Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fuzzylogic

I don’t disagree with your definition, but perhaps I should’ve emphasized access to health care should not be denied at the time of treatment if there is no means to pay for it.

I was trying to differentiate between health care, which is accessible to all, and health insurance, which is the responsibility of the patient and not the provider.


51 posted on 03/19/2017 6:24:46 PM PDT by Senator Goldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: Senator Goldwater

Understood. The fact that we all die in varying ways and also have a varying level of income means that this entire topic is impossible to make everyone happy. I just don’t like the purely insurance based model, even if able to purchase across State lines. When you need care, under the purely insurance based model, you and your doctor are spending the insurance companies money, not your own. That plus the legal costs to the medical industry only insure that it will be expensive. If some portion of insurance premiums were set aside (and tax deductible) as a “health savings account” so that you could shop around for the lowest cost, best care, option - maybe where you get to receive the remaining balance tax free at the end of the year - we might have something where everyone is aligned in making pragmatic choices?


52 posted on 03/19/2017 8:44:46 PM PDT by fuzzylogic (welfare state = sharing consequences of poor moral choices among everybody)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson