GOP rep: 'Nobody dies' from not having health care

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
5,833
1,110
126
ITT people confuse health CARE and health INSURANCE.

Nobody is denied health care in a hospital emergency room.
Emergency room is just for that - emergencies. They'll fix your broken bone, they'll resuscitate you, they'll pump your stomach if you happened to swallow poison.

However, once the immediate emergency is over they'll discharge you and send you home. Emergency rooms treat emergencies, they do not provide healthcare. Emergency room won't treat your cancer, they won't do anything for your heart condition, or your failing liver, or kidneys. Seizures? Bad luck, can't help you. High blood pressure, sorry, can't help you. Diabetes? Sorry, you're on your own.

I really do not get why this is so difficult to understand.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
That's a bunch of BS. ER is only required to stabilize the patient so he can be discharged. They won't be curing your cancer at the ER.
They won't be curing your cancer anywhere. If you get cancer you die, rich or poor.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
I really do not get why this is so difficult to understand.
What is difficult to understand, apparently, is that everybody dies. You can delay it by throwing money at the problem, but money is not unlimited. Who is to say patient X deserves $2 million worth of care and patient Y deserves only $5 million? At some point you need to draw a line.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
5,833
1,110
126
What is difficult to understand, apparently, is that everybody dies. You can delay it by throwing money at the problem, but money is not unlimited. Who is to say patient X deserves $2 million worth of care and patient Y deserves only $5 million? At some point you need to draw a line.
So if everybody dies, why even try? Why not just get rid of health insurance/health care altogether?
 

Azuma Hazuki

Golden Member
Jun 18, 2012
1,532
866
131
Bingo. By his logic, we should start with him. And since he's going to end up in Hell at this rate, his logic dictates we should do it with a match and a can of gasoline. After all, if he gets there already medium-rare that's efficient! Less money spent on sulfur and brimstone!
 
Feb 16, 2005
13,724
4,658
136
What is difficult to understand, apparently, is that everybody dies. You can delay it by throwing money at the problem, but money is not unlimited. Who is to say patient X deserves $2 million worth of care and patient Y deserves only $5 million? At some point you need to draw a line.
why?
are you drawing those same lines when it comes to funding wars?
 

Meghan54

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2009
9,288
2,046
136
They won't be curing your cancer anywhere. If you get cancer you die, rich or poor.
Wrong again. I must ask if you really are the moron who sits in the corner, hitting himself in the head with a hammer, who, when asked "Why are you hitting yourself?", responds....because it feels so good when I quit. I'm just waiting for you to reach that point when you want to quit hitting your own head.....but then again, being a paid troll has no off days to feel better, does it?

As for cancer being a death sentence no one survives, that's a lie.....as in you're lying.

Skin cancers are cured routinely, as are colon cancers, and many others. True, some are death sentences despite aggressive treatment, like oat cell lung cancer, but with treatment, life expectancy has increased across all cancer diagnoses. Just think how many people's lives would be positively impacted if everyone could be treated early and appropriately.

But, since the poor would access the same care as you, that notion is a non-starter for you, isn't it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azuma Hazuki

