Sarah Palin proven right! Government tricks beautiful young mom; imposes 1st Death Panel Verdict

Because that would mean the evil, uncaring, government is in control of health care.

Why not just give the government all the power, and then make those rules for the government to follow?

It also doesn’t help much if the person denied care is dead before the government can enforce the rules.

Wrong again. Profit is what’s left over AFTER R&D expenses. Which again shows that you are either lying or are unaware of business, or don’t understand the word profit. I suspect all three.

Profit = revenue - cost

I would love to, are you have to do is stop lying. Even to suggest what you have is a “different viewpoint” is a lie. You need to think about the stuff you are writing.

I’m not sure I parsed this correctly,

So would it be correct then, SA that your vision of the ideal system is one in which all health care and health insurance are provided by private companies, subject to strict government regulation and severe penalties?

So, somehow it costs more to hire a lawyer to sue the government that it does to sue a private corporation, or something? Do explain! :rolleyes:

Recently?

Somehow just hiring a lawyer seems to do the trick.
(Not that my cite has any actual credibility!)

CMC fnord!
Sometimes the fruit is so low hanging … well, ya need a shovel to pick it.

As a Canadian, I acknowledge that if I contract certain types of cancer, my best shot at long-term survival may indeed be to seek care (expensive though it might be) at Johns Hopkins or similar high-end American facilities, where the most advanced medicine in the world is being studied and applied.
Of course, also as a Canadian, I don’t have to fear that something banal like a broken leg will force me to take out a mortgage. As I understand it, SA is proud of the former and using it to dismiss the latter.

Best health care money can buy! Course, there is that one little catch…

Do you imagine that Doctors, nurses, PT’s, interns, etc work without pay where there is UHC?

Um, no. Doctors etc all profit in a UHC system, they all get paid just like your system. But the insurance company doesn’t draw a profit. We’re all part of one large plan, with no profit being drawn rates are low, as part of one huge plan, very low. Just like a large group plan rates are lower than a small plans. Duh. Hospitals don’t operate for profit is all.

Police services and fire services in America don’t work on a ‘for profit’ model, surely you’re smart enough to see the advantages to the larger community in this model. Now imagine hospitals were run the same. Not for profit, but services offered at cost.

God you are truly and utterly beyond reason. It is astounding.

I am firmly convinced the real reason boneheads like you oppose such social programs is because if everyone is entitled to the same access to care, then you’re not better than anyone else. The entitlement issue isn’t really about the masses, it’s about your fat wallet or fat insurance policy and how it entitles you to be treated better than the masses. That’s what you’re really afraid of.

Even better, you probably won’t even need a lawyer. Go to the top. If you write to the execs of an insurance company, you are likely to get ignored, since the CEO is not going to risk his bonus on you. But your Congresscritter gets paid the same if you get care or not. And he gets listened to. No one in government profits from turning you down. Paying more than is set by law is going to be far more of a problem than people deliberately getting turned down. There is incompetence in both areas, of course.

Now, that’s the flaw in your argument right there.

Hate to bring it up here (well, actually, no I don’t) but the same could be said of his position on SSM and the use of the word “marriage” when it comes to them.

Ouch.

This might be overstating. To the best of my knowledge*, Starving Artist has never displayed any evidence that shows him to be exceptionally affluent. If you limit your remarks to refer to “boneheads like [him],” that’s fair, but I don’t see any reason to assume that his wallet is particularly fat.

P.S. Don’t worry about it, descamisado. But IRT the SSM thing, are you sure you’re not thinking of magellan?

*'Course since I don’t read his posts any more, the best of my knowledge is probably more limited than yours is. :slight_smile: If he’s started flashing his bankroll during the past six months, please disregard my post.

I could have sworn that Starving Artist and magellan have in the past wrangled similar arguments on that subject. I have to run now (I really do!) but if I can’t find posts supporting what I’ve imputed to him (or he doesn’t post with an affirmative position proving me wrong in the meantime), I will apologize.

He defends the advantages the rich get like it is a deserved entitlement. I know he is not rich, but he speaks for them . I guess he has some demented idea that the rich have all worked up from fast food jobs and should get better health care and tax breaks. Because dog gone it, they are just like us.

