spokane to Coeur d'Alene vomiting, but I knew it wasn't life threatening....uncomfortable...yes.
apparently you dont know much about how the health care industry works....I was pulling off the freeway going from Spokane to Coeur d'Alene vomiting, but I knew it wasn't life threatening....uncomfortable...yes.
I too contracted Salmonella from the Fair. Didn't cost me $4500. Push Gatorade and ride it out. If you go into the ER anywhere and you have no insurance, they will still treat you. They can give you samples of meds and write off the rest of it. That's the law. They HAVE to treat you whether you can pay or not. Wahlgreen's and Walmart give you quite a few generic meds for $4.00. Oh but i forgot liberals hate Walmart and Wahlgreen's might just be run by rich people. Oh well. Drink gatorade then the next time.
if we wanted a strong state government and a weak central government, the south should have won the civil war. instead its the other way around. if you dont like it, ask your state to secede or move to another country that is strong on state rights, not national rights.No one is saying health care is not an issue.
However, expanding government controls in order to deal with this issue is another issue.
He has a hard time comprehending what is actually being said, Ropey.
The individual mandate is a fundamental shift in choice with the oversight a strong shade of a Marxist socialist attachment. At least Romney's mandate was a State mandate and that means it was left to the State to decide. A Federal Individual Mandate legislated by the Judiciary takes even that choice away.
Shades of Roe vs Wade but in far deeper waters.
He has a hard time comprehending what is actually being said, Ropey.
The individual mandate is a fundamental shift in choice with the oversight a strong shade of a Marxist socialist attachment. At least Romney's mandate was a State mandate and that means it was left to the State to decide. A Federal Individual Mandate legislated by the Judiciary takes even that choice away.
Shades of Roe vs Wade but in far deeper waters.
if we wanted a strong state government and a weak central government, the south should have won the civil war. instead its the other way around. if you dont like it, ask your state to secede or move to another country that is strong on state rights, not national rights.
working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.apparently you dont know much about how the health care industry works....I too contracted Salmonella from the Fair. Didn't cost me $4500. Push Gatorade and ride it out. If you go into the ER anywhere and you have no insurance, they will still treat you. They can give you samples of meds and write off the rest of it. That's the law. They HAVE to treat you whether you can pay or not. Wahlgreen's and Walmart give you quite a few generic meds for $4.00. Oh but i forgot liberals hate Walmart and Wahlgreen's might just be run by rich people. Oh well. Drink gatorade then the next time.
Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
we mean the majority of the nation.. to the victor goes the spoils......The individual mandate is a fundamental shift in choice with the oversight a strong shade of a Marxist socialist attachment. At least Romney's mandate was a State mandate and that means it was left to the State to decide. A Federal Individual Mandate legislated by the Judiciary takes even that choice away.
Shades of Roe vs Wade but in far deeper waters.
if we wanted a strong state government and a weak central government, the south should have won the civil war. instead its the other way around. if you dont like it, ask your state to secede or move to another country that is strong on state rights, not national rights.
Who is "we"?
Couldn't your brother afford insurance, or did he just elect not to purchase insurance?
There are a lot of Americans who elect not to have insurance because of their young age.
Affordable insurance can be obtained with the help of government through some mandates and getting out of the way of competition. The government insurance is not the answer to this problem we're facing.
No he had lost his job when the company he worked for shipped the jobs from his plant down to Mexico.
I don't know if anyone's ever seen how much it costs to extend health benefits after you've been laid off, but it eats up more than half of unemployment. Getting on a government program takes time, and though he had applied, it still took two months to get on it. The infection hit him about three weeks in. His employer hadn't offered dental, so my brother always paid for his kids to go first and then of money was left over, he would go himself. It had been awhile this time around.
I had offered to help him out when he lost his job, but my brother doesn't like charity and thought he'd be back to work right away.
He had to be forced by his wife and kids to even go to the emergency room the night he did go. He said he'd wait till morning, but in reality, he knew the bill would be more than he could pay and didn't want that over their heads as well.
