Progressives, part 3...

party of tolerance :)

As an aside... how do you support Pete Buttigieg and not know he's gay? Did she show up at last nights caucus and just picked someone? It's been mentioned just a few times. 

JFC. What a ding dong.

posted by majorspark

The coal miners have to start somewhere.

Boom

posted by kizer permanente

What health system is this? By law you're only required to stabilize someone, not perform surgery or any other medical care. And I've never heard of a health system that just says yeah come on in!

That is Mt Carmel's policy.

The voting app maker, Shadow, is comprised of a CEO, COO, CTO, and sales manager who were all Clinton campaign team members.  They have the uncanny ability to make emails disappear, votes disappear, delegates disappear, election results disappear, and people disappear. 

posted by queencitybuckeye

That is Mt Carmel's policy.

So if I was diagnosed with lung cancer, told I needed surgery and chemo, but didn't carry insurance, I could just drive over to Mt. Carmel, present myself and receive the cancer treatment I need?  

I don't think so. 

That stupid caucus-goer belongs on the WTF thread. 

posted by justincredible

JFC. What a ding dong.

No kidding. I live the "no one ever told me" like it was a secret and she deserved to be let in on it. 

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

So if I was diagnosed with lung cancer, told I needed surgery and chemo, but didn't carry insurance, I could just drive over to Mt. Carmel, present myself and receive the cancer treatment I need?  

I don't think so. 

You will ultimately receive treatment, and then when the bill comes you will declare bankruptcy.  Because if what you said was true (only treated if you have the money), then there would be no medical bankruptcies.  Correct?

Happens every day.  Most people who are worth anything, could have afforded insurance but chose to spend their money on other things.  Those who aren't worth anything don't really have anything to lose.  And there's a relatively small group of people who are[were] rejected with pre-existing conditions.  Which is an issue that could have been solved much more simply.

posted by gut

You will ultimately receive treatment, and then when the bill comes you will declare bankruptcy.  Because if what you said was true (only treated if you have the money), then there would be no medical bankruptcies.  Correct?

Happens every day.  Most people who are worth anything, could have afforded insurance but chose to spend their money on other things.  Those who aren't worth anything don't really have anything to lose.  And there's a relatively small group of people who are[were] rejected with pre-existing conditions.  Which is an issue that could have been solved much more simply.

 

Mt. Carmel is not going to provide surgery and chemo as a cancer regimen to someone with no insurance. Yes they will stabilize someone in off the street. Most hospitals will. But they are not going to set off on a course of treatment like this for a patient with no ability to pay. 

posted by gut

You will ultimately receive treatment, and then when the bill comes you will declare bankruptcy.  Because if what you said was true (only treated if you have the money), then there would be no medical bankruptcies.  Correct?

Happens every day.  Most people who are worth anything, could have afforded insurance but chose to spend their money on other things.  Those who aren't worth anything don't really have anything to lose.  And there's a relatively small group of people who are[were] rejected with pre-existing conditions.  Which is an issue that could have been solved much more simply.

 

Well, no. Insurance pays so much then maxes out. If you have cancer there's a good chance your treatment will outlast your insurance. The bill still comes. You still owe it.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

So if I was diagnosed with lung cancer, told I needed surgery and chemo, but didn't carry insurance, I could just drive over to Mt. Carmel, present myself and receive the cancer treatment I need?  

I don't think so. 

After confirming that your financial position is what you claim, and determining what (if anything) you can pay, yes.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4808451/user-clip-dr-robert-epstein-testimony

posted by gut

1) that's hyperbole

2) you're ignoring the massive role GOVERNMENT (and the federal reserve) played in the housing crisis

 

This.  The socialists have done a great job branding this as a capitalism issue and completely disregarding the Government's role.  It takes two to play.  The Government's role in crony capitalism is much worse than the private's role, considering they can actually pass laws making it extremely difficult for other businesses to thrive.

posted by kizer permanente

When I say it does more for the top than the bottom, I mean there's exponentially more wealth growth at the top than bottom. The income disparity here is pretty noticeable.

I can see this outlook if you completely disregard the affordable commodities/services available to lower and middle class citizens due to capitalism. 

posted by kizer permanente

I'm also not of the belief that we need to spend nearly the amount on defense that we do. Seems a lot of spending IS based on crony-capitalism. 

I agree.  The government needs to cut a lot of fat and defense is a huge part of it.  Capitalism would thrive even more if they did this.

posted by kizer permanente

So we hear this all the time... countries with socialized medicine just wait and die to see a doctor. Yet their mortality rates and quality of life rates are always higher than Americans... so someone isn't telling the truth. and it's always the other person. 