This issue? Have we found one yet that shows informed rational though by SA?

Check this out, it’s Starving Artist’s attempted pit thread! It even includes this little gem, "Just wait till the government has even more of us under their wing.’

That’s right, when more people are under their wing, more people will be able to get life saving procedures. Why?

" Jackson Memorial Hospital can’t preform the procedure without the coverage, as the Medicaid program shields them from liability for a risky procedure."

That’s right, without the evils of government socialism, this woman would have NEVER been able to get this procedure.

I think it should also be noted that as far as I can tell Medicaid just paid for her chemo, anyone wanna guess how much a year of chemo costs?

Not sure what your on about, here. We already knew he was misinformed, does it help us to know by whom?

What I still don’t get is how this is supposed to be an example of an “uncaring” government. As far as I can tell we have:

Part 1: Social Security goes out of their way to make sure a mother with cancer gets the money she is entitled to for her child. We’ve established that she wasn’t tricked. So it sounds like a pretty great example of the government doing a good thing. Does Social Security have any way of knowing what her relation is with Medicaid? I don’t believe so. All they know is that there is a program she is eligible for, and they let her know.

Part 2: Medicaid drops her coverage. We were all meant to believe that she was dropped because the procedure was too expensive. That a government bureaucrat wanted to save money. But the reality is that she was dropped because she no longer qualified, her income was now above the cutoff. To me that’s completely neutral. It sucks, but it’s not a matter of being caring or uncaring. She no longer qualifies, and as Starving Artist said, it doesn’t make sense to cover everyone. If you move out of state, your drivers license is no longer valid. If your license is no longer valid, neither is your insurance. Is that uncaring?

We also have no idea what her actual financial situation is. I don’t know what the Medicaid cut off is in Florida, let’s say it’s $15k. I find it hard to believe that the benefits for her child were $15k a year, so she’s got at least $13 or $14k coming in from some where (child support payments perhaps).

What we have is simply bad timing. The person at the Medicaid office who deals with that part of the paperwork doesn’t know she has surgery planned. And given how slow government works, chances are all this was set into motion months before the procedure was even an option.

And even if this uncaring and evil bureaucrat knew about the procedure, Medicaid doesn’t have the option to cover people just because they need a life saving procedure. It’s not based on health care needs, it’s based on financial needs. Do you see how fucked up that is? People qualify for Medicaid if their income is below a set limit, there is no qualification based on health care needs. Needing a bone marrow transplant isn’t on the Medicaid application form. So this woman wasn’t unfairly targeted, she was simply no longer eligible.

Part 3: The hospital refused to allow the procedure because of liability. Now THAT sounds uncaring to me, but the hospital isn’t the government, it’s private.

The only thing we’ve proven is that private hospitals are uncaring and driven by profit. That profit motives means that a cost benefit analysis HAS to be performed on each individual case. And that when the risk to profits is too great beautiful young mothers have to die.

That a beautiful young mother wouldn’t be able to get a lifesaving procedure if it wasn’t for the government stepping in to help.

That’s what this article proves. For profit health care does not work. Well, I guess it works for 85% of the population, the rest die unless the government steps in to do something.

Every single time SA has come into this thread to shrug off the deaths of 45,000 people he’s ironically reminded me of the comment by Joseph Stalin himself about how one death is a tragedy but a million deaths a statistic.

Why is anyone still arguing with him?

He’s been proven wrong a few dozen times. All he’ll do is come into this thread yet again with some blather about the evils of government and all our made up stories about how UHC actually works.

It’s weird how when everything’s private, 45,000 needless deaths is perfectly acceptable, but if the government is involved in any way, nothing short of absolute perfection will do.

Well, it’s blindingly obvious that there’s no way for YOU to argue these issues with a smidgeon of honesty or acceptance of opposition.

Fortunately, there are many other posters here, both conservative and liberal, who seem able to manage it.

Smidgen.

SMIDGEN, GODDAMNIT!

Here’s your mnemonic:

Your average pigeon
Has lots of religion.
Walter Pidgeon?
Just a smidgen.