Cost of no coverage

I bring to your attention a matter most important. Having been a nurse for more than 30 years, I have had the privilege of helping people in their time of most need.

Now I see more patients and their families without adequate health-care coverage, or none at all. These problems actually increase health-care cost and increase length of stay in hospitals. We can't get these patients to be accepted to a skilled facility or discharged safely to home. We have to do the right thing, the patriotic thing, the Christian thing, and help those in need!

Our country needs health-care reform now, which includes the public option. I support my taxes and energies going to provide affordable health care to all my fellow Americans.

LINDA McCARTHY
Observatory Hill

 


Posted Nov 05 2009, 09:50 AM by Susan Mannella

Comments

DonF wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 9:58 AM

Hey Linda and all you other Lib's who so badly want your money to go to help people in need: did you know that there are dozens of charities who help people pay for their hopsital bills, help them thru sicknesses, etc? Surely as a nurse you would know that, right? So then let me ask you all this: exactly how much of your money are you giving to those groups now? If it is any less than you want us to pay in taxes, then you are just what I thought you were - a total hypocrite. Thanks for playing everyone's favorite Lib game of "do as I say not as I do".

kevin morris wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 11:29 AM

DonF, I'm tired of this argument. American citizens shouldn't have to depend on people's charity for a basic need. Guess what was the first way many folks cut back when money got tight last year? Using your system, this year more poor people would just have to suffer and die. Oh well, tough times for all of us; some folks are keeping their 3 year old Hummer an extra year, too.

I also find it ironic how, every time someone who works in the medical professions sends in a letter describing what they have observed of our health care system, they are immediately personally attacked. She has spent 30 years watching our system get worse, but somehow she's just a "lib" and "a total hypocrite" so her perceptions must be wrong!

Surely you know much more about what is happening in health care-you listen to Beck and Limbaugh.

KDHunter wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 12:41 PM

How DID those millions of predecessors of modern man ever survive with no gov't run health care?

Scurry13 wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 12:59 PM

"American citizens shouldn't have to depend on people's charity for a basic need."

Kevin, hate to break it to you, but insurance isn't a "basic need".  also, American citizens shouldn't have to depend on the government's theft from the citizens to provide others a "basic need".  i'm so sick of this entitlement mindset.  can the health care industry be reformed?  yes.  does it need completely torn down and have the beltway bandits run things?  NO!

chilco99 wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 1:19 PM

Nurse Linda,

were you swiping psychotropic's & benzo's from the med cart when you had this epiphany?

MikeT wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 1:44 PM

Scurry

When was the last time you couldn't afford a prescription or medical service that you needed to stay healthy or alive?

Also, taxation isn't theft.

Titan Lee wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 2:43 PM

Kevin,

As probably the only intelligent, stupid Liberal on this site, are you willing to admit that the biggest problem with health-care reform is that everyone knows that Congress is lying to them?  When polls show that trust in Congress is at 18% and the only question is wondering where those 18% live, there is no reason to believe one word that comes out of their mouths, much less 1990 pages worth of words.

Are you willing to admit that conservatives don’t have a problem with helping the uninsured, but they expect to be told how much it will cost, why it will cost that much and how will it be paid for?

DonF wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 2:49 PM

Kevin - It is hypocritical to tell conservatives that we "only care about our wallets" (as someone posted yesterday) but then not shell out anything to help people who don't have health insurance if that is a cause you truly believe in. If Lib's are so eager to "help", why wait around for the Democratic Party to just let them down (and make no mistake, that is where we are headed). One of the Lib's on this site made a good point a while ago - that the Dems use healthcare the same way the GOP uses abortion. As a pro-lifer, I got tired of waiting around for the GOP to do something about it. Instead, I now support the local Pregnancy Crisis Centers who not only do something about it, but are not corrupt and can manage a budget and actually know how to really help people without messing everything up. It just boggles my mind that even though you always seem to be one of the smarter, more thoughtful persons on this board, that you have so much faith in people like Pelosi and Reid.

MikeT - Taxation isn't automatically theft, but it is in the hands of our current politicians (both parties included). Look at the earmarks on the stimulus bill. Look at how the price tag for the latest health care bill suddenly jumped WAY up out of nowhere. C'mon, don't be naive.

peace wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 2:57 PM

HOLD ON KEVIN!

"I also find it ironic how, every time someone who works in the medical professions sends in a letter describing what they have observed of our health care system, they are immediately personally attacked. She has spent 30 years watching our system get worse, but somehow she's just a "lib" and "a total hypocrite" so her perceptions must be wrong!"

This coming from the same person who has attacked my views on Healthcare (I've only spent 12 years in the business) because my views differ from your liberal "I want it but make sure someone else pays for it" perpective......

THATS WHY WE CALL LIBERALS HYPOCRITES!

peace wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 3:00 PM

....I'm still laughing from MikeT's hilarious comment that taxation isn't theft.....good one buddy!

Scurry13 wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 3:22 PM

Mike, want to know the difference between what we have now and what will happen when the Gov takes over everything (which is what the endgame will be)?

right now, if your insurance says they won't pay for something, you can *gasp* pay out of pocket.

when the gov is the sole pay, when they say no, you won't be able to pay for yourself.  there are provisions in that if someone does tries that, they will lose coverage and the doc will be fined bid time!  

is the current system perfect?  no.  will the gov system be better?  history and other countries with that sort of system say no!