The doctors told us if he had waited even that one extra night, he'd be dead now.
He is since better. He dd find a job almost six months after the incident, driving trick and has since been promoted to head of his office, which he says is just a fancy was to say he's the dispatcher.
The bill for 1 week hospital stay that saved his life was almost $300,000 dollars, which will hang over his head the rest of his life.
Perhaps the government should have a safety net for people that are in the position that your brother was in. It wouldn't take such a broad implementation as what is being thrown at us. I believe that most Americans would be in favor of a safety net approach regarding the issue.
we mean the majority of the nation.. to the victor goes the spoils......if we wanted a strong state government and a weak central government, the south should have won the civil war. instead its the other way around. if you dont like it, ask your state to secede or move to another country that is strong on state rights, not national rights.
Who is "we"?
working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.apparently you dont know much about how the health care industry works....
Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
the hospital charges you for use of the facility, ($2500)the doctor charges you for the use of his time ($1000), when a nurse pushes meds they charge you for the nurse to actually push the plunger down. ($200 x 2), the hospital charges you for the medication (varies but mine was roughly $400 per IV). if i had to pay cash for this, i would have told them no, but no doctor says well my services are this much, the hospital will charge you this much, each drug is this much. you dont get a fucking a menu at the hospital which shows you how much services costs. if youre so much smarter than the doctor that treated me, why arent you a doctor and charging these exorbitant amounts to treat food poisoning?
and oh youve finally realized that its the law the hospitals treat you no matter what. so when you cant pay, it costs the rest of us an increase in premiums.
and im not your honey, bitch. so stop using cute little pet names.
i guess stupid bitch fits for you then.working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
the hospital charges you for use of the facility, ($2500)the doctor charges you for the use of his time ($1000), when a nurse pushes meds they charge you for the nurse to actually push the plunger down. ($200 x 2), the hospital charges you for the medication (varies but mine was roughly $400 per IV). if i had to pay cash for this, i would have told them no, but no doctor says well my services are this much, the hospital will charge you this much, each drug is this much. you dont get a fucking a menu at the hospital which shows you how much services costs. if youre so much smarter than the doctor that treated me, why arent you a doctor and charging these exorbitant amounts to treat food poisoning?
and oh youve finally realized that its the law the hospitals treat you no matter what. so when you cant pay, it costs the rest of us an increase in premiums.
and im not your honey, bitch. so stop using cute little pet names.
The hospital writes it off. They can write off so much, take it off their taxes in the end.
You don't like pet names? You've obvious got the IQ of a little pet mouse. You don't have to spell out what a hospital charges for everyone. I know full well what it is. Sure our premiums go up, but the hospitals usually have provisions for people without insurance. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. It doesn't make me want the government to take over my healthcare.
working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.apparently you dont know much about how the health care industry works....
Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
the hospital charges you for use of the facility, ($2500)the doctor charges you for the use of his time ($1000), when a nurse pushes meds they charge you for the nurse to actually push the plunger down. ($200 x 2), the hospital charges you for the medication (varies but mine was roughly $400 per IV). if i had to pay cash for this, i would have told them no, but no doctor says well my services are this much, the hospital will charge you this much, each drug is this much. you dont get a fucking a menu at the hospital which shows you how much services costs. if youre so much smarter than the doctor that treated me, why arent you a doctor and charging these exorbitant amounts to treat food poisoning?
and oh youve finally realized that its the law the hospitals treat you no matter what. so when you cant pay, it costs the rest of us an increase in premiums.
and im not your honey, bitch. so stop using cute little pet names.
apparently you dont know much about how the health care industry works....I too contracted Salmonella from the Fair. Didn't cost me $4500. Push Gatorade and ride it out. If you go into the ER anywhere and you have no insurance, they will still treat you. They can give you samples of meds and write off the rest of it. That's the law. They HAVE to treat you whether you can pay or not. Wahlgreen's and Walmart give you quite a few generic meds for $4.00. Oh but i forgot liberals hate Walmart and Wahlgreen's might just be run by rich people. Oh well. Drink gatorade then the next time.
Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
i guess stupid bitch fits for you then.working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.
the hospital charges you for use of the facility, ($2500)the doctor charges you for the use of his time ($1000), when a nurse pushes meds they charge you for the nurse to actually push the plunger down. ($200 x 2), the hospital charges you for the medication (varies but mine was roughly $400 per IV). if i had to pay cash for this, i would have told them no, but no doctor says well my services are this much, the hospital will charge you this much, each drug is this much. you dont get a fucking a menu at the hospital which shows you how much services costs. if youre so much smarter than the doctor that treated me, why arent you a doctor and charging these exorbitant amounts to treat food poisoning?
and oh youve finally realized that its the law the hospitals treat you no matter what. so when you cant pay, it costs the rest of us an increase in premiums.
and im not your honey, bitch. so stop using cute little pet names.
The hospital writes it off. They can write off so much, take it off their taxes in the end.
You don't like pet names? You've obvious got the IQ of a little pet mouse. You don't have to spell out what a hospital charges for everyone. I know full well what it is. Sure our premiums go up, but the hospitals usually have provisions for people without insurance. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. It doesn't make me want the government to take over my healthcare.
so stupid bitch, got any proof that insurance companies and hospitals done raise rates to cover the costs to treat the uninsured?
Health Coverage Costs Rise Due to Uninsured, U.S. Study Says - Bloomberg
About 45 million Americans lacked health-care coverage in 2003, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Washington-based Families USA said people without insurance pay about a third of their health-care costs, leaving doctors and hospitals this year with more than $43 billion in unpaid bills. Health providers raise prices to other patients to make up the difference, according to the report.
``The large and increasing number of uninsured Americans is no longer simply an altruistic concern on behalf of those without health coverage but a matter of self-interest for everyone,'' said Families USA Executive Director Ron Pollack in a statement.
hmmm stupid bitch looks stupid after all.....
working as a janitor at the hospital doesnt county.Honey, I've worked in the healthcare industry for 42 years. I am afraid I DO know just how it works. You are talking to the wrong person here, sweet cheeks.
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide treatment in life-threatening emergencies and when patients are in active labor, even if the patients have no insurance and even if they have no ability to pay for treatment. Hospitals don't have to provide treatment for things that aren't life-threatening, but they often will. For instance, if you go to an emergency room for a headache, it's probably not life-threatening; but just in case your headache is caused by a brain tumor, most emergency rooms will treat you. They're required to at least have a qualified health care professional assess you to determine if your condition is an emergency.
Read more: Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com Can a Hospital Refuse Treatment Without Insurance? | eHow.com
the hospital charges you for use of the facility, ($2500)the doctor charges you for the use of his time ($1000), when a nurse pushes meds they charge you for the nurse to actually push the plunger down. ($200 x 2), the hospital charges you for the medication (varies but mine was roughly $400 per IV). if i had to pay cash for this, i would have told them no, but no doctor says well my services are this much, the hospital will charge you this much, each drug is this much. you dont get a fucking a menu at the hospital which shows you how much services costs. if youre so much smarter than the doctor that treated me, why arent you a doctor and charging these exorbitant amounts to treat food poisoning?
and oh youve finally realized that its the law the hospitals treat you no matter what. so when you cant pay, it costs the rest of us an increase in premiums.
and im not your honey, bitch. so stop using cute little pet names.
Looks like sweet cheeks got her panties all in a wad.
No he had lost his job when the company he worked for shipped the jobs from his plant down to Mexico.
I don't know if anyone's ever seen how much it costs to extend health benefits after you've been laid off, but it eats up more than half of unemployment. Getting on a government program takes time, and though he had applied, it still took two months to get on it. The infection hit him about three weeks in. His employer hadn't offered dental, so my brother always paid for his kids to go first and then of money was left over, he would go himself. It had been awhile this time around.
I had offered to help him out when he lost his job, but my brother doesn't like charity and thought he'd be back to work right away.
