Health Insurance in the USA

**thebigspendur** · 08-02-2009, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by GregJDS

"Also, to baselessly assert her cancer was caused by her spending money on "junk" is a bit reprehensible, IMO. "

I never said her cancer was caused by that, just probably was caused by it.
Most cancer is caused by voluntary consumptiuon of toxic materials, the rest which is probably less is caused by involuntary consumption of toxic materials like exhaust fumes.
Obviously all cancers are going to be a mix of both to some degree but its mainly people putting stuff into their own bodies for many years that causes cancer.

The reason her treatment was so expensive was becuase she chose the chemotherapy option. Chemotherapy is like offering to fix someones broken leg with a sledgehammer.
The story is terrible about how the insurance company treated her claim, although the method of treatment and story around how people aquire cancer was what I was commenting on.

Well here we go again.

You should be working for a health insurance company.

"well you smoked cigars so we're not going to pay for your cancer, you were a painter and exposed to chemicals so its your fault we're not going to pay, you lived in LA and breathed that foul air that's your fault we're not going to pay, you joined the army knowing you could get shot-that's reckless behavior we're not going to pay." You could exclude just about everybody.

The bottom line is people die in this country because they can't afford to be properly treated and that's the travesty.

**honedright** · 08-02-2009, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Well here we go again.

You should be working for a health insurance company.

"well you smoked cigars so we're not going to pay for your cancer, you were a painter and exposed to chemicals so its your fault we're not going to pay, you lived in LA and breathed that foul air that's your fault we're not going to pay, you joined the army knowing you could get shot-that's reckless behavior we're not going to pay." You could exclude just about everybody.

The bottom line is people die in this country because they can't afford to be properly treated and that's the travesty.

I think Bigspendur has stated the crux of the mater beautifully:

"The bottom line is people die in this country because they can't afford to be properly treated and that's the travesty."

Yes, the real problem is that some people can not afford their health care, or their lives.

Since this is a topic on health care, I will make a health care related analogy:

- A patient is burning up with fever due to an acute bacterial infection. The patient desperately needs antibiotics to cure the illness. But oops, someone has misdiagnosed the illness, so instead, a cold compress is applied to the patient's forehead which brings temporary relief of the fever, but does nothing to address the the real cause of the illness. The infection is worsening and threatens to kill this patient and then to spread to other patients and staff at the hospital. -

National health care is the cold compress in this analogy. The real cure must address the infection - the inability of people to be able to afford their lives.

Instead of addressing the real problem, all you (figurative) want to do is apply a band-aid in the form of national health care. In the mean time, the patient is dying. But you feel better because at least you feel like you did something. But the problem persists, The patient is dying.

And all anyone can think of is the proper way to soak towels in cold water.

**GregJDS** · 08-02-2009, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Well here we go again.

You should be working for a health insurance company.

"well you smoked cigars so we're not going to pay for your cancer, you were a painter and exposed to chemicals so its your fault we're not going to pay, you lived in LA and breathed that foul air that's your fault we're not going to pay, you joined the army knowing you could get shot-that's reckless behavior we're not going to pay." You could exclude just about everybody.

The bottom line is people die in this country because they can't afford to be properly treated and that's the travesty.

Itend not to buy or sell insurance, a bit like neither a borrower nor a lender be. except its neither a seller of insurance nor a buyer be.

**JimmyHAD** · 08-03-2009, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by GregJDS

Itend not to buy or sell insurance, a bit like neither a borrower nor a lender be. except its neither a seller of insurance nor a buyer be.

The day will come when you will wish that you had it. Unfortunately since this is the only country in the industrialized world that doesn't provide health care for all of it's citizens you will have to determine if it is worth it to you.

My point in posting the ladies testimony before the committee was to demonstrate that even if you have insurance you still are not free from worrying that you will have to fight for the treatment you need when the time comes.

That is assuming you're not one of the estimated 47 million Americans who do not have health insurance. This is my last post on the topic in any of the related threads. Anyone who could watch that vid and not feel empathy for that women hasn't got any AFAIC.

**GregJDS** · 08-03-2009, 02:44 AM

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

The day will come when you will wish that you had it. Unfortunately since this is the only country in the industrialized world that doesn't provide health care for all of it's citizens you will have to determine if it is worth it to you.

My point in posting the ladies testimony before the committee was to demonstrate that even if you have insurance you still are not free from worrying that you will have to fight for the treatment you need when the time comes.

That is assuming you're not one of the estimated 47 million Americans who do not have health insurance. This is my last post on the topic in any of the related threads. Anyone who could watch that vid and not feel empathy for that women hasn't got any AFAIC.

meh dunno about that, I think I was close enough to thinking I wasnt going to make it last year when my stomach/kidneys were having serious problems, and im ok with dying, this body has got to wear out sometime, and I cant be killed because I'm an immortal spirit.
Anyway I wasnt hinking about insurance or anything like that, was mainly
focused on what the greatest test in our life, which is how we go when we go.

Btw I did feel empathy for certain parts of the story, and then I was also critical of other parts, it is possible to be both at the same time. And if you allow your empathy to go too far it can cloud you critical view of reality, and if you allow your criticism to go too far it can cloud your empathy and make you cold. Either one of those extremes is migrating into foolishness, so I think its healthy to be able to be critical of something and empathetic at the exact same moment.
Bruce Lee said it well in terms of control(criticism) and flow(empathy).
YouTube - Bruce Lee´s last interview

**JMS** · 08-03-2009, 03:05 AM

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

This is my last post on the topic in any of the related threads. Anyone who could watch that vid and not feel empathy for that women hasn't got any AFAIC.

