Posted on 02/12/2010 8:17:12 AM PST by SeekAndFind
It's a contentious question, but curiously, one that doesn't get debated nearly as fiercely as things like "how many uninsured people are there?" I find that surprising, because after all, we don't necessarily care whether people are marked by some survey as "insured" or "uninsured"; we care whether there is preventable suffering in the world.
But it turns out to be really hard to determine how many people die without insurance, which is the subject of this month's column. The most recent available study, which also had the largest sample and controlled for the most variables, found no effect at all--a result which surprised the hell out of its author, a former Clinton advisor. Other studies say the number is in the tens of thousands.
The left is predictably fond of the study which got the largest number, 45,000 a year. Unfortunately, its authors are political advocates for a single-payer system, who also helped author the notorious studies on medical bankruptcies. Those studies are very shoddily done, with parameters that somehow always conspire to produce the maximum possible number. In the first study, they set an absurdly low threshhold for what constituted a "medical bankruptcy". In the second, they chose 2006, the year after the 2005 bankruptcy reform act had driven an unprecedented spike in filings. It seems pretty likely that medical bankruptcies were bound to be overrepresented in 2006, since most financial events are easier to see coming than illnesses. But even if you disagree--and the authors offered an incredibly wan explanation of why they did--it's very clear that the people who filed in 2006 were not going to be a representative sample of bankruptcies in a normal year. I can't imagine why you would choose to study 2006 unless you were looking for biased results.
(Excerpt) Read more at meganmcardle.theatlantic.com ...
Why doesn’t she just pay for the MRI herself if need be?
BM
The hospital in VT where this happened wouldn’t accept her insurance, and she’s already out $700+ for the ER visit. Why bother having insurance if no one honors it?
I agree with “fool in paradise” rationing IS going on, and I think this is an example of it.
All I know is this: if you pay insurance premiums there best be a DAMN good reason not to pay out when you make a legitimate claim.
Everybody dies, health insurance or not. The only question is when.
Certainly there are times it’s darned frustrating dealing with them and times you have to fight with them over paying stuff. Of course, it depends on your coverage (and some insurances are accepted more places than others—I miss the old days when my insurance had a deductible, and I paid EVERYTHING but once I hit the deductible they paid most stuff at 80%. Of course I had to send it in to get reimbursed, but it was a far superior system).
My point is, if she needs an MRI she needs to get it down ASAP and not wait for the insurance.
Well let’s try to answer the question taking the Left’s assumptions.
Harry Reid said 47,000 people A YEAR die from the lack of health insurance.
Since the proposed Obamacare would not kick in for THREE YEARS after enactment, that means 141,000 people will die from the lack of health insurance.
So, on the altar of passing Healthcare for all, it is OK to Harry Reid and the Dems that 141,000 people die until the program kicks in.
Abortion in the US since 1973: 60 million
Communism/Fascism/Socialism in the 20th Century: 100 million
So what’s a mere 141,000 as long as the Dems get what they want?
Just remmber, Hitler wanted healthcare for all too. Not long after, the undesirables starting to disappear from society.
Think it can’t happen here?
That’s why November 2, 2010 is a very important date in the history of the United States.
I guess you should tell that to the emergency rooms where people get pregnancy tests, treatments for headaches, flu, etc. because they refuse to see a doctor where they have to get an appointment and pay for it.
As somone who does medical billing I know exactly who does and does not pay for it.
Of course there is still abuse but if someone doesn't have insurance they will get a bill for the service. Even if it is an emergency a person still gets billed. You either pay or it goes to a collection agency.
Some people are eligible for state aid but if you're not the e room is not free.
Just wondering if today's "undesirables" would include homosexual people with AIDS. It would be an interesting stand-off with two liberal groups (the pro-deathers vs. people with AIDS) going at each other.
I have pleaded with her to just pay for it and get it done. Her thick skull is saying no.
I agree - the old days were much better.
I hope she gets it treated soon. Good luck!
Thank you! She got an appointment for tomorrow night.
WEll now you have to keep me posted! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.