Jimmy Carter Cures ObamaCare

[ogibillm]

lol. you're claiming that reagan guaranteed healthcare.

had we not had insurance would reagan's law have guaranteed the necessary but not life-saving procedure?

"lol. you're claiming that reagan guaranteed healthcare."

I am.

And he did.


And it's President Reagan to you.

so would someone with my wife's condition but no insurance have gotten the surgery?

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

 

[ogibillm]

they had emergency care. care that would bankrupt them.

Only if they spend all their money on beer and pretzels....as you did.

No sense of responsibility....leave it up to your neighbors to pay, huh?

you make a lot of unwarranted assumptions

I support and back up every single thing I post....That's because I'm not a brain-dead Liberal


As proof.....weren't we on the Right absolutely correct about Obama???????

did you not assume we don't have insurance?

Who's "we"????

What are you talking about????


Why are you so afraid to admit that I've been right about every single thing I've posted?

"we" is my wife and me.
did you not assume we don't have healthcare insurance?

 

[JimH52]

Now go away Chic and makes love to your RR glossy.

 

[Searcher44]

This is a post for information purposes only, just to give a little context. This is CIA info provided here. I'm not defending Obamacare, I actually think it's pretty shitty. But high healthcare costs in the U.S. cannot be blamed on this admin. It's been a trend and a fact of life for decades.

"While the United States has consistently fallen in the rank of world nations over the last 50 years, the average life expectancy has risen from 69.8 years in 1960 to 78.49 today."
"Life expectancy in America ranks 51st in the CIA's table at 78.49 years - lower than Canada (81.48), Australia (81.90), New Zealand (80.71), Japan (83.91), the UK (80.17) and much of Europe."

Forbes says;

"Health care costs are dramatically higher in the U.S. than in the rest of the world. Yet our health care outcomes – from life expectancy to infant mortality – are average at best. There is little dispute over these facts.
The real debate comes when we ask why. While there isn’t one single answer, the rapidly rising cost of drugs and medical devices is a significant factor.
And the magnitude of this problem is likely to spike in the future if not properly addressed.
Pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers have been criticized for their role in health care for over a decade. Little has changed. Americans pay significantly more for prescription drugs and medical devices than patients in the rest of the world.
The justifications for these extraordinarily high prices vary, but the industry is well aware that most patients have no choice but to pay whatever they charge."

This is all well known stuff. Concentrating on partisan blame is not even a start toward solutions. I find the infant mortality rate stats the most disturbing, in Canada as well as the U.S.;

Rahm's brother's or Blumenthal's opinions have nothing to do with this stuff. "Death Panels" is a worn out partisan talking point dead end. I suggest getting on with the business of improving the situation and not spending so much time trying to reinforce obsolete attacks on the satanic barry hussein kenyatobama.

Even tho the thrill of the fight is seductive we shouldn't let the truth be collateral damage.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fewer US Bankruptcies after the Affordable Care Act? Probably Not.

Ready to apologize and beg forgiveness, Jim-bo????
I demand penitential prostration......now!


Did Reagan make certain that in America, every single person has healthcare?????


Well????????

So why didn't Reagan stop the bankruptcies? His plan wasn't a very good one was it?

You claimed Reagan didn't provide healthcare for all.

Now you're changing your tale.

Makes you a dissimulator....
...better go look that up before you think it's a compliment.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Change the subject???

It's the same subject. You said Reagan's EMTALA meant that everyone could go to the ER and get treatment. I've asked you numerous times who you believe paid for that treatment when the patient was unable to.

You can't answer. Why is that?

That would be the tax payer. Let me help her.

But it's fun to watch her flail.

Every reader will recognize you're a liar.

Prove it.

With your help.....I did.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"lol. you're claiming that reagan guaranteed healthcare."

I am.

And he did.


And it's President Reagan to you.

so would someone with my wife's condition but no insurance have gotten the surgery?

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

Did the 1986 law give everyone healthcare?

Simple question....stop tap-dancing.

You're dancing, not me.
it guaranteed emergency treatment.
now answer my question. did reagan's 86 law do anything for necessary but non-emergency health care?

"it guaranteed emergency treatment."

Exactly as I stated.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is a post for information purposes only, just to give a little context. This is CIA info provided here. I'm not defending Obamacare, I actually think it's pretty shitty. But high healthcare costs in the U.S. cannot be blamed on this admin. It's been a trend and a fact of life for decades.

"While the United States has consistently fallen in the rank of world nations over the last 50 years, the average life expectancy has risen from 69.8 years in 1960 to 78.49 today."
"Life expectancy in America ranks 51st in the CIA's table at 78.49 years - lower than Canada (81.48), Australia (81.90), New Zealand (80.71), Japan (83.91), the UK (80.17) and much of Europe."

