# Ambulance service to charge more for obese patients



## Tincanfireman (Jun 30, 2009)

Shawnee County, KS (Topeka, KS area) commissioners have approved rate increases for AMR for patients weighing in excess of 350 lbs.  Basic Rate will increase from $629 to $1172 and the per-mile rate will increase from $11.09 to $16.00. ALS fee increases were not disclosed.
Read all about it here.


----------



## Sapphyre (Jun 30, 2009)

Would be nice if we, the providers would see some of that....  

/me still sore from the last bariatric....


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Tincanfireman said:


> Shawnee County, KS (Topeka, KS area) commissioners have approved rate increases for AMR for patients weighing in excess of 350 lbs.  Basic Rate will increase from $629 to $1172 and the per-mile rate will increase from $11.09 to $16.00. ALS fee increases were not disclosed.
> Read all about it here.



That is almost doube the cost. That's terrible.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Double the cost for double the average weight...


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> That is almost doube the cost. That's terrible.



Why? Ever paid for a bariatric unit? Ever pay for workmen's comp? So should everyone else pick up the tab, for the few that choose that style? (before the stoning occurs, yes I know some are medical related but the vast majority is hand mouth syndrome.) 

R/r 911


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

retracted

10


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2009)

Sounds good. I know when I worked IFT the charges went up for obese patients because a lot of time we'd have to get a second unit to give a lift assist (5-600 lb pts)


----------



## el Murpharino (Jun 30, 2009)

Tincanfireman said:


> Shawnee County, KS (Topeka, KS area) commissioners have approved rate increases for AMR for patients weighing in excess of 350 lbs.  Basic Rate will increase from $629 to $1172 and the per-mile rate will increase from $11.09 to $16.00. ALS fee increases were not disclosed.
> Read all about it here.



I don't see a problem with the BLS/ALS rate increase - The extra equipment needed to care for these patients adequately, combined with workman's comp costs and medical costs due to potential back problems legitimize this increase...but why a $5 increase per mile?  Sounds to me like they're trying to raise funds somehow, and why not charge extra to obese people if their insurance/medicare/medicaid will foot part/all of the bill?


----------



## rmellish (Jun 30, 2009)

Sounds like a great idea.


----------



## JPINFV (Jun 30, 2009)

Sapphyre said:


> Would be nice if we, the providers would see some of that....
> 
> /me still sore from the last bariatric....



I hope that the fee increase would go to pay for the extra equipment and crews required for such a transport. Provided the proper equipment and crew sizes are used (oversized gurneys with extra hand holds, more than one crew, larger ambulance with either a lift or winch/ramp configuration, etc), I don't see why a bariatric call would be harder on the back. Heck, make bariatric transports a specialty unit with dedicated crews and extra training and pay similar to police or fire specialties (___ taskforce, SWAT, swift water rescue, technical and high angle rescue, etc). Bariatric calls are one of the few reasons I could actually see a real use (i.e. not compensating for undersized pieces of anatomy) for the medium duty ambulances.


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

The possibility of provider injury goes way up with bariatric type patients, therefore the service must charge more to cover workman comp should something happen.

Welcome to the era of personal responsibility. Rather spend that four dollars for a pack of ciggs over your 4 dollar walmart Rx for your BP? No more ICU care for you. It is coming...


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

daedalus said:


> The possibility of provider injury goes way up with bariatric type patients, therefore the service must charge more to cover workman comp should something happen.
> 
> Welcome to the era of personal responsibility. Rather spend that four dollars for a pack of ciggs over your 4 dollar walmart Rx for your BP? No more ICU care for you. It is coming...



Health Care is (or should be) a right and not an award for doing what society views as right, ok, unhealthy or healthy.


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Health Care is (or should be) a right and not an award for doing what society views as right, ok, unhealthy or healthy.



I know and hear what you are saying, but he way that we are going in America, this is the way it may end up. As most any doctors what they think of my above scenario. 

The fact is, fat people should be charged for two plane seats, etc.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Health Care is (or should be) a right and not an award for doing what society views as right, ok, unhealthy or healthy.



If it's a personal choice that lead to your current condition, why should others have to pay for the majority of it?


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Jun 30, 2009)

Be great if the provider that's killing there back would see some of that extra money.

I think it's a good idea we JUST had this icident occur and had to take another truck out of service for lifting assistance so I definetley think these folks should ante up.


