They will never say this, but this is how it will work when the ACA/NSA/IRS data hub fusion centers are operating.
Welcome to the USSA. Now, shut up and be a good comrade, or no operation for your brat kid!
First concept of economics:
Resources are scarce and limited
and demand for those resources is unlimited.
A rationing process will impose itself, even if that process is the complete depletion of the resource.
They will never say this, but this is how it will work when the ACA/NSA/IRS data hub fusion centers are operating.
Welcome to the USSA. Now, shut up and be a good comrade, or no operation for your brat kid!
My doctor told me yesterday that there’s a certain test that insurance will pay for no more than once every 3 years.
Is that rationing or not? Been going on for many years I suppose.
But mind you, I am totally against Obamacare.
Frankly, death panels already exist, in the form of doctors and medical ethicists who weigh the benefit/risk of performing surgery or treatments on very old/sick/unlikely to recover people. But, of course, those are not politicians/bean counters. It is an undeniable fact that a tremendous amount of money is spent at the end of life of an older person, even when the outcome is utterly and imminently hopeless, which I’ve seen happen in my own family. The system, as it is, is designed to drain the maximum amount of money from this person and their insurance regardless of outcome.
Also, I have no problem at all with a 95 year old person getting a lung transplant, if they pay for it and can find a doctor willing to do it thinking that the patient would actually survive and thrive (if you can say a 95-year old person is going to “thrive”...). But no insurance company or “normal” doctor/hospital would do this today, and I would not want to pay the premiums for an insurance company that would actually cover that.
There has to be rationing since the current system is unsustainable. The only question is who does it, i.e., the government, the insurance companies, or the patient?