President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#42,926
#42,926
swampfoxfan said:
I'll try. But to be clear you have shown no data.
Click to expand...

Here’s a study showing 2-3x higher ER rates when you give people Medicaid.

The Uninsured Do Not Use The Emergency Department More—They Use Other Care Less - PMC

There is a popular perception that insurance coverage will reduce overuse of the emergency department (ED). Both opponents and advocates of expanding insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have made statements to the effect that EDs ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


swampfoxfan said:
What democrats have been lying about full hospitals?? That wasn't part of the discussion.
Click to expand...

This is Obama proclaiming that providing health insurance to people will reduce ER visits

1759452726624.jpeg
Here’s the link for reference Remarks by the President to the Annual Conference of the American Medical Association

swampfoxfan said:
As for ER abuse, that's been going on as long as I can remember. But my point is that not insuring indigent persons ERs are left to absorb the cost of treatment. Anybody presenting themselves at an ER must be treated, If only to tell them nothing is wrong. Insured or not has no bearing on the number of er visits.
Click to expand...

There’s numerous programs outside of Medicaid that fund the poor. A lot of my patients are PHC-A. They have no insurance. We see them. They pay nothing (to the best of my understanding, I don’t always know what a patient is billed). And PHC-A does not come from the Medicaid budget. There’s numerous similar programs/grants hospitals use to provide services. Although I have less knowledge of those.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and LouderVol
#42,930
#42,930
luthervol said:
I never said that. I said there was room and need for compromise.
The nuts on here said there was no room for compromise.
Go back and look if need be.
Click to expand...

Tell me if you’d accept this compromise.

1. Criminal back ground check and pass a health screening and you’re in. You get 1 year to pay both back or you’re immediately deported, or even fine their employee and then deport them. To clarify by “in”, I mean you can be here legally with a work visa

2. Zero welfare to include zero benefits for your anchor baby. If you’re coming here to work, work. Your party claims countries like Cuba and Mexico have better healthcare than we do. Return if you need to. Once you’ve paid into SS, Medicare, etc for so many years (probably 5-10 minimum) then you can be eligible for benefits. But not when you show up.

3. Stricter punishments for anyone caught here illegally or for anyone caught employing someone here illegally. And have their home country house them for the length of their sentence.
 
Last edited:
#42,931
#42,931
hog88 said:
Yes, I understand that and that’s wrong.
Click to expand...
This is the guy that posts here every day telling us what is wrong with society, espousing "progressive" politics, telling us now that whatever society defines is "right", and anyone who disagrees with it is "nuts".

His relativism paints him into some fun corners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, whodeycin85, W.TN.Orange Blood and 1 other person
#42,935
#42,935
BeardedVol said:
View attachment 778286
www.nbcnews.com

GOP misleads with claim that Democrats shut down to give health care to 'illegal immigrants'

U.S. law prohibits federal health care benefits for undocumented immigrants. Democrats want to return benefits for those with lawful presence, like DACA recipients and asylum-seekers.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
girl-sure-jan.gif
Click to expand...
Why in the world would we provide free healthcare to asylum seekers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Vol8188, volfanhill and 1 other person
#42,938
#42,938
Yall poor souls. Arguing again with a dense brick wall.

Consider this:
Did people and children have life threatening and emergency needs BEFORE health insurance was a product (1930ish)?
Did people have those situations BEFORE Medicare and medicaid (1965)?
We're those people kicked out to die in the street?

If they weren't, how is that possible if in today's society those without ins, Mc, and ma are at risk of going without help?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, UT_Dutchman, LouderVol and 4 others
#42,942
#42,942
McDad said:
Yall poor souls. Arguing again with a dense brick wall.

Consider this:
Did people and children have life threatening and emergency needs BEFORE health insurance was a product (1930ish)?
Did people have those situations BEFORE Medicare and medicaid (1965)?
We're those people kicked out to die in the street?

If they weren't, how is that possible if in today's society those without ins, Mc, and ma are at risk of going without help?
Click to expand...
It's less arguing with, and more exposing that it's nothing more than a dense brick wall that can't even agree with itself.

But to answer your post, this is a wonderful thing, worth supporting:


www.clinicamedicos.org

Clinica Medicos

www.clinicamedicos.org www.clinicamedicos.org
 
#42,945
#42,945
McDad said:
Yall poor souls. Arguing again with a dense brick wall.

Consider this:
Did people and children have life threatening and emergency needs BEFORE health insurance was a product (1930ish)?
Did people have those situations BEFORE Medicare and medicaid (1965)?
We're those people kicked out to die in the street?

If they weren't, how is that possible if in today's society those without ins, Mc, and ma are at risk of going without help?
Click to expand...
They aren't. Which is the point.
smdh
 
#42,950
#42,950
Orange_Crush said:
So, a legitimate question. I'd appreciate a straight answer. If society decides that there will be absolutely NO free healthcare for ANY illegal, including dying children, that would make it right to let them die?
Click to expand...
Not in my eyes. And I would do all within my power to make sure society does not make that decision.

I view that as my moral imperative.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top