Comments on: Yes, health care is a commodity

By: Steve McGough

Steve McGough — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 07:23:30 +0000

Uh, no – we can't agree on that. Insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid … may write the checks, but where do you think the money comes from? I also never said the government was running the system, I said because of their involvement, it can no longer be considered a private system. I'm done with the word play.

By: sammy22

sammy22 — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:05:43 +0000

The doctors, hospitals etc. provide health care. The insurance cos, Medicare, Medicaid, VA etc. programs pay for the services. Can we at least agree on that, and not mix them together and make it sounds like the government is running the system. Otherwise, if the government is already running the system the ball game is already over.

By: Steve McGough

Steve McGough — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 07:32:41 +0000

So you're saying the federal government won't deny coverage willy nilly? You're delusional, they are doing this now and you know it. Health care is not a right, it is a commodity, but your emotions are driving your argument.

I know seniors – covered under Medicare – who are unable to get a primary care physician right now because docs will not take them.

At least you're being honest saying you want the government to take it over and you think their should be no health insurance companies. You're wrong, but honest about that. You want the socialist way – just admit it and you'll feel better.

I've been discussing facts about the insurance companies and how they are, and will be, better than a government system. I also refuse to accept the premise we have a private system now run by health insurance companies – that is a lie and everyone knows it. When government already runs Medicare, Medicaid and dozens of other state, federal and local government funded programs, the system is no longer private.

By: Gzoref

Gzoref — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:02:21 +0000

Rep. Weiner is right on target. And health IS a Right, not a Privilege
Nobody should be at the mercy of companies that can deny and rescind coverage willy-nilly. Cigna only has an obligation to their shareholders. The government has an obligation to it’s citizens. Who’s gonna provide better coverage?
Ask senior’s and veterans to give up their socialist healthcare in the name of the free-market; explain the virtues of Cigna to them.

By: sammy22

sammy22 — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:41:21 +0000

I don't want government to take over health care. I do want everybody to be covered and to pay for health care (not pick and choose and when a leg is broken in a skiing accident have somebody else foot the bill). Sure it's an emotional response to have to call 911, I don't think you'd happy to do it either. As for the site you sent me to, you forgot to note that the 3% cost in ER does not include the going to intensive care for the heart attack or whatever. You are selective in your choice of facts, but flick off others. We ALL pay for those that either don't have, cannot afford or CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE coverage. These are FACTS.

By: Steve McGough

Steve McGough — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:24:50 +0000

No kidding, of course it's different. But emergency visits are not the bulk of the cost. This site says it's less than 3 percent. On top of that, emergency care is available and there is a federal law in place that stipulates you must be treated. You're not turned away. Then again, if emergency departments are required to treat and don't get reimbursed by the government or whomever, they close the doors. Doctors leave and hospitals close if they can't make any money. Go try to find a doc who will take new Medicare patients in some parts of the country - can't find one - since the government plan ensures they loose money on every visit. Why don't you just say you want government to take over health care and we can leave it at that. There is no friggin way private carriers can compete with the government in the ball game. None at all, and simple economics proves me right. Can't make money? Not offering the service. Your arguments are always based on emotion and how it should be, never reality, economics or fact. So, I'm done responding to you.

By: sammy22

sammy22 — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:53:13 +0000

When you are having a heart attack you don't go shopping for the best price, nor when you get picked up in a car wreckage. At least say (admit) that there is a difference between elective (or I have the time to check options on my cataract surgery) and when 911 has been dialed. Everything is simple until you are faced with a crisis.

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:37:11 +0000

Actually, it would only be the cheaper red pill!

By: IWorryMyMomWorries

IWorryMyMomWorries — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:01:09 +0000

If health reform passes, cataract surgery will mean jamming red and blue pills into your corneas.

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:02:50 +0000

I think Rush put it best: government health "care" makes people a budget item, and thus, the relationship between gov't and the American people will be forever changed, particularly if you are what the government deems "expendable."