An example of why a public option would be nice in the United States

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

What's with this repeated mention of "Usual Suspects"? If you don't want people to comment then why do you bother to post?

Because he thinks he's a centrist and anyone who disagrees is falling off the right side. Of course he doesn't realize that he is "the usual suspects" for the far left.

Have you ever noticed how he never says anything, just posts a moderate insult and runs away? Tribesman gets grief for going over the edge, and he sometimes does, but at least he contributes to the debate, and often well.

Torvald, on the other hand, contributes nothing but the ocassional insult. This is the classic example of trolling at its worst.

[Bubblehead1980]

A "public option" would work no better and just further add to our nation's problems.

[Platapus]

This is not a public option or no public option issue.

This is an issue where a policy is being enforced to a strictness that, in this case, raises an emotional response.

Sure we all feel a bit angry when a person is denied medical coverage for a "mere" $0.02. That's the whole purpose of the story.

What I don't understand is why they did not pay the extra 2 cents when they paid their following month's bill?

If I get a bill, for something as important as medical insurance and it has listed

Forwarded balance $0.02
Current Balance $328.69
Total Due $328.71

Why didn't they either pay the extra $0.02 (no brainer) or immediately call the insurance company to ask about the two cents?

Ultimately it is the responsibility of the customer to pay the premium.

Did the insurance company act like jerks? Of course they did. Honestly does anyone expect caring and consideration from COBRA?

But, did this family take any reasonable actions to mitigate this issue such as paying the two cents or calling the company to inquire? Evidently not. Their solution was to ignore the problem.

Yes on an emotional level, this issue is terrible. I am angry at this. But logically I can't ignore that this family did contribute to this issue by not paying the full amount or calling/writing the insurance company to inquire about the "extra" $0.02

[gimpy117]

as i said before, people's health is a right. and why should we make health a profit based system?

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

as i said before, people's health is a right. and why should we make health a profit based system?

When ever someone opines a "right", I like to ask what is the source of this "right"?

I am not saying that it is or is not a right, but I would be interested in knowing what you consider the source of this right?

[Growler]

Originally Posted by Platapus

When ever someone opines a "right", I like to ask what is the source of this "right"?

I am not saying that it is or is not a right, but I would be interested in knowing what you consider the source of this right?

Curious. I'd like to know as well; the concept is intriguing.

It is the responsibility of a company to provide the service paid for. It is the responsibility of the consumer to pay the company for services rendered. Simple economics.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Growler

Curious. I'd like to know as well; the concept is intriguing.

It is the responsibility of a company to provide the service paid for. It is the responsibility of the consumer to pay the company for services rendered. Simple economics.

You'd be surprised what they don't pay for, so read all the fine print. It's also a matter of policy to deny many bills the first time even if it's covered, although after calls from you or your Doctor they will pay up, but this tactic works, 28% don't follow up, get the bill and either pay it or not. They leave many areas gray on purpose. They should make fine unreadable print on some back page against the law. Think how corrupt that is, why, because it works and screws millions up every year. Whatever is written in fine print now should be changed to large print with a large "WARNING", read this, hire an attorney to understand it...or you could die. The profit is in the fine print.

The bigger question is health a right. The government already deems we have the right to life, the bill of rights protects the right to life, one reason ER rooms don't deny life threatening conditions, criminals in jail get good health care as do terrorist.

Yes, this right has to be paid for, like we all pay for prisions, education, ect..Why, if we didn't it would cost society as a whole. We all together pay cops and firefighters to protect life. We ban together to do so.
When one is denied or can't afford health care, all studies show it cost us all more in the long run, so we all suffer as a society, hospital charge more, Insurance goe's up, medicare 60 trillion in debt.

I have no problem with all making profit, but the medical industry as a whole has become a corporate monopoly based on mass profits. On this one area of health, ask yourself this...do you want people to act based on how they can help you the most or do you want them to act based on how much profit..? This is an affront to our right to life.

Today Doctor mistakes are the 3rd leading cause of death, 40,000 die every year from lack of care, millions do without meds, live in pain, so they can feed their kids instead. These get worse and usually cost us all more.
Many in pain just kill themselves.

All studies show one thing, no changes, in 10 years 40% of us could be without medical insurance. Recent studies show corporations are providing less and less options with insurance. All studies show the nice government care will have to be cut...I've met many a GOP member that got ill, lost his job, insurance and forced into pain and poverty changed their mind about a public option.

You have to ask yourself, public option or corporate control for mass profits....which is worse? We know both have bankrupted this country, but no CEO will get a 20 million dollar bonus at the end of the year at the expense of someone elses pain or death.

What we need is a properly regulated medical industry, I myself don't trust the government, but I trust corporations less...course they run the GOP, so would be a win win for them either way.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

When ever someone opines a "right", I like to ask what is the source of this "right"?

I am not saying that it is or is not a right, but I would be interested in knowing what you consider the source of this right?

He's right. The Tenth Amendment says so.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

[CaptainHaplo]

A person's health IS a right.

What is not is a right is public payment to care for and uphold that right for everyone else.

You want to be healthy? That's your right. You can exercise, eat healthy, not smoke or drink, etc. Those are your choices.

You want to be unhealthy? Thats your right too. You can eat bon-bons, lay around and get fat, diabetic , smoke up your lungs till you get cancer, drink till your liver dessicates and eat bacon till you clog your arteries. Those are also your choices.

To say that health care is a right, and that health care should NOT be a profit source for business, your saying that the doctors and nurses who take care of you should not be recompensed beyond a certain minimal level. Your saying that you have the RIGHT to make them use their knowledge on you for your benefit without them having benefit as well.

Personal health is a right. Publicly funded health care is trampling the rights of others who have to pay for your bad decisions.

[August]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

people's health is a right.

Fine by me, but declaring it to be a right doesn't mean that the government has to, or even should, get involved in providing it. You also have a right to privacy. Does that mean the government has to guard your front door in order to make sure you get it?

...and why should we make health a profit based system?

Because it is a profit based system.

Now I'm not unsympathetic to a Nationalized Health Care system but that presently does not exist and you can't just switch from one to the other like you turn on a light, even if the idea had complete backing from the medical community, which it doesn't.

First we'd have to train a complete new crop of surgeons, doctors, nurses, technicians orderlies and administrators because few of the existing ones are going to want to leave the much higher paying private practice for government service.

That alone will take quite some time and it won't be cheap.

Meanwhile though we'd also have to spend even more money to rent, buy or build hospitals and clinics all across our huge country in order to give that new crop of medics a place to work once they are ready. And then lets not forget that we'd have to start, collect, file, standardize and store 300 million sets of medical records. A huge undertaking just in itself.

So yeah, we have a right to health care, nobody is stopping you from buying as much as you require, but you can't expect to get it for free.