Is access to health care a basic human right: or a privilege?

I agree. My mistake. I remembered that in some ways it was more liberal than Obamacare but that wasn't it.

 

Then you would only be demonstrating your own stupidity, as fascism is about government control, which is precisely the opposite of what I'm talking about.

OK. I'll bite: How is advocating liberty and free markets "destroying America" and doing "great harm to Christ's Church".

 

I was a paramedic for several years. Every emergency room I can recall, I was practically slapped in the face every time I walked through the doors by a huge sign explaining how the hospital could not turn people away because of their inability to pay, and that all citizens would be treated, regardless of their ability to pay. It was the law and it worked.

 

No, we're talking about people without insurance who go to cash-only doctors.

You have not explained why you're so concerned about somebody who can't pay $30-$40, but seem to have no problem with people not being able to pay the high premiums and deductibles of Obamacare. Its beginning to appear that your issue isn't with their ability or alleged inability to pay, but with their independence in making their own choices, free from government interference.

 

I don't think you are reading my posts correctly.

I've been trying to understand how a fully private health system free from government, letting people make their own choices would work. I don't care about Obamacare at all. Scrap it for all I care.

All I want it to see that a system is in place that will provide a quality, cost effective health care for everyone. I don't care at all if it is government or private paid. I just don't see how an all private system will actually achieve that. I am willing to be shown otherwise.

 

Now, you're just lying. About what I expected from you.

 

What part am I lying about?

I thought the cash only doctors concept was an interesting one and agreed that it would work in certain areas.

I asked about how a private only system would be able to manage those folks that could not pay the cash only doctors, like patients who are currently covered by Medicare/Medicaid.

My guess is that the burden would fall on emergency departments and physicians who currently manage the uninsured and are already stretched. I wasn't aware of how this all worked until I did some research after reading church mouse guy's post. I am interested in hearing how a private-only system would keep emergency departments and non-profits hospitals afloat when they are flooded with more uninsured patients previously covered by Medicare/Medicaid.

 

I think what you are looking for me to say is that folks that can afford Obamacare can afford the cash only doctors. Sure, I'll agree to that. It's just that those folks were never the folks I was concerned about. None of my comments on this thread have been about trying to defend Obamacare. I moved past that comment because to me, health care delivery is not about any specific political plan or ideology. It is about caring for people's needs and how to do that effectively.

 

That's nice: accusing a fellow-poster of lying.

 

If he doesn't want to be accused of lying, then he shouldn't lie.

Not exactly rocket science.

 

I thought personal attacks weren't allowed here

 

This idea of paying cash for medical services is great for the routine stuff and low level illnesses. Physical exams, strep throat cultures, basic digestive function troubles, flu shots, etc. I wish there was more cash payment for doctors, if it lowered my premiums for insurance.

But get into an car accident, get diagnosed with a disease, need prescription meds, well, you're going to run out of money in a hurry without insurance.

My doctor has me on Xarelto, a blood thinner, as a stroke preventative medicine. It's $50 a month by using my health insurance prescription meds coverage. I see in Canadian pharmacies, which are much, much lower than U.S. prices, Xarelto is $440 a month! So I'm imagining it's about $800 to $1,000 a month if paying cash in the U.S.

So, consider needing to find $800 a month in cash for prescriptions. Kind of makes sense to be on health insurance for, what, $500 a month?

 

If you think I lied somewhere, please show me where and I can either clarify or apologize.

 

Depends who makes them.

Besides, if somebody lies, it isn't a personal attack to point out that they lied. It's an observation.

 

"Now you're just lying. It's about what I'd expect from you."

If that isn't an ad hominem then the term has no meaning

 

Yep.

I've got a detractor (no!) here on BB that routinely lies about me with stories of me "floating a Trump rape story" says "I'm a liberal", says "I'm opposed to Trump's agenda", says "I support Hillary", "defend Obama", etc. Despite my constant refutations, including links to previous posts of mine that clearly prove he's lying, it continues. When I say he's lying the mods usually delete my allegations.

 

Sure, but drop the last phrase, "it's what I expect from you", and it might not be.

 

I appreciate what you are doing. But I am not bothered by his accusations.

I just want to carry on the conversation and I don't know how I can clarify whatever it is he thinks I was lying about because he won't tell me.

I'm willing to continue with others if he wants to bow out. As a health care provider who has experienced multiple health care models, I want to know the pros and cons of different approaches to health care and how to take the best of all of them.

I have read a few articles about free market health insurance. Most of them are either rants about government sponsored health care or articles about how free market health care doesn't work. I haven't found someone who actually proposes a thought out model of free market health care that actually presents a structure for how it would work in reality. There must be some well thought out models out there that can be the basis of a policy that attempts to address the complexities of adopting it.

 

The problem with your view on health care is that it only views people as either affording it or not affording it for which you propose government assistance for the latter. The underlying reason people cannot afford it needs to be addressed:

1. The cause of high health care costs.
2. The common lack of ability to pay among many people.

In dealing with health care everyone seems to be wanting to deal with the symptoms of the problems but no one is paying attention to the causes. Managing symptoms never resolves anything.

 

I have asked many times to show me an alternative. Please share one if you have one.

And how does a free market health care system address these things?