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,388
1,011
126
But, since the poor would access the same care as you, that notion is a non-starter for you, isn't it?
LOL you really think that? Given the past and present way that benefits for the poor are administered including low cost housing policy (aka explicit government policy of redlining), public education, and pretty much everything else? If you ever do get your "universal healthcare" what's going to get provided to the poor is at best going to be just as ghettoized as anything else government does for them and at worst is going to be Tuskegee Syphillis Experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experimentPart Deux. Although in some ways it might be worthwhile to give them the shitty care so they can go back to being ignored again just like we do the homeless. Put the poor into shitty "healthcare facilities" that are akin to the housing projects of yesteryear and not stocking them with medicines, qualified staff, or anything else and let them start reducing the poor population by any means necessary, that sounds great.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
60,516
3,676
126
LOL you really think that? Given the past and present way that benefits for the poor are administered including low cost housing policy (aka explicit government policy of redlining), public education, and pretty much everything else? If you ever do get your "universal healthcare" what's going to get provided to the poor is at best going to be just as ghettoized as anything else government does for them and at worst is going to be Tuskegee Syphillis Experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experimentPart Deux. Although in some ways it might be worthwhile to give them the shitty care so they can go back to being ignored again just like we do the homeless. Put the poor into shitty "healthcare facilities" that are akin to the housing projects of yesteryear and not stocking them with medicines, qualified staff, or anything else and let them start reducing the poor population by any means necessary, that sounds great.
What are you rambling about? My wife sees about 25 inpatients a week in a cardiac ICU (some of the most acute care required in a hospital) on some form of Obamacare/Medicaid/Medicare. They get the same treatment as anyone else with private insurance and access to expensive post discharge medication like anyone else. Medicare is a very comprehensive heath coverage.

Most of us are arguing for single payer, rather than universal health care. There is a distinct difference. I do think there are significant opportunities in the prompt and primary care environments for a "universal health" approach, but when it comes to acute settings that is where the issues you mentioned may be a factor.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
13,687
3,455
136
They won't be curing your cancer anywhere. If you get cancer you die, rich or poor.
Dude, it's not the 1970s. Survival rates have improved considerably for many types of cancer; when it first became infamous, it was usually spotted late with little treatment for it and one typically had months, maybe a year or three to live; in short, if you were diagnosed, you were about to die. These days there are plenty of options depending on the type and how early it was spotted; many people get a type of cancer, it's treated, they move on with their lives and get checked on a regular basis in case the cancer makes a comeback.

My dad has prostate cancer. He's had it for years. He casually mentioned it one day and I and my siblings were shocked, but apparently it's not going anywhere and it's more apparently more trouble to do anything about than to leave it alone. It's just another thing he has.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Geekbabe

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Oct 16, 1999
31,439
999
126
www.theshoppinqueen.com
They won't be curing your cancer anywhere. If you get cancer you die, rich or poor.
Expert cancer care has kept me alive & working since Dec 2014. I don't know how long I will be on this earth but we are treating this as a chronic illness at this point. Every month longer I live is another month for the next new drug to go on trial.
 

Geekbabe

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Oct 16, 1999
31,439
999
126
www.theshoppinqueen.com
I have been insured via employers for decades, premiums have risen as coworkers got cancer or had premature or seriously ill children. Nobody likes a rate increase but I sure was glad people I worked with got the care they needed & didn't need to do Gofundme to save their lives.

Now I am the sick coworker, my insurance takes care of me. That's how insurance works & how a compassionate society feels.
 

Geekbabe

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Oct 16, 1999
31,439
999
126
www.theshoppinqueen.com
What is difficult to understand, apparently, is that everybody dies. You can delay it by throwing money at the problem, but money is not unlimited. Who is to say patient X deserves $2 million worth of care and patient Y deserves only $5 million? At some point you need to draw a line.
Very glad you aren't approving my insurance claims.

Btw, many with serious illness participate in clinical trials, I just tried to get into a phase 1 CAR T trial. These patients benefit millions of others who come after them. Many of us use the extra time to continue working, raising children etc.

" Drawing a line" , refusing to pay for care after that point means letting a lot of decent people die miserable pain wracked deaths after bankrupting themselves & their families.
 

Geekbabe

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Oct 16, 1999
31,439
999
126
www.theshoppinqueen.com
Another point I find interesting in these debates is that when you bring up the idea that Death with Dignity should be legal in all 50 states, a lot of folks huff, puff & get all chuffed because you aren't " dying like you are supposed to" ie bankrupt, homeless & screaming in agony.

We put sick pets down to spare them suffering, we even give convicted murders lethal injection but a cancer pt who can't afford a high risk pool? Oh noes, they need to suffer like Jesus before they die
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY