Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Healthcare

Healthcare Healthcare Forum - For topics and discussions about health care, health policies, and health care systems


Thanks Tree7Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 11th, 2017, 10:49 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 5,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Thats a little misleading. The insurance companies can refuse to pay for a treatment, but they can not refuse the treatment. That is a very big difference as opposed to a entire system that is under government controlled health care. In that situation the government completely denies the care, as you referenced with the Vatican offers.

Uuuuhhhhh excuse me. Yes the British healthcare system CAN deny you care. HOWEVER Britain still has a dual system. There ARE private doctors and you are free to see them IF you can afford to do so. Same in Canada.
BubbaJones is offline  
Old August 11th, 2017, 01:03 PM   #32
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
Uuuuhhhhh excuse me. Yes the British healthcare system CAN deny you care. HOWEVER Britain still has a dual system. There ARE private doctors and you are free to see them IF you can afford to do so. Same in Canada.
Not quite. Most procedures are not allowed to be offered for payment other than from the government.

You are free to travel to whatever country you wish to give your money to for bigger titties or whatever. Sorry, bad choice. You can get that here in legal private clinics.

Wishful thinking cancer cures are one where you can't here and have to waste your money elsewhere.
RNG is offline  
Old August 11th, 2017, 04:07 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Thats a little misleading. The insurance companies can refuse to pay for a treatment, but they can not refuse the treatment. That is a very big difference as opposed to a entire system that is under government controlled health care. In that situation the government completely denies the care, as you referenced with the Vatican offers.
Guy39,NO! It’s not at all “misleading”.
Both commercial and government entities acting as insurers can deny payments for legal reasons. Commercial or government administrators can act or fail to act in any manner they choose that’s not contrary to law; but laws and regulations are somewhat more restricting or exacting in the cases of government administrators.

The questions of location or method for treating the child had nothing to do with finances, or insurance benefits, or socialized medicine. The Vatican was willing to pay for it all.

This was a question of England’s other civil and criminal laws. What those laws are, you and I don’t know. If you have a link that provides the families name or some other information that can lead us to the legal basis of this dispute, I suppose we can better understand what was the legal issue.

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old August 11th, 2017, 05:00 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 8,395
So in Singapore, anything over ten thousand dollars, the government pays, under ten thousand, it comes from an individual's mandatory health savings account, which is supplied by a mandatory deduction from each paycheck, and some employer matching funds.
That means people can shop for most stuff, and they see the full bill.
And if the Health savings account goes dry, the government tops it off.

That has a large market function, and it covers almost everyone.
goober is offline  
Old August 12th, 2017, 01:19 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
So in Singapore, anything over ten thousand dollars, the government pays, under ten thousand, it comes from an individual's mandatory health savings account, which is supplied by a mandatory deduction from each paycheck, and some employer matching funds.
That means people can shop for most stuff, and they see the full bill.
And if the Health savings account goes dry, the government tops it off.

That has a large market function, and it covers almost everyone.
Goober, to the extent that USA’s population is not covered by adequate basic medical insurance, catastrophic insurance is remedying the much less, rather than the much more usual medical expense problems within our nation.
USA’s major medical finance problems are among those persons not qualified for Medicaid but are among the working or nonworking, or unemployed poor or otherwise lesser income persons that cannot afford adequate medical insurance or Health Savings Accounts.

Federal insurance of catastrophic medical expenditures on behalf of all patients that’s not a cost to their insurers, would significantly increase the affordability and sustainability of all commercial, or non-profits’, or governments’ medical insurance or health savings plans.

Currently in the USA, when legally obligated or charitable entities do not pay providers of medical goods and services, substantial amounts of those bills are directly or indirectly paid by our governments, (i.e. our taxpayers).

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old August 12th, 2017, 08:56 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
The powers of governments’ or political parties’ that do not appear to be sufficiently striving for their nation’s populations’ or voters’ medical care expectations are at some risk.

Respectfully, Supposn

Last edited by Supposn; August 12th, 2017 at 09:00 AM.
Supposn is offline  
Old August 12th, 2017, 10:27 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 16,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by skews13 View Post
That's why capitalism is a ponzi scheme

Privatized profits

Socialized debts

The insurance industry is the epitome of that

The only free market that exists is your local flea market

Everything else is a subsidized scam, and protection racket
Is health care subject to the free market? Has it ever been?
caconservative is offline  
Old August 12th, 2017, 10:57 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 8,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
Is health care subject to the free market? Has it ever been?
It was a free market, caveat emptor and all that shit.
Massengill marketed cherry flavored antifreeze as medicine for children, over a hundred died the first month the product was on the market.
That's when the government insisted on sticking their nose into the tent.

Do you want Caveat Emptor to be the rule when you have a sick child?
goober is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Healthcare

Tags
catastrophic, costs, individuals, individuals’, medical



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Peak Number Of Americans Delaying Medical Care Over Costs antares Political Talk 37 January 23rd, 2015 08:00 AM
WHO warn virus could spread to other countries causing 'catastrophic' loss of life antares Current Events 50 August 5th, 2014 08:31 AM
Should medical insurers’ individual catastrophic accounts be federally re-insured? Supposn Healthcare 3 March 1st, 2013 10:06 AM
Cutting medical expenses; limit medical suits? Supposn Healthcare 1 November 29th, 2009 12:17 PM
Bush to be a Dictator in Catastrophic Emergency... tadpole256 Political Talk 8 June 1st, 2007 07:32 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.