Are you going to completely disregard lifestyle?   A lot of countries live a much healthier lifestyle than Americans.  Just living in Italy alone (ranked top 3 healthiest country), portions are smaller, everyone walks, everything is fresh, everyone eats healthy options, etc...  

All of this plays a much larger role in our mortality and QOL rates, than being able to go to a doctor.  BTW, the US' mortality rate dropped AFTER Obamacare was passed (aka socialist healthcare lite).  The US also has the most innovative and highest quality health care in the world.  Look at the world ranking of hospitals and see how the US dominates.  If you took out Government's role , not doubt it would thrive even more and prices would go down.  I know you will say this is what the old system was, but it wasn't.  It has been a highly regulated industry since the 70s. 

posted by O-Trap

Erm ... why?  It's just the caucus.


 

posted by gut

Sure, this is anecdotal but probably not surprising:  A friend's mom was in the hospital a few months ago.  There was a couple there from Ontario to have surgery....said healthcare in Canada is a mess, that the hospitals are filthy and overrun (apparently the homeless come in and use the healthcare system for shelter in the winter).  So obviously they're paying out-of-pocket to get quality care in the US.

I've heard similar from a few Canadian friends.  If it's something small that they go to their GP for, they prefer Canada's system, but if it's a major surgery or a specialist they need, they come to the US.

There is one exception who is really funny.  She's a dear friend, and when she's not talking politics, she's a lovely woman, but she thinks Canada shits gold, and she refuses to get medical treatment in the US, because she buys into the notion that the Canadian single-payer system is hilariously superior to the US system.  Well, a few months ago, she unfortunately found herself with a cancerous tumor.  Not being a hypocrite, she insisted on having her treatment in Canada, but the whole time, she complained about the condition of the hospital, the competence of the hospital staff, and the ridiculous (and they were) wait times.

Now, at no point has she come around to admitting that she might be better off being treated in the US, mostly because she's stubborn (she has more than enough money to cover it out of pocket), but it's funny to see her be such a champion for their healthcare system and yet do nothing but complain when she's using it.

 

Same shit in Italy.  It's available to everyone, but everyone ends up paying extra for private clinics, because it is such a shit show to go to public clinics/hospitals.   Same shit with the military.  I have been around it my whole life.  Ask anyone in the military how they feel about Tricare and the majority of the responses is "it's nice to have for little things like colds, etc, but anything major it's terrible."   That seems to be the universal outlook on socialized healthcare.
 

posted by like_that

This.  The socialists have done a great job branding this as a capitalism issue and completely disregarding the Government's role.  It takes two to play.  The Government's role in crony capitalism is much worse than the private's role, considering they can actually pass laws making it extremely difficult for other businesses to thrive.

It's the damnedest thing.  There were multiple federal agencies tasked with overseeing and regulating what all went to hell, which means that even the redundancy didn't do shit, because the agencies were either corrupt, incompetent, asleep at the wheel, or some combination of those, which renders them useless anyway (even for their intended purpose, which can be debated as either a good or bad thing anyway).
 

posted by like_that

I can see this outlook if you completely disregard the affordable commodities/services available to lower and middle class citizens due to capitalism.

This is absolutely true..  Also, the quantities available, such that there's never a scarcity issue for so much of it, which is also a result of open competition.
 

posted by like_that

I agree.  The government needs to cut a lot of fat and defense is a huge part of it.  Capitalism would thrive even more if they did this.

Frankly, it's probably where we can afford to cut the most.  Obviously, if you're going to have a military, have a strong one, but you don't need to be able to take on literally every other country in the world at the same time.

Our military spending is insane. We've built an empire and justify it by our exceptionalism. We've also tied support of the military in its current state to patriotism. Now every kid who enlists, gets college paid for and drives a truck at Ft Knox gets treated like he's Audie Murphy "thanks for your service". 

You don't like war? Why don't you support the troops?

posted by justincredible

You don't like war? Why don't you support the troops?

Exactly the problem.  It's not unpatriotic to challenge the size and mission of our military. Yes, front line soldiers deserve our admiration for their risks, but that doesn't mean the mission they've been sent to do is right. 

This idea too that everyone who signs up for the military attains hero status is BS. We're paying for a hell of a lot of people to go to college, get great training and never do anything more to protect our freedom than a working class guy doing a typical 9-5.