Diane Black , a female GOP rich rep. wants to end the EMTLA

[MadChemist]

The "Let Them Die" thing is a by-product of their fixation on government as the only way to solve social problems. In their worldview, if you are opposed to using government to solve a problem, it can only mean you don't want the problem solved! If you don't want government taking over health care, it means you want people to die.

No, it just means you are indifferent to it if it happens, and that's even a little worse.

The thing is, the hospitals WILL let people die if they weren't required to treat them. As it stands now, they give the minimum of care and then ship them off to somewhere else, which is how you have poor people having limbs amputated when they could be saved and shit like that.

Either health care is a commodity to be bought and sold, and if you can't afford it, fuck you.

or

It's a basic human right, and has to be provided by whatever means works.

so which is it?

It is clearly a commodity or a good to be bought or sold. It represents something like 17% of our GDP right now.

A "right" by definition is something available to all at no cost to others. This is not healthcare.

 

[dblack]

Competency doesn't require authoritarian government.

Again, what you consider Authoritarian and what sensible people consider authoritarian are two different things.

Then feel free to omit "authoritarian". Change my post to "Competancy doesn't require government".

 

[MadChemist]

LET THEM DIE!

The republican party is the party of satan.

The thing is, lately it's mostly liberals I hear bitching about EMTALA. It really brings out their "inner selfish prick".

While ScienceRocks is clearly partisan in his assertions, can you provide an example of the left wing complaining about EMTALA ?

 

[dblack]

While ScienceRocks is clearly partisan in his assertions, can you provide an example of the left wing complaining about EMTALA ?

JoeB131 does so in nearly every ACA thread. It really rubs him raw that "freeloaders" might indirectly cost him money. He's not the only one. Plenty of others here offer the same excuse for why we need insurance mandates.

 

[MadChemist]

The "Let Them Die" thing is a by-product of their fixation on government as the only way to solve social problems. In their worldview, if you are opposed to using government to solve a problem, it can only mean you don't want the problem solved! If you don't want government taking over health care, it means you want people to die.

No, it just means you are indifferent to it if it happens, and that's even a little worse.

Such a statement is incredible in it's arrogance.

There is no validity at all to your claim of indifference.

Your statement about "a little worse" really relegates you to the trashbin of unreasonableness.

There have been plenty of solutions offered up that don't include a government component. Many of them could be considered reasonable. Most don't allow for the "big one" which seems to be the standard argument against self regulated care.

The "big one" is a real concern and has to be addressed at some level. But to say an avoidance of a government run or influenced solution is indifferent is to act like a bully of some kind (and you are not very good at it).

 

[deanrd]

LET THEM DIE!

The republican party is the party of satan.

wrong again fuckchop.

If you are actually dying or in actual 'need' of medical care, you will get it, and you won't have to sit, in pain, for hours, to get it.

Not if you end EMTALA. Even a double fuckchop such as yourself should understand that.

 

[MadChemist]

While ScienceRocks is clearly partisan in his assertions, can you provide an example of the left wing complaining about EMTALA ?

JoeB131 does so in nearly every ACA thread. It really rubs him raw that "freeloaders" might indirectly cost him money. He's not the only one. Plenty of others here offer the same excuse for why we need insurance mandates.

O.K.

I was looking for a link or something.

But your point is instructional. The argument you cite is pretty common.

Thanks.

 

[MadChemist]

LET THEM DIE!

The republican party is the party of satan.

wrong again fuckchop.

If you are actually dying or in actual 'need' of medical care, you will get it, and you won't have to sit, in pain, for hours, to get it.

Not if you end EMTALA. Even a double fuckchop such as yourself should understand that.

Please support your argument.

There must be some statistic regarding deaths before and after that can be directly attributable to EMTALA.

 

[MadChemist]

The thing is, lately it's mostly liberals I hear bitching about EMTALA. It really brings out their "inner selfish prick".

Well, why they bitch about it is because it creates unnecessary expense. The ER's know the poor people won't pay, so they jack up the prices on the rest of us.

Simpler solution- universal health care and community clinics.

THE REST OF THE WORLD HAS FIGURED THIS OUT ALREADY.

While a bit oversimplified, it was the trend for a long time.

ER's in many hospitals have transformed into "combo" units in order to avoid what you call out....simply because sickness and accidents (non-life threatening) don't just happen nine to five (Mon-Friday). That is why you can sit for a very very long time in an ER. They know who needs help and who does not (well, they are pretty good at figuring it out).

