88,000 lose Blue Cross coverage plans in Texas

[zincwarrior]

It's morally wrong to take the labors of someone and give them to another person.

Its morally wrong to condemn another to death because they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth too.

 

[zincwarrior]

Yeah it's called Socialism and Communism.

Yep and thats what you'll get if you don't fix the system and soon.

You already have a proto-socialist in second place in the Democratic Party and a proto-fascist leading the polls in the other party.

 

[texas skeeter]

Its morally wrong to condemn another to death because they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth too.

You know it's funny, I know of MANY that are poor and cannot afford sh-t because they are LAZY and have no intention of working nor making their lives better financially or of quality. So because they "Choose" their own poverty we shall all pay for them right?

 

[Mreed911]

It's morally wrong to take the labors of someone and give them to another person

It isn't, however, morally wrong to set as a requirement of licensure that x% of care come at a subsidized price, as long as that requirement is clear up front and the person considering becoming a physician understands that and factors it into their decision to pursue the education required, etc. Then the pressure is on the person setting the x% to manage it such that there's enough supply of people willing to be physicians to meet the need, and on physicians to balance costs such that they don't attract others into the market to compete with them for services.

Today, there aren't enough doctors to go around, so since demand is high the government is getting away with a really high 'x factor' in terms of taking time, payments, etc. from doctors - a bad position to be in.

In reality, you'd see prices go up the same x% to cover the 'gap.' That's what you see today in terms of medical costs - it's covering losses to non-paying patients or subsidized care below actual (or perhaps market) cost.

Ultimately, this is what's driven the concept of seeing a PA or even an NP vs. a doctor - not enough doctors, and a better way for medical practices to increase their margins using lower-cost (and lower cost-to-insure) providers.

Hell, just on the front lines, I'm seeing my scope of practice increase greatly year-over-year as a paramedic, which only requires a two-year Associate's degree (and in our service, the functional qualifications of an apprenticeship to qualify to "climb the ladder" in terms of practice/scope).

I'll be training to provide field pericardiocentesis (sticking a long needle under your ribs to the sac around your heart and taking off fluid) within the next quarter... something few in EMS have been doing. We're seeing neighboring services starting central lines in the field. Both of those are typically billed as surgical procedures in-hospital and require some pretty advanced training and continuing education. We also have a community paramedicine program (not the first - the first/best is probably MedStar in Fort Worth) that provides home visits, check-ups and therapies as well as "social work" related services to try and reduce 911 call volume. The burden of care is shifting to non-MD/DO providers, and the place of care is shifting to the home and/or community clinic.

The ACA made things worse at the ER level - more people with insurance just meant more people using the ER as a primary care facility instead of a local doctor or clinic... so now a 4-16 hour wait for non-urgent cases is normal. Go figure...

HFD is using a program called Ethan to do video chats with doctors to avoid hospital transports and ER congestion.

Get ready. It only gets more congested from here... and now we know why there's a six month wait for things in Canada in the UK. Everyone insured means everyone demanding more care beyond the catastrophic/life-saving.

 

[texas skeeter]

Reed I commend you for the job you do.

 

[TheDan]

Its morally wrong to condemn another to death because they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth too.

Not getting medical care is bad, but slavery is ok. Got it...

See, I can use hyperbole, too.

 

[Hoji]

Its morally wrong to condemn another to death because they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth too.

GFY. I just spent the last two hours mustered in full SCBA on an oil rig in the Arabian Gulf. How fucking dare you spout off with that horse shit. I take 100% of the risk in my job. I spend 6 months a year away from my family to make a better life for us. Tell me, what percentage of my income does some shitbag welfare brood mare "deserve"?

 

[texas skeeter]

Damn I have a new found respect for Hoji!!!

 

[cbigclarke]

Damn I have a new found respect for Hoji!!!

Yeah!! Really!!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[TheDan]

It isn't, however, morally wrong to set as a requirement of licensure that x% of care come at a subsidized price, as long as that requirement is clear up front and the person considering becoming a physician understands that and factors it into their decision to pursue the education required, etc.

Requiring someone to pay a tax based on their chosen profession is still force and some might even argue it's not equal protection.

I guess you're cool with taxes levied against people practicing their chosen religion as well?

 

[cbigclarke]

Requiring someone to pay a tax based on their chosen profession is still force and some might even argue it's not equal protection.

I guess you're cool with taxes levied against people practicing their chosen religion as well?

Government = force

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[zincwarrior]

You know it's funny, I know of MANY that are poor and cannot afford sh-t because they are LAZY and have no intention of working nor making their lives better financially or of quality. So because they "Choose" their own poverty we shall all pay for them right?

A separate subject, and a good one, but this one. As noted, as we move towards a post-labor economy it won't be just "the lazy" that don't have jobs.

To the topic. In your system, what about the aged? What about the vets? What about the homeless vets? What about those in the working class who aren't lazy but can't afford the money to cure their parents, their wives and children when the technology is available. If you say "screw 'em" eventually they are going to say "screw you" right back, and the US will be in a world of hurt.

 

[texas skeeter]

Yeah!! Really!!

Iam being serious for once! lol

 

[zincwarrior]

GFY. I just spent the last two hours mustered in full SCBA on an oil rig in the Arabian Gulf. How $#@!ing dare you spout off with that horse shit. I take 100% of the risk in my job. I spend 6 months a year away from my family to make a better life for us. Tell me, what percentage of my income does some shitbag welfare brood mare "deserve"?

And those on Medicare? Are you going to say GFY to grandma and grandpa too?

 

[cbigclarke]

Iam being serious for once! lol

Me too.

I am in agreement

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[texas skeeter]

To the topic. In your system, what about the aged? What about the vets? What about the homeless vets? What about those in the working class who aren't lazy but can't afford the money to cure their parents, their wives and children when the technology is available.

And ALL these folks I'd have NO Problem helping out with some sort of Healthcare. It's the welfare/Entitlement "I want more Free sh-t" crowd I could care less about. those that are healthy and haven't worked a day in their life by choice....

 

[Hoji]

And those on Medicare? Are you going to say GFY to grandma and grandpa too?

Yes. You do not have an inherent right to the fruits of someone else's labor. Period.
Does it suck that some decent people will suffer? Yep, sure does. But I take extraordinary risks to provide for my family and it burns my ass how much I ALREADY pay in taxes to fund entitlement programs.

Life is not fair, and nowhere is it written that is.

 

[breakingcontact]

A separate subject, and a good one, but this one. As noted, as we move towards a post-labor economy it won't be just "the lazy" that don't have jobs.

To the topic. In your system, what about the aged? What about the vets? What about the homeless vets? What about those in the working class who aren't lazy but can't afford the money to cure their parents, their wives and children when the technology is available. If you say "screw 'em" eventually they are going to say "screw you" right back, and the US will be in a world of hurt.

I could donate more money to Dell Children's hospital if the gov took less of it to fund a deadbeats addictions and laziness.

 

[zincwarrior]

And ALL these folks I'd have NO Problem helping out with some sort of Healthcare. It's the welfare/Entitlement "I want more Free sh-t" crowd I could care less about. those that are healthy and haven't worked a day in their life by choice....

It is strange and disconcerting that I find we are in complete agreement. I am fully supportive of Medicare for my fellow oldsters, even the Republicans.

 

[zincwarrior]

Yes. You do not have an inherent right to the fruits of someone else's labor. Period.
Does it suck that some decent people will suffer? Yep, sure does. But I take extraordinary risks to provide for my family and it burns my ass how much I ALREADY pay in taxes to fund entitlement programs.

Life is not fair, and nowhere is it written that is.

If life is not fair why should they be fair to you?