----------



## reaper (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> If it's a personal choice that lead to your current condition, why should others have to pay for the majority of it?




Well, I will say that I smoke a pack a day and have for 25 years. If I add up all the taxes that the gov has soaked out of me, unfairly, I am entitled to some great healthcare! To bad I pay for my own healthcare, so I will never see the benefit of all those taxes!


----------



## medic417 (Jun 30, 2009)

reaper said:


> Well, I will say that I smoke a pack a day and have for 25 years. If I add up all the taxes that the gov has soaked out of me, unfairly, I am entitled to some great healthcare! To bad I pay for my own healthcare, so I will never see the benefit of all those taxes!



But all those taxes won't even come close to paying all the medical expenses later in life incurred because you made the choice to smoke despite all the known risks.  And your own healthcare insurance will be gone when you get old and wow I'm supporting you because you screwed up your own health.  Completely wrong.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Health Care is (or should be) a right and not an award for doing what society views as right, ok, unhealthy or healthy.



Really, I have read the Bill of Right's. I swear I don't see health care anywhere in it? It is a privilage not a right. 

Why should I be paying? Just when does one become responsible for themselves? Why should I have to pay for others bad habits? 

I realize not all morbidity is r/t just over eating but in comparrision that's the common denominator. 

If this was just a rarity, and if a related disease process but for someone to be excess of 400 pounds, 500, 600 pounds + ? When you almost outweigh a vehicle don't you think you maybe ought to start sometype of intervention? 

Sorry society is what bases of morays and as well pays for those that can't. Until we can recieve money from somewhere else, I guess we can vote not to be responsible for those unresponsible. 

R/r 911


----------



## Buzz (Jun 30, 2009)

I can understand the increased costs, including the cost per mile. Many of our bariatric patients are transported by two crews. Add on top of that the specialized equipment, injury risk, basic wear and tear on the vehicles, etc. and I can easily understand an increased cost for the heavier patients.


----------



## JPINFV (Jun 30, 2009)

*Do smokers cost society money?*



> WASHINGTON — Smoking takes years off your life and adds dollars to the cost of health care. Yet nonsmokers cost society money, too — by living longer.





> However, smokers die some 10 years earlier than nonsmokers, according to the CDC, and those premature deaths provide a savings to Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs.
> 
> Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-tobacco-costs_N.htm


----------



## DrankTheKoolaid (Jun 30, 2009)

*re*

It's about time EMS is following in the footsteps of the travel industry.  

The number 1 cause of morbid obesity is HtM DZ coupled with a sedentary lifestyle. period, point blank, end of discussion unless someone can find proof otherwise......  dont bother, it's true.

Why should my and every other healthcare provider risk having their career cut short due to the lack of will power and disciple of others.   

Healthcare is not a right but a privledge as Rid pointed out.  If they expect the best medicine can do for them, then the medical community should expect no less from these patients.

You freakin liberals are probably one of the biggest problems in America today and the reason people do not take responsibilities for themselves.  Since the begining of time evolution had a way of weeding out the sick, weak and lazy.  But now that that has been removed we will all have to pay for it.  Be it with loss of our hard earned tax dollars caring for them or the loss of our hard earned careers when we have them cut short due to back injuries and anything else that comes with dealing with the bariatric community.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

(At JPINFV)
Yes. because making right choices in your life, and consequently living longer, is worse then making wrong choices and expecting others to pay for it.


Sorry, but if you do a year-by-year comparison, they cost much more.  Fact.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Double the cost for double the average weight...



350lbs is double the average weight? Have you looked around when you go shopping? The majority of people around here easily weigh over 175.



JPINFV said:


> *Do smokers cost society money?*
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-tobacco-costs_N.htm



Touche



Sasha said:


> Health Care is (or should be) a right


Agreed



Linuss said:


> If it's a personal choice that lead to your current condition, why should others have to pay for the majority of it?



If money wasn't an issue, if all healthcare were free, doctors, nurses, techs, EMTs, Paramedics etc were all paid well.... then, should healthcare be a right?



daedalus said:


> The fact is, fat people should be charged for two plane seats, etc.



Agreed. I don't want someone's fat rubbing against me for the entire flight.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> 350lbs is double the average weight? Have you looked around when you go shopping? The majority of people around here easily weigh over 175.



I base everyone off of me.  I'm 160.  That means double my weight is 320, therefor 350 is more then double my average weight.   

Plus, Michigan is just a fat state.






> If money wasn't an issue, if all healthcare were free, doctors, nurses, techs, EMTs, Paramedics etc were all paid well.... then, should healthcare be a right?



Nope.  Not a right.  Should not have ever been, and should never be.  

Yes, I'm for people having access to healthcare, but it is NOT the publics /governments responsibility to provide it to people.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Nope.  Not a right.  Should not have ever been, and should never be.
> 
> Yes, I'm for people having access to healthcare, but it is NOT the publics /governments responsibility to provide it to people.



Why shouldn't it be a right?

When did I ever say that it would be the Govt/Public providing the healthcare?


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Why SHOULD it be a right?

Are we guaranteed it anywhere?


And how is healthcare going to be provided to everyone, if the gov't and/or public isn't providing it?


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

Actually JP, I have seen far more cite that 5% of our population incurs somewhere upwards of 75% of healthcare costs from medicare.


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

Corky said:


> You freakin liberals are probably one of the biggest problems in America today and the reason people do not take responsibilities for themselves.  Since the begining of time evolution had a way of weeding out the sick, weak and lazy.  But now that that has been removed we will all have to pay for it.  Be it with loss of our hard earned tax dollars caring for them or the loss of our hard earned careers when we have them cut short due to back injuries and anything else that comes with dealing with the bariatric community.



I am very liberal (on environment, and issues of rights for women and LBGT, etc) but still believe in personal responsibility and economic conservatism. It is not all of us, I swear.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Why SHOULD it be a right?
> 
> Are we guaranteed it anywhere?
> 
> ...



1. That isn't an answer. Defend your position, don't turn the question around. If your only answer is that it isn't guaranteed anywhere, that's a poor argument, to me.

2. Perhaps charity organizations would band together and people in healthcare would provide their services free of charge in my little scenario. Who knows? Be creative.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

It IS an answer.  If it's not a right guaranteed in any of our country's founding documents, why should it be a right?

Every single right you have as a US citizen is spelled out in the Constitution and its amendments.  That's it.  Every single other thing is a privilege, nothing more. 

If you want it, get it, but don't expect others to do it for you.





Charities tend to take money from the public.  So that one doesn't work.


Again, why should many people pay to provide care to other people who don't pay for it themselves (exceptions not withstanding)


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> It IS an answer.  If it's not a right guaranteed in any of our country's founding documents, why should it be a right?
> 
> Every single right you have as a US citizen is spelled out in the Constitution and its amendments.  That's it.  Every single other thing is a privilege, nothing more.



If we left everything how it was before, we'd be stuck with only the Bill of Rights. Some of the later amendments were added because people recognized that the (then) current amendments weren't enough. Things change, perhaps in the future we'll have an amendment that deals with the right to health care.



			
				Linuss said:
			
		

> Charities tend to take money from the public.  So that one doesn't work.



Which is why I said "Be creative". It wasn't meant to be the only option. If you aren't that creative, I'll make a list of ideas that you can go over.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

> Really, I have read the Bill of Right's. I swear I don't see health care anywhere in it? It is a privilage not a right.



Yet, when you are presented at the ER with a life threatning injury or illness, have no insurance and the reason for the visit is your own doing, they cannot turn you away, can they? Doesn't that make it your right to recieve health care?


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Yet, when you are presented at the ER with a life threatning injury or illness, have no insurance and the reason for the visit is your own doing, they cannot turn you away, can they? Doesn't that make it your right to recieve health care?



There are people, including myself, who want to do away with a lot of EMTLA..

( I agree with the basic premise, but it is bloated and costly. ERs across the country are shutting down, that will not get better or just stop until the government steps in to help the hospitals they are requiring to hemorrhage money.)


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

daedalus said:


> There are people, including myself, who want to do away with a lot of EMTLA..
> 
> ( I agree with the basic premise, but it is bloated and costly. ERs across the country are shutting down, that will not get better or just stop until the government steps in to help the hospitals they are requiring to hemorrhage money.)



I really hope that it is never done away with.


----------



## DrankTheKoolaid (Jun 30, 2009)

*re*

Sasha that is not healthcare as we are talking about it.  That is emergency stabilization, there is a very big differance.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Corky said:


> Sasha that is not healthcare as we are talking about it.  That is emergency stabilization, there is a very big differance.



