Off Topic > Off Topic
[NEWS] "Patient dumping" in Baltimore
General:
Literally people in the US choose not to get healthcare until their health deteriorates to a fatal state before going into a hospital... How can anyone defend such a stuff system? It's beyond me. Where I live taxes may be higher but i would have already been broke if my family or I had to pay out of pocket for our own healthcare.
And hey, even after taxes, I still have money to buy expensive stuff that I like.
SeventhSandwich:
--- Quote from: General on January 13, 2018, 04:50:05 PM ---Literally people in the US choose not to get healthcare until their health deteriorates to a fatal state before going into a hospital... How can anyone defend such a stuff system?
--- End quote ---
There is a small subset of conservatives who have arguable economic/pragmatic reasons to believe that a universal healthcare system wouldn't work in the US, and then there's the other eighty percent that either instinctively reject anything that even remotely resembles a 'socialist' policy, or just a general philosophy that it's toxic to human culture to sacrifice any labor for the benefit of someone outside their immediate family. Basically, just 'forget the poor, it's my money'.
Of course the irony here is that the majority of conservatives stand to benefit from universal healthcare. The rural, working-class conservatives in Midwestern states with sky-high rates of diabetes and heart-disease would receive far more benefit to their health and finances by subscribing to a single-payer system than they would ever get from avoiding a modest marginal increase to their income tax rate. My family wouldn't personally benefit from it, but I think it's a worthwhile sacrifice.
There are even fiscal reasons to support this idea. Having a sicker populace is a burden on taxpayers. If creating a single-payer system was able to drop the incidence of certain highly-expensive preventable diseases like breast cancer and heart disease, that would translate into literally hundreds of billions of dollars of new economic productivity. You could also expect the rates of people receiving disability payments to decrease, since they would be able to receive treatment before their condition develops into something that's permanently debilitating. Likewise, people might not be receiving welfare as much when they aren't draining their entire savings account every time they have a life-threatening emergency.
Does all of that not sound like something that conservatives could get behind?
Deus Ex:
--- Quote from: Nonnel on January 13, 2018, 03:27:54 PM ---bluh bluh not every road is the same some are more expensive than others some have guardrails and some have more lanes and why should I have to pay for a road I'm NEVER going to use??
we get it you're talking out of your ass
The doctors are already trained in how to be doctors. All of the machines and specialists to treat these different ailments already exist. You're paying into the system along with everyone else who would have access to these doctors so that everyone can get better treatment.
--- End quote ---
ROADS DO NOT GET AIDS
ROADS DO NOT GET CANCER
ROADS DO NOT HAVE DIABETES
Aide33:
--- Quote from: Deus Ex on January 13, 2018, 05:34:00 PM ---ROADS DO NOT GET AIDS
ROADS DO NOT GET CANCER
ROADS DO NOT HAVE DIABETES
--- End quote ---
here we can see the conservitus maximus going super saiyan in his natural habitat
espio100:
--- Quote from: LeisureSuit912 on January 12, 2018, 08:07:17 PM ---Do you own or rent your own home? Or do you contribute to your family's mortgage?
It's unjust to kick somebody out of the hospital in freezing temperatures. You should at least have some sympathy.
--- End quote ---
Welcome to capitalism
Idk if a homeless guy came into my business and couldn't pay for my services I would kick him out as well?
Money doesnt grow on trees.