Forbes says;

"Health care costs are dramatically higher in the U.S. than in the rest of the world. Yet our health care outcomes – from life expectancy to infant mortality – are average at best. There is little dispute over these facts.
The real debate comes when we ask why. While there isn’t one single answer, the rapidly rising cost of drugs and medical devices is a significant factor.
And the magnitude of this problem is likely to spike in the future if not properly addressed.
Pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers have been criticized for their role in health care for over a decade. Little has changed. Americans pay significantly more for prescription drugs and medical devices than patients in the rest of the world.
The justifications for these extraordinarily high prices vary, but the industry is well aware that most patients have no choice but to pay whatever they charge."

This is all well known stuff. Concentrating on partisan blame is not even a start toward solutions. I find the infant mortality rate stats the most disturbing, in Canada as well as the U.S.;

Rahm's brother's or Blumenthal's opinions have nothing to do with this stuff. "Death Panels" is a worn out partisan talking point dead end. I suggest getting on with the business of improving the situation and not spending so much time trying to reinforce obsolete attacks on the satanic barry hussein kenyatobama.

Even tho the thrill of the fight is seductive we shouldn't let the truth be collateral damage.

OMG!!!

You're not serious...are you????

1. So we have been told that the United States is listed at number 37 in world ranking for health care. Here is why only fools and America-bashers attribute any significance to this rating: WHO/UN states that their data “is hampered by the weakness of routine information systems and insufficient attention to research” and when they couldn’t find data, they “developed [data] through a variety of techniques.” WHO accepts whatever governments tell them, including reputable regimes such as Castro’s Cuba.
WHO | Message from the Director-General


2. The oh-so-political WHO/UN is not thrilled with governments like the US, as they have determined that we do not have a progressive-enough tax system. This is one of the criteria for judging our healthcare.

WHO, “World Health Organization Assesses
theWorld’sHealth Systems,” press release, undated,
WHO | World Health Organization Assesses the World's Health Systems.

1. Health Level: 25 percent

2. Health Distribution: 25 percent

3. Responsiveness: 12.5 percent

4. Responsiveness Distribution: 12.5 percent

5. Financial Fairness: 25 percent
http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp101.pdf

After an intensive survey of over 1000 respondents, half of whom were members of UN staff, they designed a measurement of healthcare in which 62.5% of the criteria of their healthcare study on some type of “equality!”
WHO | The world health report 2000 - Health systems: improving performance



3. Note that the United States suffers in the WHO/UN healthcare ratings due to a definition of fairness which reads: “the smallest feasible differences between individuals and groups.” Therefore a poor nation that does not have our level of expensive or experimental treatment, and therefore lets all suffers die, would have a higher rating than the US.

This is not to imply that only the rich in America can get the ‘expensive’ treatment, since there are many options such as a)getting a loan, b) asking a family member or a charity for help, c) find a doctor, hospital, or drug company willing to work at a reduced rate. All are common.

And because we have rich people who pay a great deal for the best healthcare, enabling research and development, the end result is that this brings costs down and makes treatment affordable for everyone, even in socialist countries.


4. Now, who are you going to believe if not Michael Moore? Moore states that Cuba has a better healthcare system (they live longer). "All the independent health organizations in the world, and even our own CIA, believes that the Cubans have a pretty good health system. And they do, in fact, live longer than we do," he said.

But when "20/20" contacted the CIA, officials said, "We don't say that Cuba has a pretty good system or that Cubans live longer than Americans."

In fact, the CIA's World Fact Book says Americans live nearly a year longer. Although a U.N. report supports Moore's position, that data comes straight from the Cuban government.
Michael Moore to John Stossel: 'Little Debate' About Health Care in Cuba




Here's a shocker for you: America...before ObamaCare had the best healthcare in the world!!

5. How to judge healthcare:

a) life expectancy: many people die for reasons that can’t be controlled the medical profession, such as auto accidents, murder, etc., and once you factor out care crashes and homicides, the US ranks number one in worldwide life expectancy!

“One often-heard argument, voiced by the New York Times' Paul Krugman and others, is that America lags behind other countries in crude health outcomes. But such outcomes reflect a mosaic of factors, such as diet, lifestyle, drug use and cultural values. It pains me as a doctor to say this, but health care is just one factor in health.

In "The Business of Health," Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider factor out intentional and unintentional injuries from life-expectancy statistics and find that Americans who don't die in car crashes or homicides outlive people in any other Western country.