But it is health care! So how is health care not a right? Also if preventive medicine was available to everyone don't you think it would cut down on a lot of the ER visiits or the train wreck patients who haven't seen a doctor in 20 years and have every disease and disorder under the sun?

Heck, if we're going to start awarding people health care by what we think is right, do we stop providing to drivers injured in an MVC who were speeding, not wearing their seat belt, drunk, or texting/talking on the phone unless they carry private insurance?? Charge them extra for an ambulance ride because they are a drain on society?


----------



## DrankTheKoolaid (Jun 30, 2009)

*re*

Yes it would make a differance.  But in order for that to happen people have to take the inititve to get an education and get a job with benefits to PAY FOR THEIR OWN preventitive healthcare.  

As to the trainwrecks thats a whole other story.   The people who you ask "why did your doctor prescribe this for you" and they answer  "because my doctor tells me to" all leads back to poor eduation.

Answer me this.  When you get tired of lets say paying someone to fix your computer or to know when something is wrong, what do you do.  You take the inititve to learn the basic's yourself so you dont have to pay somebody else to figure it out for you, right? A persons healthcare should be no differant.  You take the inititive to learn the basics..................  Or evolution has a surprise for you



That Sasha is emergency stabilization and i think EVERYONE should be entitled to it and thats why ive spent the last 17 yearsof my life providing just that.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Preventative healthcare available to all--- Finding a job that provides healthcare.


They exist.  If you choose to get a job that doesn't offer it, don't whine that you don't have it.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Not everyone can afford to pay for health insurance. It is NOT available to all. Available to all means everyone would have equal access to it, those who cannot afford to carry insurance do NOT have access to preventive care. Have you tried to go to a doctor without insurance? Good god it's expensive.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

As I just had stated, and you missed, all people begin with the exact same chance to get healthcare--

Finding a job that offers it.  


Many employers do, even small "teenager" jobs.  Blockbuster offered it.  Kroger offered it.  It's not just career jobs that give benefits.  Yes, not all employers do, but if more people try for the "better" places, the other companies will have to up their benefits as well to compete for competent employees.  All people win.


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

A story:

Hey Mr. Jones, we notice that after your MI 4 years ago, you ate McDonalds everyday since because you did not want to change your habits. When the doctor put you on ASA, Plavix, and Atenolol, and told you that Walmart could fill these scripts for only a few bucks each, you whined and demanded that we give you your prescriptions for you. After all, we wouldn't want you to die, right? That is what you said to us, to make us feel guilty. Well, you spent those few bucks, but not on your meds. You bought cigarettes so you could continue your smoking habits. Than, we offered you free smoking cessation classes and even offered to buy you nicotine gum/patches so that you could afford your prescriptions. But you still refused, stating you had no money for your meds and went on to buy a new car. Well, now you are at the ER with shortness of breath because you are having another MI that could have been prevent had you listened to us, and you have no insurance. You want the hospital to foot the bill for your bad decisions? After all, your just going to throw away the hospital bill when it comes and keep on buying ciggs and fast food and beer, because the hospital cannot do a damn thing about it can they? Plus, doctors and hospitals are rich! Anyways, we gladly accept you into the ER because of EMTLA, and the taxpayers will foot the bill along with the hospital. You end up bed ridden. Now, a private ambulance brings you home, and than a county ambulance picks you up and drives you to the doctor's office free of charge, because we are here to hold your hand. The taxpayers will pay for the ride, because you need help, dont you? When you get to the office, you demand that the government foot the bill for your meds again. And than the ambulance takes you back home, free of course. We would not want you to have to pay for the ambulance that picks you up because you ignored your health, right? That would inconvenience you. How dare we. Hey, the taxpayers can help again. Your depressed, angry at everyone, your family doesn't like seeing you, your fat, and you cost society money. You survive off of government handouts and foodstamps and live in a subsidized apartment (all of which are payed for by, you guessed it, tax payers). You refuse to get a job. 

Hey, get up and walk a mile a day, toss out your ciggs (we will help you do that), eat a little healthier, and spend the money you save on your meds. You will feel happier and healthier, have more energy, people will want to be around you. Than you can get a job and start feeling productive again. Your self confidence will go up and your debt will go down, along with your waist size. Hey, you might even live longer to see your grand children grow up. 

This is what I want to say to people.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

I do say that to people.



















In the safety of my head.