Universal health care is not a simpler solution. The issues associated with that are already stacking up with the ACA (and are not the the fault of the ACA).

The rest of the world continues to adjust their universal health care as they figure out what works and what does not. Which means it isn't perfect. In some cases it is really a mess.

Right now, we have the worst of all worlds. We have the government doing what it does best (propping up big business in the form of health insurnce companies), setting requirements that increase the cost of care and making available to people an unlimited supply of health care with little impact to those who use it.

 

[MadChemist]

Neither of course.

Health care IS a commodity to be bought and sold (actually, it's a service, but I guess that doesn't have the same ring to it). It will remain that way until doctors and nurses see the light and agree to work for free. But that's not a "fuck you" to anyone. Just a recognition of the reality of the situation.

So by that logic, fire fighting and police work is a "service" that is bought and sold because policemen and firefighters don't work for free.

I'm sure as a rugged individualist, you think people should put out their own fires, though.

The reality, though, is we don't provide those things on people's ability to pay. We don't let a tenement of poor children burn down because a rich bitch needs someone to get her cat out of a tree.

Medical treatment should be the same thing. We take care of the poor kids with cancer, and THEN we take care of the rich-bitch's facelift, if we have any money left over.

We do buy the services of the police and firefighters.

We also buy the services of trash haulers. I lived in a city where there was on hauler. And prices were simply stupid. Someone bribed the city council to let them in and we had two. Guess what happened to prices ?

 

[MadChemist]

This thread was about the Emergency Medical Treatment And Labor Act (EMTALA).

It mostly contains the same general arguments you'll find in any discussion about health care when people really don't have open minds regarding what they think is "right".

Most unfortunate.

 

[Penelope]

Neither of course.

Health care IS a commodity to be bought and sold (actually, it's a service, but I guess that doesn't have the same ring to it). It will remain that way until doctors and nurses see the light and agree to work for free. But that's not a "fuck you" to anyone. Just a recognition of the reality of the situation.

So by that logic, fire fighting and police work is a "service" that is bought and sold because policemen and firefighters don't work for free.

I'm sure as a rugged individualist, you think people should put out their own fires, though.

The reality, though, is we don't provide those things on people's ability to pay. We don't let a tenement of poor children burn down because a rich bitch needs someone to get her cat out of a tree.

Medical treatment should be the same thing. We take care of the poor kids with cancer, and THEN we take care of the rich-bitch's facelift, if we have any money left over.

That'd be fine with me, actually. If we want to make health care a government services, we should handle it like we do firefighting or education. But I don't hear any of the socialists advocating for that. They want centralized, national control of health care. Nothing less will do.

No actually only the Democrats, as we do not want the Ins companies as gate keepers. (and that is what the Pubs are ok with )

 

[Penelope]

Neither of course.

Health care IS a commodity to be bought and sold (actually, it's a service, but I guess that doesn't have the same ring to it). It will remain that way until doctors and nurses see the light and agree to work for free. But that's not a "fuck you" to anyone. Just a recognition of the reality of the situation.

So by that logic, fire fighting and police work is a "service" that is bought and sold because policemen and firefighters don't work for free.

I'm sure as a rugged individualist, you think people should put out their own fires, though.

The reality, though, is we don't provide those things on people's ability to pay. We don't let a tenement of poor children burn down because a rich bitch needs someone to get her cat out of a tree.

Medical treatment should be the same thing. We take care of the poor kids with cancer, and THEN we take care of the rich-bitch's facelift, if we have any money left over.

We do buy the services of the police and firefighters.

We also buy the services of trash haulers. I lived in a city where there was on hauler. And prices were simply stupid. Someone bribed the city council to let them in and we had two. Guess what happened to prices ?

A city of a tiny town. That is why the fine needs to be endorsed for no health ins. , even raised.

 

[dblack]

Neither of course.

Health care IS a commodity to be bought and sold (actually, it's a service, but I guess that doesn't have the same ring to it). It will remain that way until doctors and nurses see the light and agree to work for free. But that's not a "fuck you" to anyone. Just a recognition of the reality of the situation.

So by that logic, fire fighting and police work is a "service" that is bought and sold because policemen and firefighters don't work for free.

I'm sure as a rugged individualist, you think people should put out their own fires, though.