He had to be forced by his wife and kids to even go to the emergency room the night he did go. He said he'd wait till morning, but in reality, he knew the bill would be more than he could pay and didn't want that over their heads as well.
The doctors told us if he had waited even that one extra night, he'd be dead now.
He is since better. He dd find a job almost six months after the incident, driving trick and has since been promoted to head of his office, which he says is just a fancy was to say he's the dispatcher.
The bill for 1 week hospital stay that saved his life was almost $300,000 dollars, which will hang over his head the rest of his life.
Perhaps the government should have a safety net for people that are in the position that your brother was in. It wouldn't take such a broad implementation as what is being thrown at us. I believe that most Americans would be in favor of a safety net approach regarding the issue.
I honestly think the mandate is that safety net but only when its coupled with the 80-85% must be paid out on benefits stipulaton AND a public option for the unemployed/very poor.
Alot of people dont really understand how its all going to work because its implemented in stages and all implimentation hasnt gone into effect yet.
By requiring that insurers pay ouy 80-85% ( depending on the plan ) of premiums back out in benefits, it means the insurers will either:
a) refund money ( required by August 1 of every year ) that has nto been spent on benefits
b) lower their rates for the next fiscal year
By paying out 80-85% of the premiums as benefits, this lowers their profit margin. To maximize their margine the insurers will actually want to lower rates the next year in order to avoid the cost of the refund process.
OR
c) Insurers instead of dropping premiums will choose to cover more procedures in order to reach that 80-85% payout.
My wife has been in the insurance game for over a decade. Ive browsed through all the explaination her company has been sending home with her to get her up to date on how the new system works.
I was actually against the mandate without a public option attached until I saw that this creates prices controls that keep us from being gouged by the private companies.
Here's a little tidbit: It costs $125 out of pocket to pay to have excessive ear wax removed......it takes place in the doctor's office and takes less than 15 minutes from examination to removal to chit chat to see ya next year and pay at the door. Now in my town, the doctor that does this does NOT take personal checks UNLESS you have insurance. He does take cash and credit cards.
A pain in the ass for the unemployed and/or uninsured, or working folk on a tight budget, n'est-ce pas?
Hey, life is tough. It is not the gov'ts job to subsidize the unemployed, uninsured or working folks who have blown their budget on cigs and beer.
This is why 3rd world dictators and others come here?
King Hussein Heads To U.s. For Medical Treatment - Chicago Tribune
Yemeni President Heads To US For Medical Treatment | Fox News
Saudi King Heads to U.S. for Medical Treatment - YouTube
Your post is a bunch of unsupported and wrong generalizations.
What did I generalize? According to the WCO the US ranks 37th in care. So how did I generalize that? Yemen is ranked 120th so it is easy to see why they would transfer someone to the 37th. It is better care.So when you said I was making generalization it was you that made statements without knowledge, in fact. You might want to do the research before criticizing anyone else. It makes you look foolish.
What you get in the US is the highest cost for the 37th best. Seems like the US pays to much for to little.
Source for WCO rankings: World Health Organization ranking of healthcare systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Our healthcare is number one in the world if all the facts and criteria are on an even playing field. Something the WHO really doesn't do. Even our child mortality would be a lot higher in the world if the WHO used the same critertia that we use.
We have more auto deaths and more homicide deaths than any other place in the world.
Do you have any ability to think critically? Your rankings put Italy at #2, San Marino at #3 and Andorra at #4. Do you honestly think San Marino delivers state of the art care and the US does not?This is why 3rd world dictators and others come here?
King Hussein Heads To U.s. For Medical Treatment - Chicago Tribune
Yemeni President Heads To US For Medical Treatment | Fox News
Saudi King Heads to U.S. for Medical Treatment - YouTube
Your post is a bunch of unsupported and wrong generalizations.
What did I generalize? According to the WCO the US ranks 37th in care. So how did I generalize that? Yemen is ranked 120th so it is easy to see why they would transfer someone to the 37th. It is better care.
