RDD_1210
Forms his own opinions
- May 13, 2010
- 18,981
- 1,817
- 265
Right. They cant. BUT they still get the care the need. And that is why costs to the rest of us, who do pay, is skyrocketing.
Exactly. This is what they are not getting. We are already paying for all these people who don't have insurance but are still being treated at ER's and hospitals who can not turn them away. The problem is we are paying for ER costs which are DRASTICALLY higher and is an extremely inefficient way of paying for their care. It would be much more efficient to subsidize these peoples insurance so they can get preventative care and treat their ailments before they get out of control and end up costing us a lot more money when they visit the ER.
In the end we are paying for people who aren't insured no matter what, it's just a question of how do we want to do it. Efficiently or inefficiently?
Have you seen what shows up in ER's? A good deal of what shows up is NOT an emergency. And in my opinion they should be turned away.
It would be more efficient for the government to open low cost hospitals and clinics. Require doctors that are still paying off their loans to man them for free.
Yeah, you're right, alot of ER patients shouldn't be there, but they have nowhere else to go because they have no insurance. That's why if they had insurance from the beginning they can seek care with their personal doctor and avoid the ER all-together. That improves the quality of their life, while reducing the costs for the rest of us.