The reality, though, is we don't provide those things on people's ability to pay. We don't let a tenement of poor children burn down because a rich bitch needs someone to get her cat out of a tree.

Medical treatment should be the same thing. We take care of the poor kids with cancer, and THEN we take care of the rich-bitch's facelift, if we have any money left over.

That'd be fine with me, actually. If we want to make health care a government services, we should handle it like we do firefighting or education. But I don't hear any of the socialists advocating for that. They want centralized, national control of health care. Nothing less will do.

No actually only the Democrats, as we do not want the Ins companies as gate keepers. (and that is what the Pubs are ok with )

Huh?

 

[JoeB131]

JoeB131 does so in nearly every ACA thread. It really rubs him raw that "freeloaders" might indirectly cost him money. He's not the only one. Plenty of others here offer the same excuse for why we need insurance mandates.

Guy, how about posting where I said that instead of mischaracterizing my position, kay?

What rubs me wrong is that we spend this money inefficiently. We could have single payer, cover everyone and spend half as much.

 

[JoeB131]

We also buy the services of trash haulers. I lived in a city where there was on hauler. And prices were simply stupid. Someone bribed the city council to let them in and we had two. Guess what happened to prices ?

Someone bribed the city council? Or someone finally said, "Cleetus only done picks up the garbage once every month, and the Raccoons done be getting into it!"

 

[dblack]

JoeB131 does so in nearly every ACA thread. It really rubs him raw that "freeloaders" might indirectly cost him money. He's not the only one. Plenty of others here offer the same excuse for why we need insurance mandates.

Guy, how about posting where I said that instead of mischaracterizing my position, kay?

So now with the EVIL Corporation Insurance Companies losing their supplemental billions from the gov

 

[Two Thumbs]

LET THEM DIE!

The republican party is the party of satan.

wrong again fuckchop.

If you are actually dying or in actual 'need' of medical care, you will get it, and you won't have to sit, in pain, for hours, to get it.

Not if you end EMTALA. Even a double fuckchop such as yourself should understand that.

you're ability to lie in the face of facts is so good, you should go pro

 

[Indeependent]

U.S. Rep. Diane Black would like to see changes to a federal law to allow emergency department staff to turn patients away.

Black, a Republican gubernatorial candidate and former nurse, said a federal law, called EMTALA is a "burden" that took away clinicians' ability to tell patients that "an emergency room is not the proper place" for treatment.

The law, the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act, requires ER staff to treat any patient regardless of ailment, ability to pay or other grounds of discrimination.

"I would get rid of a law that says that you ― you are not allowed, as a health care professional, to make that decision about whether someone can be appropriately treated the next day, or at a walk-in clinic, or at their doctor,” Black, R-Gallatin, said in comments on MSNBC on Oct. 13.

Diane Black wants ERs to be able to send people away. Here are the issues for patients, doctors.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is one nasty women in my opinion, get rid of the ACA, gut Medicare and Medicaid and Snap, very pro the tax cut for the elites. Also wants to defund PP, being an ex RN she so cares about people health. All this female cares about in my opinion is the almighty buck.

You mean an end to Illegals using Emergency Rooms as Primary Physicians?
Good.
And fuck you!

 

[MadChemist]

Neither of course.

Health care IS a commodity to be bought and sold (actually, it's a service, but I guess that doesn't have the same ring to it). It will remain that way until doctors and nurses see the light and agree to work for free. But that's not a "fuck you" to anyone. Just a recognition of the reality of the situation.

So by that logic, fire fighting and police work is a "service" that is bought and sold because policemen and firefighters don't work for free.

I'm sure as a rugged individualist, you think people should put out their own fires, though.

The reality, though, is we don't provide those things on people's ability to pay. We don't let a tenement of poor children burn down because a rich bitch needs someone to get her cat out of a tree.

Medical treatment should be the same thing. We take care of the poor kids with cancer, and THEN we take care of the rich-bitch's facelift, if we have any money left over.

We do buy the services of the police and firefighters.

We also buy the services of trash haulers. I lived in a city where there was on hauler. And prices were simply stupid. Someone bribed the city council to let them in and we had two. Guess what happened to prices ?

A city of a tiny town. That is why the fine needs to be endorsed for no health ins. , even raised.

Or the money could go to an HSA instead of the Federal Government.

A much better use.