----------



## imurphy (Jun 30, 2009)

Just on the origional point. I totally agree with the price hike. 

Last week, 650 lbs, took 3 (yes that's right *3*) units out of service to bring someone in. Which also cost 1.5 hours overtime for each of the 6 people we needed. 

Also take into account we had to remove a bar from a double door to get them through and the cost of the mind-bleach I need to get certain images and, lets face it, smells out of my memory. 

Oh, and her teenage daughter? Well you'd think after seeing the effort it takes to get her mother around she'd be rail thin? Nope. I'd estimate 300lbs if she was 3lbs. 

Oh, and of course, no job and all of course on my tax dollars.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> As I just had stated, and you missed, all people begin with the exact same chance to get healthcare--
> 
> Finding a job that offers it.
> 
> ...



What about those who work in jobs that don't provide health care? SOMEONE has to do those jobs. What if they are part time? Not all jobs offer insurance to part time employees. Actually, all the companies I've worked for, don't.

I didn't miss it, I just think that's a ridiculous answer.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

> Hey, get up and walk a mile a day, toss out your ciggs (we will help you do that), eat a little healthier, and spend the money you save on your meds. You will feel happier and healthier, have more energy, people will want to be around you. Than you can get a job and start feeling productive again. Your self confidence will go up and your debt will go down, along with your waist size. Hey, you might even live longer to see your grand children grow up.



Who are you to judge their choices? I bet you do things that people wouldn't agree with or that are bad for your health.


----------



## medic417 (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Yet, when you are presented at the ER with a life threatning injury or illness, have no insurance and the reason for the visit is your own doing, they cannot turn you away, can they? Doesn't that make it your right to recieve health care?



They only have to stabilize immediate life threats.  If you go in with a mild fever they do not have to give you Tylenol.  So only very limited actual medical care available.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

medic417 said:


> They only have to stabilize immediate life threats.  If you go in with a mild fever they do not have to give you Tylenol.  So only very limited actual medical care available.



I've never seen an ER doctor withhold treatment for someone that doesn't have insurance. Around here, most will treat them fully. Good for them.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> What about those who work in jobs that don't provide health care? SOMEONE has to do those jobs. What if they are part time? Not all jobs offer insurance to part time employees. Actually, all the companies I've worked for, don't.
> 
> I didn't miss it, I just think that's a ridiculous answer.



I answered that question before you even asked it.


The answer is again;

Everyone can go for the jobs that offer them.  They are quite numerous, and every job I've had since I was 15, offered healthcare.  TO A TEEN.  Including the paintball field I ref'd at for a year.

The best way to get reform is to get it in the workplace.  Your job doesn't offer benefits?  Find one that does.  As soon as more people do that, jobs will have to compete to keep employees.


Simple economics, failed by a vast majority of people.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

medic417 said:


> They only have to stabilize immediate life threats.  If you go in with a mild fever they do not have to give you Tylenol.  So only very limited actual medical care available.



I keep hearing that, never seen it. The hospitals I did clinicals at/am employed by will, but they also have assistance programs.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> I've never seen an ER doctor withhold treatment for someone that doesn't have insurance. Around here, most will treat them fully. Good for them.



Required =/= chosen.

They are only REQUIRED to sustain life.  They are not required to go beyond that.  If they do, it's their choice and not the law.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> As I just had stated, and you missed, all people begin with the exact same chance to get healthcare--



I have Medicaid. It's not too bad.


----------



## medic417 (Jun 30, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> I've never seen an ER doctor withhold treatment for someone that doesn't have insurance. Around here, most will treat them fully. Good for them.



I have, I have even seen them tell a non emergent patient that they would have to pay up front to be treated.    But most still treat and the hospital just files it as a loss on taxes.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> I answered that question before you even asked it.
> 
> 
> The answer is again;
> ...




What about those who can't change jobs?? Who will work the essential jobs that don't offer health insurance?? What about part time employees?


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> What about those who can't change jobs??



What about those that can't change jobs?  Why can't they change them?



> Who will work the essential jobs that don't offer health insurance??


The same people that do them now-- those who would rather take the lower job then bettering themselves to get a better job. 



> What about part time employees?


What about part time employees?  Get a full time job.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> What about those that can't change jobs?  Why can't they change them?
> 
> 
> The same people that do them now-- those who would rather take the lower job then bettering themselves to get a better job.
> ...



What about students who can't hold a full time job because they are too busy trying to better themselves and without it their schoolwork would suffer?