I hope you will make an exception and post to answer my question Jimmy.
Let me start by saying that I find it rather low to emotionalize this whole healthcare debate. It makes us blind to reason and the problems with the supposed answers being fed us. Secondly, who says she will fare better under a government run system? I doubt that she would've. If I were her I would've pursued every avenue and knocked on every door until I got satisfaction. I would not have waited around for my insurance. She was chasing after the devils promise, or so it appeared.

My question to you Jimmy is what does whether we believe that government should take over our health care have anything to do with whether we feel any empathy for this woman?

**JimR** · 08-03-2009, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by honedright

I think Bigspendur has stated the crux of the mater beautifully:

"The bottom line is people die in this country because they can't afford to be properly treated and that's the travesty."

Yes, the real problem is that some people can not afford their health care, or their lives.

Since this is a topic on health care, I will make a health care related analogy:

- A patient is burning up with fever due to an acute bacterial infection. The patient desperately needs antibiotics to cure the illness. But oops, someone has misdiagnosed the illness, so instead, a cold compress is applied to the patient's forehead which brings temporary relief of the fever, but does nothing to address the the real cause of the illness. The infection is worsening and threatens to kill this patient and then to spread to other patients and staff at the hospital. -

National health care is the cold compress in this analogy. The real cure must address the infection - the inability of people to be able to afford their lives.

Instead of addressing the real problem, all you (figurative) want to do is apply a band-aid in the form of national health care. In the mean time, the patient is dying. But you feel better because at least you feel like you did something. But the problem persists, The patient is dying.

And all anyone can think of is the proper way to soak towels in cold water.

What the hell are you talking about?

Do you have any idea what cancer treatment costs in the USA? this person's treatment costs $30,000 a month. That's almost my entirely yearly salary--in one month. JUST for treatment.

Are you saying that the real cure is to make everyone in the US immensely rich? Or to make health care affordable for everyone in America? Because they are both ludicrously impossible. I mean impossible to the point of being delusional.

In order to make it possible for people to pay their own possible medical bills, you either have to have an economy that would allow every family in the United States to have an income in excess of 1,000,000 a month JUST ON THE OFF CHANCE of someone getting cancer and needing treatment, or you would have to convince every element of the health care industry (which is a HUGE industry, dedicated to making as much money as possible) to cut costs to a tiny percentage of their current levels. As in, make that 30,000 a month cancer treatment cost, say, $30 a month. I think that apart from those below the poverty line, $30 a month to stay alive is probably pretty swingable. Maybe even $100.

Another option, of course, is to say "Unless you can afford to pay $30,000 a month for an unknown amount of time, you will die of the cancer that you caught because the town you live in is near a paint factory that released toxic chemicals into the air when you were still in the womb."

OOOOORRRRR...we can use the leverage of a democratically elected government to help regulate health costs to a more reasonable level, AND use the already existing tax system to collect a fairly determined amount of money from those who are able to pay so that every man woman and child in America will be able to receive the health care that would allow them to continue to exercise their rights to life and the pursuit of happiness.

**Navaja** · 08-03-2009, 03:17 AM

Originally Posted by JimR

OOOOORRRRR...we can use the leverage of a democratically elected government to help regulate health costs to a more reasonable level, AND use the already existing tax system to collect a fairly determined amount of money from those who are able to pay so that every man woman and child in America will be able to receive the health care that would allow them to continue to exercise their rights to life and the pursuit of happiness.

This sounds so hypocritical that makes me puke

**honedright** · 08-03-2009, 03:59 AM

Originally Posted by JimR

OOOOORRRRR...we can use the leverage of a democratically elected government to help regulate health costs to a more reasonable level, AND use the already existing tax system to collect a fairly determined amount of money from those who are able to pay so that every man woman and child in America will be able to receive the health care that would allow them to continue to exercise their rights to life and the pursuit of happiness.

Gosh Jim...what makes you think that this "democratically elected government" is so much more able to solve the problem than it's people?

Do you consider us THAT incompetent?

Maybe it's the nearly insolvent social security system managed by the government - is that the reason for your confidence?

Or is it the impending bankruptcy of medicare?

Or maybe it's this country's continuing high rate of unemployment despite the billions spent by the government on stimulus that you find so stimulating?

Or just could it be due to General Motors bankruptcy even after the government took over and spent billions of tax payer dollars to keep it afloat?

Or just maybe it was the little miscalculation of just how much money it would require to run the latest "success" - Cash 4 Clunkers, necessitating the confiscation, no make that procurement, of an additional $2 billion. Did you trade in your Clunker yet?

And the tens of billions the government has wasted for over 30 years on the failure called the "War on Drugs." That's what gives you hope in the governments ability to accomplish goals?

Or is it the total persistence of poverty in this country despite over 60 years of left wing, socialist, faulty economic policy, from "New Deal", to "The Great Society", and now on to "Hope and Change", that has you so convinced in the ability of government to solve our problems.

Just curious...

**JMS** · 08-03-2009, 04:04 AM

Originally Posted by honedright

Just curious...

....Me too.

Thread: Health Insurance in the USA

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to thebigspendur For This Useful Post:

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JimR For This Useful Post:

Posting Permissions