And if we measure a health care system by how well it serves its sick citizens, American medicine excels.
http://www.davepetno.com/blog/index.php?itemid=30


" The standardized estimate of life expectancy at birth is the mean of the predicted value for each country over the period 1980–99. As shown in table 1-5, the raw (not standardized) mean life expectancy at birth for the United States over this period was 75.3 years, compared to 78.7 years for Japan, 78.0 years for Iceland, and 77.7 years for Sweden. However, after accounting for the unusually high fatal-injury rates in the United States, the estimate of standardized life expectancy at birth is 76.9 years, which is higher than the estimates for any other OECD country."
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf



Wise up.....stop accepting Leftist propaganda.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Only if they spend all their money on beer and pretzels....as you did.

No sense of responsibility....leave it up to your neighbors to pay, huh?

you make a lot of unwarranted assumptions

I support and back up every single thing I post....That's because I'm not a brain-dead Liberal


As proof.....weren't we on the Right absolutely correct about Obama???????

did you not assume we don't have insurance?

Who's "we"????

What are you talking about????


Why are you so afraid to admit that I've been right about every single thing I've posted?

"we" is my wife and me.
did you not assume we don't have healthcare insurance?

Why are you so afraid to admit that I've been right about every single thing I've posted?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"lol. you're claiming that reagan guaranteed healthcare."

I am.

And he did.


And it's President Reagan to you.

so would someone with my wife's condition but no insurance have gotten the surgery?

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

 

[ogibillm]

so would someone with my wife's condition but no insurance have gotten the surgery?

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

 

[ogibillm]

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

that is the one question I've been trying to get you to answer this whole thread and you keep dancing around it. it's a yes or no answer btw

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course.
Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is that Americans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

I believe you've resolutely declined to answer this query:
Now....did you send thank you notes to all of your neighbors who paid for the surgery?

The ones who picked up the obligation that you didn't take responsibility for?


Why didn't you pay for your own familial obligations?

 

[ogibillm]

but nothing in reagan's law would have required any hospital to perform the operation, correct?

so without insurance she would have gone without health care

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

I believe you've resolutely declined to answer this query:
Now....did you send thank you notes to all of your neighbors who paid for the surgery?

The ones who picked up the obligation that you didn't take responsibility for?


Why didn't you pay for your own familial obligations?

You're going to wear out your shoes with all that dancing.

and you can quit with the idea that we don't have insurance.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I just gave you two ways that surgery would have been paid for.

Here's one way:
I was in Lancaster, Pa. a while ago, and the local paper explained how the Amish, who eschew healthcare insurance, either make deals with the local hospitals and pay cash...the same rates that the government gets, or are involved in medical tourism...and fly to Mexico for health related issues.

Their choice....medical tourism over medical totalitarianism.


And another:

1. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
2. We usually hear about charity in the media when there is a terrible disaster. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, we heard about the incredible outpouring of private generosity that amounted to $6 billion. What gets less attention is thatAmericans routinely give that much to charity every week. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
   https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

I believe you've resolutely declined to answer this query:
Now....did you send thank you notes to all of your neighbors who paid for the surgery?

The ones who picked up the obligation that you didn't take responsibility for?


Why didn't you pay for your own familial obligations?

You're going to wear out your shoes with all that dancing.

and you can quit with the idea that we don't have insurance.

When will you come to terms with the fact that you are willing to accept the money taken from your fellow citizens, because you chose to not prepare for the eventuality of medical reversals?

Folks like you are happy to pretend that government makes money, and can spend it for your benefit.....when you really know the truth- government has taken hard earned money from others.


They do that so that they will have your vote.

 

[JimH52]

Fewer US Bankruptcies after the Affordable Care Act? Probably Not.

Ready to apologize and beg forgiveness, Jim-bo????
I demand penitential prostration......now!


Did Reagan make certain that in America, every single person has healthcare?????


Well????????

So why didn't Reagan stop the bankruptcies? His plan wasn't a very good one was it?

You claimed Reagan didn't provide healthcare for all.

Now you're changing your tale.

Makes you a dissimulator....
...better go look that up before you think it's a compliment.

Never said he didn't improve it. He put a bandaid on it. It only affected ER frequents. The ACA nailed it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fewer US Bankruptcies after the Affordable Care Act? Probably Not.

Ready to apologize and beg forgiveness, Jim-bo????
I demand penitential prostration......now!


Did Reagan make certain that in America, every single person has healthcare?????


Well????????

So why didn't Reagan stop the bankruptcies? His plan wasn't a very good one was it?

You claimed Reagan didn't provide healthcare for all.

Now you're changing your tale.

Makes you a dissimulator....
...better go look that up before you think it's a compliment.

Never said he didn't improve it. He put a bandaid on it. It only affected ER frequents. The ACA nailed it.

I have to stop saying "How stupid can you be?.....you seem to take it as a contest.