Scurry13 wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 3:23 PM

also mike, if i came to you, took money from you, i'd get charged with theft.  just because it's the gov, doesn't make it any less of theft.

MikeT wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 4:19 PM

Scurry

Given the way you completely ignored my question, I'll assume that you've never been forced to go without medical assistance because you couldn't afford it. That goes a long way towards explaining your assertion that medical insurance shouldn't be a right. It also explains the part of your answer where you assert people can pay out of pocket -- despite the fact that I asked you about a situation where you couldn't afford it.

Regardless, I think the funniest part of your response was where you said the gov't would come after you if you paid out of pocket for an expense they didn't cover. Apparently you haven't heard of this thing called Medicare, where the gov't pays for basic health care for senior citizens, and millions of Americans buy supplemental insurance for services that Medicare doesn't cover.

MikeT wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 4:20 PM

Good to see you got a nice laugh out of my response peace. I'm still chuckling over your comment from yesterday about "taxation without representation".

Wags wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 5:10 PM

Linda, how about you get paid for 40 hours (to care for those with insurance) but "donante" another 40 that DOESN'T get billed for those who have no coverage. That way, you can give all you want for uncovered patients, but I don't have to fork up anything.

Wags wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 5:12 PM

Linda, how about you get paid for 40 hours (to care for those with insurance) but "donante" another 40 that DOESN'T get billed for those who have no coverage. That way, you can give all you want for uncovered patients, but I don't have to fork up anything.

kevin morris wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 6:33 PM

OK, one at a time.....

Scurry, insurance isn't a basic need, medical care is. And please quit pretending this is a zero sum game, we are all already paying a huge amount of money for health care, including supporting the free health care provided by hospitals. It's more like taking the money out of your savings rather than the checking.

Titan, I agree that the Congress is lying some, but so are the insurance companies and health care providers.

I don't know if conservatives are willing to help the uninsured; they made no effort to do so in the 8 years they controlled the government.

DonF, I think putting your money and efforts where your mouth is is great, and I do it too. I just don't think our health care should depend on something as undependable as charitable giving. When a kid needs his appendix removed we don't have time for a bake sale.

Peace, I've attacked your arguments and views with counter-arguments; I don't believe I've ever insulted you personally, as has repeatedly happened to professionals who have written describing their views and observations.

KD, Re: "How DID those millions of predecessors of modern man ever survive with no gov't run health care?"

We liberals think it's a good idea to progress out of the caves, KD.

OK, what else ya got?

KDHunter wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 6:54 PM

What you term progressive I term regressive and a return to serfdom, kevin morris. Liberals are stupid dupes of a long ago disproven theory of societal interaction. I have lived in communist countries and while they are not completely bad, they do not foster the innovation and creativity that has made the American way of life possible.

I don't care what progress you make as long as my income is not part of your solution. You or your "progress" have no right to redistribute that which I have earned.

If you wish to donate 100% of your income to the gov't that is your prerogative.

Scurry13 wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Thu, Nov 5 2009 9:06 PM

"Regardless, I think the funniest part of your response was where you said the gov't would come after you if you paid out of pocket for an expense they didn't cover. Apparently you haven't heard of this thing called Medicare, where the gov't pays for basic health care for senior citizens, and millions of Americans buy supplemental insurance for services that Medicare doesn't cover."

you mean that gov thing that full of debit and doesn't reimburse docs fully and in a timely manor?  yeah, i've heard of it, and i have to laugh every time a lib like yourself tries to use it to support gov heath care.  

where i was going, and you apparently are too shortsighted to see, is once the gov is the sole payer (which is what will happen, the gov will destroy all competition), when they deny something, you won't have the option to pay out of pocket.  this is the case in Briton, Canada, and everywhere else where the gov is the sole payer.  

have i had to pay out of pocket for medical things?  no, but i HAVE had to for dental work.  get off your high horse, this POS should not see the light of day.  funny thing is nancy P is willing to lose the speakership over it.  they forget they work for use, they don't rule us...

kevin morris wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Fri, Nov 6 2009 7:15 AM

KD, I'm not an expert on medieval history, but I didn't think serfs had the right to vote. We who live in a democracy all hate it when those who don't think like us gain power and make changes reflecting their views. It feels like you are powerless and these idiots are ruining the country. You aren't powerless, and the pendulum will swing the other way sooner or later. In the meantime we will take a few minor steps in becoming a nation more in line other modern first-world democratic states. You won't wake up and find you're living in China, but maybe the US with a little Swedish influence.

We all like the Swedes, don't we?

myreply wrote re: Cost of no coverage
on Fri, Nov 6 2009 10:35 AM

Let's see - she's been a nurse for 30 years - that means she's had excellent health coverage for those 30 years paid for by the health facilities she worked for.  Fact.

Now she says she "supports her taxes going to provide affordable healthcare to her fellow Americans".  

Wonder if she felt that way when she "was" getting her health benefits paid for.