Why can't they change jobs? Maybe they'll have to take a pay cut? Maybe they can't take the risk with a family to support?

What about children who'se parents don't have health care on them?

Your "simple easy answer to all life's problems" is not simple nor easy.


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

The only reason doctors are spending so much on tests and treatments for the uninsured in ERs when they do not have to is because they are afraid of getting sued, which is a whole other topic of itself. 

If doctors were not afraid of getting sued, healthcare costs would go down.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> What about students who can't hold a full time job because they are too busy trying to better themselves and without it their schoolwork would suffer?


It really IS that easy to answer though.  Yes, there are different circumstances, but doesn't change the equation, and doesn't change the answer.

1,000 kids, tell them to do 1+1.  Same equation, different levels of difficulty for each person, but same correct answer.



You're talking about students not being able to work and go to school full time.  Millions have done it.  I've done it.  You've done it.  It's not impossible.  

Hell, if my sister can go to law school, AND work full time, anyone can.  (She's weird)




> Why can't they change jobs? Maybe they'll have to take a pay cut? Maybe they can't take the risk with a family to support?



I'm lost.  They can't leave a job, that offers no benefits, for one that offers benefits such as health insurance, because it will be a pay cut?   It's called trade-offs.

Health... or deluxe cable?




> What about children who'se parents don't have health care on them?


Again, get a job that offers it.  Any decent employers that offers benefits, extend it to immediate family.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> You're talking about students not being able to work and go to school full time.  Millions have done it.  I've done it.  You've done it.  It's not impossible.
> 
> Hell, if my sister can go to law school, AND work full time, anyone can.  (She's weird)



Doesn't mean it's possible for everyone because you or your sister could.





> I'm lost.  They can't leave a job, that offers no benefits, for one that offers benefits such as health insurance, because it will be a pay cut?   It's called trade-offs.
> 
> Health... or deluxe cable?



Hmmm.. What if they have no cable?? Health or a mother and/or father and three children eat, maintain a roof over their head? Not everyone has luxuries like cable and some people DO struggle to get by.




> Again, get a job that offers it.  Any decent employers that offers benefits, extend it to immediate family.



What if the parents don't work at a job that offers health insurance and can't change jobs because that will mean they loose the roof over their head, they don't fit into the equiation to qualify for medicaid or welfare? What about the children then?


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

No matter what is said, you will come up with a 'what ifs', and you will probably 'what if' this all night.   Fact is, the answer is that simple.  How people GET to the answer is different, but it doesn't change the answer at all.



If you want insurance, get a job that offers it.  If your job doesn't,  find one that does.

Do NOT expect me, or anyone else, who work for our money, to flip the bill because (generic)you are simply to lazy to find your own way of doing it.  Do not demand it of us.  Do not proclaim it as a right.  



Yes, there are exceptions.  Yes, there are changes.  Yes, there are different circumstances.  But many people that don't have it can make changes to get it.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Instead of telling everyone to get a job, why not reform the health care system? Wow, there's a thought. 

The answer is not simply "Get a job with insurance" If it were that simple, more people would have insurance, but it is NOT THAT SIMPLE.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Answers are simple.  Getting TO the answer may not be.  But it does not make the answer any harder.







> Instead of telling everyone to get a job, why not reform the health care system? Wow, there's a thought.



Instead of forcing the public to pay for the healthcare of the minority, why not have people find ways of providing their own?  Wow, there's a thought.  (See, I can do that argument too  )


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Answers are simple.  Getting TO the answer may not be.  But it does not make the answer any harder.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because we've done that and it's not working for the majority.


----------



## DrankTheKoolaid (Jun 30, 2009)

*re*

The whole thing comes down to education.  They either make sacrifices to better their situation or they dont, it's that simple.  And Sasha the whole full time student cant keep a fulltime job because it will worsen there grades is a weak argument.  If you cant make it work then you prioritize and spread schooling out.

 In a very repressed area i was able to maintain fulltime employment while going to school full time, while having to commute well over an hour just to get to class over a very ugly 3500ft summit.   And did the same for paramedic school, though that was a 2.5 hours one way.  Sure sacrafices had to be made but you know what it was worth it and i kept benefits the entire time.  So dont say it cant be done, they just dont want to make the sacrifices to make it happen.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Do NOT expect me, or anyone else, who work for our money, to flip the bill because (generic)you are simply to lazy to find your own way of doing it.