"...ObamaCare experiment costing taxpayers $2.4 billionis failing. The co-ops were founded on the idealistic belief that community members could band together to create health insurance companies that would be member-driven, service-oriented, and would not have to answer to shareholders or turn a profit."
400,000 Citizens To Lose Health Insurance (Again) Because Of Obamacare Co-Op Failures

and this....

The Obama Administration is aggressively exploiting regulation to achieve its policy agenda, issuing 157 new major rules at a cost to Americans approaching $73 billion annually....twice the annual average of his predecessor George W.Bush.Andmuch more regulation is on the way, with another 125 major rules on the Administration’s to-do list, includingdozens linked to the Dodd–Frank financial regulation law and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.Red Tape Rising: Five Years of Regulatory Expansion


and this...

"Obamacare health insurance co-opssurged past the $1 billion mark in losses this week, making history ofsorts.Theinsolvencies, totaling $1.36 billion,mean that the co-ops have burned through more than half of theoriginal $2 billion appropriatedin 2010 for the program under the Affordable Care Act. The funds were loaned to the start-up co-ops in 2012 and were to be repaid in 15 years, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Obamacare.

...13 of the 23 federally-financed Obamacare co-ops have officially failed in only two years. Most are in the process of default as insurance regulators attempt to pay customer’s medical bills, cover medical providers and pay other creditors.
Obamacare Co-Op Mess Causes $1.3 Billion In Losses


Wanna really feel like a moron?
Watch this:

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fewer US Bankruptcies after the Affordable Care Act? Probably Not.

Ready to apologize and beg forgiveness, Jim-bo????
I demand penitential prostration......now!


Did Reagan make certain that in America, every single person has healthcare?????


Well????????

So why didn't Reagan stop the bankruptcies? His plan wasn't a very good one was it?

You claimed Reagan didn't provide healthcare for all.

Now you're changing your tale.

Makes you a dissimulator....
...better go look that up before you think it's a compliment.

Never said he didn't improve it. He put a bandaid on it. It only affected ER frequents. The ACA nailed it.

And stop your lying.

You denied that Reagan provided healthcare for every person in the nation...as I stated.


In post #35 you wrote this:

"Ronald Reagan did what? Are u on drugs?"



I proved my statement, and now you're running from it with your tail between your legs.

Wanna doggie treat?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Amazing what they're doing these days when you have unlimited resources and money to obtain it.

What you are overlooking is the progression: rich people may be the first to avail themselves of cutting edge technology....but it is because they begin it, the price becomes more practicable.

Just saw this story...
"I was just reading a story on /. from 10 years ago about Lasik Eye Surgery. Personally, I've had Lasik done and loved every single part of the surgery. I went from wearing contacts/glasses every day to having 20/15 vision! In the older post, everyone seemed to be cautious about it, waiting for technical advances before having the surgery. Today, the surgery is fairly inexpensive [even for a programmer ], takes about 10-15 minutes, and I recovered from the surgery that same day. So my question is: what is holding everyone else back from freeing themselves from contacts and glasses?" Laser Eye Surgery, Revisited 10 Years Later - Slashdot


And....it is not just those who can sustain the original costs....
It is not to imply that only the rich in America can get the ‘expensive’ treatment, since there are many options such as
a)getting a loan,
b) asking a family member or a charity for help,
c) find a doctor, hospital, or drug company willing to work at a reduced rate.

All are common.

 

[ogibillm]

so no, nothing in reagan's law would have guaranteed that health care

Have someone who is literate explain this to you:

"The most significant effect is that, regardless of insurance status, participating hospitals are prohibited from denying a MSE to individuals seeking treatment for a medical condition."
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Better get a dictionary, too.

are you saying reagan's law required hospitals to provide non-emergency but still medically necessary health care to those without the means to pay?

I believe you've resolutely declined to answer this query:
Now....did you send thank you notes to all of your neighbors who paid for the surgery?

The ones who picked up the obligation that you didn't take responsibility for?


Why didn't you pay for your own familial obligations?

You're going to wear out your shoes with all that dancing.

and you can quit with the idea that we don't have insurance.

When will you come to terms with the fact that you are willing to accept the money taken from your fellow citizens, because you chose to not prepare for the eventuality of medical reversals?

Folks like you are happy to pretend that government makes money, and can spend it for your benefit.....when you really know the truth- government has taken hard earned money from others.


They do that so that they will have your vote.

i'm going to tell you one more time, we do have our own insurance.
interestingly enough though, it is paid for by our neighbors, however the thanks usually goes the other direction.

now, will you stop dancing and answer this simple question - did regan's law do anything about medically necessary but non-emergency procedures?

it's a yes or no question - even you should be able to handle that.