What do you think about Bush's healthcare plan of "going to the emergency room"?

Question

Honestly, that is asinine. As a nurse in an Emergency Room, the cost of treating a common cold or an earache of a child in a critical area is astronomical versus being able to go to a family doctor.

Do you think hospitals cut their profits because people can't pay?

No they jack up the prices, which in turn cost you Joe taxpayer with insurance more money to go to the hospital because...

Do you think insurance companies cut their profits because they are paying more for your hospital stay?

No...they jack up your premiums and deductibles.

So, please explain to me how his vetoing SCHIP is going to drive my healthcare costs down?

Answer 1

The yearly cost is equal to about 12 days of the Iraq war.
Anyone who suggests opposing it is about the money is either uniformed or dishonest.The American right tries to push an agenda of uncompromising Social Darwinism.If you can't afford it,you don't deserve to get it,that's the whole idea in a nutshell.

Social Darwinism, term coined in the late 19th century to describe the idea that humans, like animals and plants, compete in a struggle for existence in which natural selection results in “survival of the fittest.” Social Darwinists base their beliefs on theories of evolution developed by British naturalist Charles Darwin. Some social Darwinists argue that governments should not interfere with human competition by attempting to regulate the economy or cure social ills such as poverty. Instead, they advocate a laissez-faire political and economic system that favors competition and self-interest in social and business affairs. Social Darwinists typically deny that they advocate a “law of the jungle.” But most propose arguments that justify imbalances of power between individuals, races, and nations because they consider some people more fit to survive than others.

This is jungle capitalism,survival of the fittest.It also shows most of the American right isn't pro life but pro birth.Once you're out of the womb you better have parents with money because you're on your own.

That's the issue here.The American right ranting and raving socilaism is gonna take over America with no basis in reality while they are pushing social Darwinism,According to ThinkQuest:
Social Darwinist thinking stems from the fact that the theory falls into the “naturalistic fallacy,” which consists of trying to derive an ought statement from an is statement. For example, the fact that you stubbed your toe this morning does not logically imply that you ought to have stubbed your toe! The same argument applies to the Social Darwinists’ attempt to extend natural processes into human social structures. This is a common problem in philosophy, and it is commonly stated that it is absolutely impossible to derive ought from is (though this is still sometimes disputed); at the very least, it is impossible to do it so simply and directly as the Social Darwinists did.

Answer 2

i was listening to NPR the other day about this and it's pretty obvious that Bush doesn't quite understand how SCHIP works. The part hat gets me about this is that the dollars needed to cover the other 4 million kids SCHIP would cover if the program were extended would have come from a cigarette tax. i would think an additional cigarette tax would perhaps curb smoking and in the long run reduce healthcare costs because fewer people would need smoking related treatments. in a bush interview i heard on the radio he made it seem like people that are in a certain income bracket of say, around 60,000 year, should be able to afford private insurance. he isn't taking into consideration that 60,000 doesn't cover much anymore. i grew up in a household far above the poverty line and my parents always had a hard time affording private insurance. my spouse and i make decent money but after all the bills are paid, there isn't any money left to afford anything, let a lone private insurance. luckily i have insurance through my job that our daughter is under, but my husband is self employed so he doesn't have any insurance. actually, most people i know don't have insurance either because they can't afford it or their jobs don't provide a benefit package.

Answer 3

Though I agree with most of what you asy here on YA, in this one instance I think you may have some bad info.

Bush does support a SCHIP program but wants to ensure it is limited to hoseholds that actually need the program.

Clinton constructed the new SCHIP so that households earning over $80,000 per year would be elligible as well as households of illegal immigrants.

Bush simply could not justify that type of expansion. The veto in this case was more than justified for those reasons alone.

If congress actually passes a reasoable SCHIP program, he will sign it into law as promised.

Most readers here know me as fully anti-bush. I remain so but in this one instance, I agree with his action.

Answer 4

I understand billions would go to illegal immigrants and that would draw more here. If you look at the rise over the last 20 years in expenditures for that group you will see that cutting that cost by denying benefits by far offsets the cost you are talking about. Close that loophole and extend it to ALL citizens and those legally here (after their 5 year period) so it isn't just a smaller group carrying a bigger burden, and I am for it.

Answer 5

Not much. Besides the lack of preventive care is even worse.

Bodies stay healthy when they're continually taken care of and problems are caught early.

Answer 6

It won't. It'll just make the conservative chest-thumpers think they "stuck it" to Democrats by vetoing "socialism." Reality, not being a conservative concept, will never prevail. And they are supposed to be the party of "fiscal responsibility?" Yeah. Ri-ight.

Answer 7

Asinine is Bush's real middle name... I think it was changed just prior to him running for Governor of Texas and just after he decided to get sober. :)

I could not agree with you more.

Answer 8

If you start with a false premise then you will not arrive at the correct answer. Vetoing SCHIP has nothing to do with driving your health costs down. It has everything to do with stopping the unbridled expansion of a good program into a socialized medicine program that includes folks that can afford medical care for their families. Poor folks go to emergency rooms because they can't afford to do otherwise. Some middle class folks go to emergency rooms because they don't want to have to pay. Many people use emergency rooms because they are to only place to get care at the time they can go. We don't have outpatient clinical systems that are truly responsive to the needs of working class folks. This is not a full answer but I hope that it helps.

Answer 9

We all know it won't. Don't expect many answers from the neo cons as they are not up to responding to the facts. Great question and I am with you 100%.

Answer 10

I think free health care is going to cost more than anything else in this country.