04 Nov 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziDoes the subject of "Romanian health care" interest you?
it pains me to humor your attempt to derail the topic. this would be the last reply on this.
if someone is genuinely interested in the topic "romanian health care" and considers worthwhile a discussion on the matter and makes a thread on it, i will participate and offer my opinion.
this thread is about how medicaid expansion depends in many states o ...[text shortened]... f worrying about what trump or carson said lately in debates that won't matter for another year.
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by normbenignwhen debating US economic policies with a Cambodgian, do you think it's useful to compare Cambodgian and US economy?
Health care can be in some ways relative. Since you seem not to like the US system, it is fair to ask you about how Romania compares. It doesn't need to be comprehensive, just some of the basic differences, those that you know and love.
when debating US foreign policy, would you compare it with Luxembourg's foreign policy?
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziForeign policy differs from domestic health care policy. In almost every nation, foreign policy is a government matter.
when debating US economic policies with a Cambodgian, do you think it's useful to compare Cambodgian and US economy?
when debating US foreign policy, would you compare it with Luxembourg's foreign policy?
Health care policy differs in that while many countries involve government to a large extent, others view health care as between doctors, patients, and other health care providers. Most of the arguments about health care are regarding the degree of government interference.
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziI think you should totally start a thread about economic policies in Cambodia.
when debating US economic policies with a Cambodgian, do you think it's useful to compare Cambodgian and US economy?
when debating US foreign policy, would you compare it with Luxembourg's foreign policy?
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by normbenignok, this is more on topic.
Foreign policy differs from domestic health care policy. In almost every nation, foreign policy is a government matter.
Health care policy differs in that while many countries involve government to a large extent, others view health care as between doctors, patients, and other health care providers. Most of the arguments about health care are regarding the degree of government interference.
the idea to treat health care as a business is flawed and quite frankly, a bit repugnant.
coca-cola doesn't profit if it sells you a coke once a year. or a decade.
coca-cola doesn't profit if it makes coke less sugary.
add to this a hypothetical where you need coke or you die. you now have to buy it. Coca-cola the company responds to this by making coke 1000$ and is allowed to do this because you don't want the government to interfere. coca-cola also has exclusive rights to the recipe of coke so nobody else can make it for less money.
In europe governments negotiate with drug companies and society hasn't crumbled into a communist hell.
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by Zahlanzithe idea to treat health care as a business is flawed and quite frankly, a bit repugnant.
ok, this is more on topic.
the idea to treat health care as a business is flawed and quite frankly, a bit repugnant.
coca-cola doesn't profit if it sells you a coke once a year. or a decade.
coca-cola doesn't profit if it makes coke less sugary.
add to this a hypothetical where you need coke or you die. you now have to buy it. Coca-cola the comp ...[text shortened]... ope governments negotiate with drug companies and society hasn't crumbled into a communist hell.
Doctors invest in their future economic growth, with education, renting of buying a building for their practice, and charging customers (patients) for their services. What about that isn't a business?
The whole analogy of Coca cola is seriously flawed on too many levels to deal with.
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by normbenigndoctors aren't the only aspect of health care.
[b]the idea to treat health care as a business is flawed and quite frankly, a bit repugnant.
Doctors invest in their future economic growth, with education, renting of buying a building for their practice, and charging customers (patients) for their services. What about that isn't a business?
The whole analogy of Coca cola is seriously flawed on too many levels to deal with.[/b]
if my doctor charges me 1000 dollars for a consultation, i can find myself another one.
if the only drug that can save my life is 1000 dollars because the no law prevented the company to charge that much, i can't go buy from the competition because a) there might not be competition because there IS a law that forbids anyone else from making that drug or b) all drug companies agreed to make the drug 1k dollars and not undercut each other.
you don't want the government to interfere to regulate drug and procedure prices but you are quite ok to allow it to grant exclusive rights to manufacture and sell certain drugs (also interfering). Are you a masochist?
04 Nov 15
Originally posted by JS357😀 fair enough. technically i have not stated a topic.
Maybe if you took the time to state your thesis in the OP instead of just posting a youtube link, you could at least HAVE a topic to remind people of..
to be completely fair however, the youtube does have a topic. i didn't bother elaborating because i was unsure if someone else besides the "gobirnmint bad, socializm evil" people would join.
07 Nov 15
Originally posted by Zahlanziif the only drug that can save my life is 1000 dollars because the no law prevented the company to charge that much, i can't go buy from the competition because a) there might not be competition because there IS a law that forbids anyone else from making that drug or b) all drug companies agreed to make the drug 1k dollars and not undercut each other.
doctors aren't the only aspect of health care.
if my doctor charges me 1000 dollars for a consultation, i can find myself another one.
if the only drug that can save my life is 1000 dollars because the no law prevented the company to charge that much, i can't go buy from the competition because a) there might not be competition because there IS a la ...[text shortened]... exclusive rights to manufacture and sell certain drugs (also interfering). Are you a masochist?
If bullfrogs had wings.
07 Nov 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziWhat other Safety Net program does the government use to go after assets after the death of the person who receives it?
"It is called generational poverty. What little you have to give to your child gets taken from you."
yes, it is much better to die and leave your kids orphans and with your grand fortune with which you couldn't buy a health insurance than to keep living and able to provide for your kids.
i think i can safely say this is the dumbest thing i heard all week.
Do they go after mothers who receive food assistance with child and woman food programs?
07 Nov 15
http://www.seniorcorps.org/medicare/can-medicare-take-my-parents-property-to-cover-care/
Federal law requires each state to try to recover the costs accrued by Medicaid patients. Medicare, however, is viewed as regular health insurance, and thus carries no similar recovery mandate. Therefore, Medicare will not take a person’s property to cover the cost of care provided. If your parent had Medicaid and lived in a nursing facility, however, the state probably will probably require that any property your parent owned be sold upon his or her death to recoup the cost of nursing home care.