So when you said I was making generalization it was you that made statements without knowledge, in fact. You might want to do the research before criticizing anyone else. It makes you look foolish.
What you get in the US is the highest cost for the 37th best. Seems like the US pays to much for to little.
Source for WCO rankings: World Health Organization ranking of healthcare systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Their criteria stack the deck. We see the reality: people come to the US for medical treatment. They do not go to San Marino.
all three of those country's still pay less for their health care then the US.Why are no socialist countries switching to our system of private insurance???
Oh, because US healthcare costs more and it provides worse outcomes.
Success is self-evident CONZ.
Point to all the demonstrations in socialist coutries DEMANDING they change to our system.
Point to the cost savings of the U.S. system.
Explain how having a for profit middleman saves money on healthcare spending?
Deception:
Entitlement programs are bringing Europe to it's knees. National Health Care has become unsustainable. If you don't get it Germany, Great Britain and France finally have.
Germany
Chancellor Merkel, something of a political acrobat, was previously allied in coalition with leftist Social Democrats. She's now resisting calls from the Free Democrats to get off the state-pulled health-care train. The FDP's spokesman on health, Daniel Bahr, wants a "shift in direction away from state-run medicine." Why? Because "the current financial figures have showed us that the health-care fund doesn't work."
Germany's Socialized Health-Care System Isn't Working - WSJ.com
Great Britain
In a document, or white paper, outlining the plan, the government admitted that the changes would cause significant disruption and loss of jobs. But it said: The current architecture of the health system has developed piecemeal, involves duplication and is unwieldy. Liberating the N.H.S., and putting power in the hands of patients and clinicians, means we will be able to effect a radical simplification, and remove layers of management.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/world/europe/25britain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
France
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost - WSJ.com
The UK spends $2,560 per person
Germany spends $3,174 per person
France spends $3,040 per person
The US spends $6,096 per person
(as of 2007)
Per Capita Health Expenditures by Country, 2007 — Infoplease.com
The US spends $7,960 per person
(as of 2009)
Spending: U.S. spends whopping amount on healthcare - Los Angeles Times
Comparing U.S. Healthcare Spending with Other OECD Countries - Seeking Alpha
so when those countries end up spending roughly as much as we do, then we can compare apples to apples. since they spend less than half of what we spend, an increase in costs would need to jump 100% in order to have a direct comparison.
all three of those country's still pay less for their health care then the US.Deception:
Entitlement programs are bringing Europe to it's knees. National Health Care has become unsustainable. If you don't get it Germany, Great Britain and France finally have.
Germany
Chancellor Merkel, something of a political acrobat, was previously allied in coalition with leftist Social Democrats. She's now resisting calls from the Free Democrats to get off the state-pulled health-care train. The FDP's spokesman on health, Daniel Bahr, wants a "shift in direction away from state-run medicine." Why? Because "the current financial figures have showed us that the health-care fund doesn't work."
Germany's Socialized Health-Care System Isn't Working - WSJ.com
Great Britain
In a document, or white paper, outlining the plan, the government admitted that the changes would cause significant disruption and loss of jobs. But it said: The current architecture of the health system has developed piecemeal, involves duplication and is unwieldy. Liberating the N.H.S., and putting power in the hands of patients and clinicians, means we will be able to effect a radical simplification, and remove layers of management.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/world/europe/25britain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
France
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost - WSJ.com
The UK spends $2,560 per person
Germany spends $3,174 per person
France spends $3,040 per person
The US spends $6,096 per person
(as of 2007)
Per Capita Health Expenditures by Country, 2007 — Infoplease.com
The US spends $7,960 per person
(as of 2009)
Spending: U.S. spends whopping amount on healthcare - Los Angeles Times
Comparing U.S. Healthcare Spending with Other OECD Countries - Seeking Alpha
so when those countries end up spending roughly as much as we do, then we can compare apples to apples. since they spend less than half of what we spend, an increase in costs would need to jump 100% in order to have a direct comparison.
They why don't you move to one of these places where you can live in pure bliss.
