Trump may sign new executive order on health care soon

[tango]

I believe that's correct as regards ERs, but if individual doctors take or refuse patients--which is done all the time--that doesn't mean that those who are not accepted by them have no recourse. The poorest people I know are able to see doctors, thanks to one government assistance program or another.


I can't speak as an expert, but when it comes to the very poor, hospitals normally "eat" the cost of those people's care. Of course, if someone comes into the ER and needs longer-term care, they will be hospitalized and not put out on the street.

What would concern me isn't so much the "very poor" or the "poorest" but the people who have enough to have something to lose. The very poorest probably live in rented accommodation and hence wouldn't have a home to lose due to a forced sale. The people who are rich enough to not qualify for the government assistance yet poor enough to struggle with paying a large hospital bill are the ones I would be most concerned about.

If someone does need hospital treatment and is effectively told "you'll be here for three months, and when you are released you won't have a home to go to because you'll have to sell it to pay our bill" that doesn't seem like a particularly useful system.

I can't help thinking some form of hybrid system, whereby things that are medically necessary are funded centrally while anything elective is funded privately, would make some sense. The trouble is a system too focused on the individual does little more than say "sucks to be you" to those who have health issues they can't control while a system too centrally managed ends up with huge levels of waste and endless waiting lists because everybody wants every trivial ailment fixed.

 

[tango]

I know a USA person who has gallstones, ought to have surgery to remove the gallbladder but cannot afford it and his health cover does not cover it so he hasn't had the surgery.

Under the UK system he would probably get the surgery, eventually, and the outcome could be anything from a perfectly normal life to spending the next couple of weeks in intensive care before dying of a hospital acquired infection. I personally knew a guy who went into hospital with gallstones, suffered all sorts of major organ failure while in the hospital, and came out in a box. He was in his early 30s. It's possible he was at death's door and truly didn't know it, but when the stream of information suddenly dries up it's hard to conclude much other than somebody isn't talking because they don't want to get sued.

My dentist wanted to send me to the local hospital to deal with the remains of a destroyed tooth that could only be extracted with surgery. But that hospital had one of the worst rates of MRSA infection in the country and, since the tooth wasn't causing me any problems, I decided to just live with it. The upside was small and the potential downside was huge.

 

[psalms 91]

I'm not sure how this adds to the discussion?

My bad I thought someone was wondering about people without health care in the USA

 

[Josiah]

In the USA, universal health care has existed for many decades.

Contrary to what some liberals and some in the press would have you assume, when there is a car accident, it is NOT the case that FIRST the paramedics make sure that all involved are legal residents and have valid health insurance. Otherwise, they go out for coffee and donuts. Contrary to what they'd have you believe, if you have a heart attack and show up at the ER, they do NOT insist: Please go outside under the lamp post and quietly expire cuz you don't have valid health insurance to cover this." Nope. If a an illegal alien shows up to deliver a child, no one says "You are here illegally, the Mexican governments health plan won't cover you in the USA, get yourself back to Mexico ASAP or go squat under that bush like women used to do." Nope. We have universal heath care (albeit not preventative). What the libs and their press assistants MEAN is "universal health INSURANCE." Not all have that. Apples and oranges.

 

[tango]

My bad I thought someone was wondering about people without health care in the USA

Sure, but your comment was little more than partisan scaremongering, no?

 

[NewCreation435]

In the USA, universal health care has existed for many decades.

Contrary to what some liberals and some in the press would have you assume, when there is a car accident, it is NOT the case that FIRST the paramedics make sure that all involved are legal residents and have valid health insurance. Otherwise, they go out for coffee and donuts. Contrary to what they'd have you believe, if you have a heart attack and show up at the ER, they do NOT insist: Please go outside under the lamp post and quietly expire cuz you don't have valid health insurance to cover this." Nope. If a an illegal alien shows up to deliver a child, no one says "You are here illegally, the Mexican governments health plan won't cover you in the USA, get yourself back to Mexico ASAP or go squat under that bush like women used to do." Nope. We have universal heath care (albeit not preventative). What the libs and their press assistants MEAN is "universal health INSURANCE." Not all have that. Apples and oranges.

This is exactly why many of us have high premiums and costly insurance because that cost of the uninsured and those who don't pay their bill get passed along to those of us who do. That is why when my son was in the hospital for three days even with great insurance that we have i am still paying on a huge bill that I got afterward. Someone is going to have to pay when people use the system but contribute nothing in payments

 

[tango]

This is exactly why many of us have high premiums and costly insurance because that cost of the uninsured and those who don't pay their bill get passed along to those of us who do. That is why when my son was in the hospital for three days even with great insurance that we have i am still paying on a huge bill that I got afterward. Someone is going to have to pay when people use the system but contribute nothing in payments

Any time it appears that someone "just eats the cost" you can be sure it gets passed on somewhere. Generally speaking any for-profit entities don't just eat a cost if they can pass it on to someone else. Even non-profits can only eat so many costs before they disappear due to running out of money.

 

[Albion]

Any time it appears that someone "just eats the cost" you can be sure it gets passed on somewhere.

It certainly does. It gets passed onto the patients who have insurance. But the point was that it's a false charge when people say that the "American system" delivers worse health care than happens in the countries which have Socialized Medicine. The American system does deliver, even if it's through a different format than residents of Canada or the UK experience. And lest we forget, Socialized Medicine is not free! The costs of treating the poor are passed onto those who are wealthier in these systems, too. That's the nature and purpose of Socialism.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Insurance means that costs are spread out among policy holders. If universal health cover is government funded then the costs are spread out among tax payers. Both approaches amount to the same thing. It may seem like insurance is voluntary (and technically it is) but when medical care is sufficiently expensive to make bankruptcy the likely outcome of having no insurance then it becomes effectively compulsory in fact it is as compulsory in the USA as taxation and possibly more so since it is said that USA "income tax" is paid by fewer people than those in the USA who pay medical insurance premiums either directly or by employment contract.

 

[Imalive]

Many do not have health care and if Trump has his way millions will be without it

Really? Sounds like Brazil. My ex's wife needed an operation but you get nothing if you don't pay there and in Holland they don't do it either. They're getting more antisocial by the day. So we just pray.