I have medicaid. It MUST be because I'm too lazy to go out and find work that offers health insurance. Yes... that is the ONLY reason I have medicaid.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Because we've done that and it's not working for the majority.



Obviously, it is working for the majority, seeing as the vast majority of the population ARE insured.





HotelCo said:


> I have medicaid. It MUST be because I'm too lazy to go out and find work that offers health insurance. Yes... that is the ONLY reason I have medicaid.





As I stated in my previous post, there are always exceptions to be made.


Like.. free healthcare for all people named Derek.


----------



## HotelCo (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Obviously, it is working for the majority, seeing as the vast majority of the population ARE insured.



You seem to be against paying for others healthcare. How many of the "majority" are insured through medicaid, medicare or some other govt program?


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

> Obviously, it is working for the majority, seeing as the vast majority of the population ARE insured.



Have you watched the trends? The percentage of uninsured is growing. Soon the vast majority will be uninsured. That's a sure sign that it isn't working and needs reform.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jun 30, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> You seem to be against paying for others healthcare. How many of the "majority" are insured through medicaid, medicare or some other govt program?





No, you're mistaken.  
I'm against pay for lazy people's things.  

I'm not against helping people.  I'm in EMS, remember?  


There's a difference between not being able to do something, and choosing to not even try.


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2009)

Linuss said:


> No, you're mistaken.
> I'm against pay for lazy people's things.
> 
> I'm not against helping people.  I'm in EMS, remember?
> ...



Helping people? Screw that. I'm in EMS to make the big bucks!


----------



## daedalus (Jun 30, 2009)

I really do not think it is as easy to change certain things as some here are describing. Sasha has some great points. For many people who are not like that in my little story, it is impossibly hard to get insurance even if they want to be healthier. 

I just do not think, and I suspect she does not ether, that socialized medicine is the answer.


----------



## Sasha (Jun 30, 2009)

> and I suspect she does not ether,



Couldn't be from our PM conversation, could it?


----------



## el Murpharino (Jun 30, 2009)

What a direction this thread has taken...


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jun 30, 2009)

Some clarification. All patients have the right to any ED that recieves Governmental funding (medicare/medicaid) to be evaluated. A medical screening examination (MSE) must be performed by either the licensed physician or their designated proxy (P.A. or NP). 

There is where the confusion starts. A patient maybe turned away if they found to be stable or if services can be provided for them elsewhere. Now, most physicians will NOT turn them away due to the possibility of a mishap or problem that may cause litigation. 

For those that assume health care is right, is also being feed? Amazing we still charge for food and even supplement farmers NOT to grow crops? Yet in health care we assume it should be for free. 

In my 32+ years; I have never seen anyone denied emergency treatment in a ER. Now, with that saying I have seen many wallet biopsies and not the "best route" or better diagnostics studies because they did not have the fund. 

I agree it is shameful. I do agree it is a problem and alike even those experts within healthcare administration there is no easy answer. I listened to 2 physicians debate this dilemma this p.m. on NPR. Alike they described; someone will still have to suffer for something no matter what. Albeit the week end jock that normally would had got his arthroscopy done and with governmental direction will have to wait 2 years or the 70 year old that will be denied dialysis because the costs will be too enormous. Who will get to live and will have to die?

I have dealt with the so called insurance thieves and hospitals that have a 1000% increase in med.'s and treatments. When my loved one needed Benadryl IV it was $130.00 for a 40 cent vial. Nice mark up... Chemo was $5,000 a treatment twice a week for 2 weeks then once a week for 6 weeks. Yes, I had insurance but since most of the Chemo was rated "trial" it would not pay but partial to none. Yes, there went my retirement and plans for our home. She was an advanced degree RN; but could not work due to autoimmune and chemo has a tendency to knock the hell out of you. Worst yet, is even if you have so called "great insurance" it is never enough and they know it! PET scan's are rarely covered by insurance companies as prescribed, even though they will far detect and isolate minute cancer developments and actually reduce the amount and time of treatments... Kinda like insurance companies not wanting to pay for mammograms?... ridiculous! 

Yes, I see the elderly instead of taking med.'s everday they choose every other day...either food, electric or medications. 

So what's the answer? There is not one that will get to the real problem. 

Reduce the profit margin of pharmaceutical companies. Currently, they cannot even give an correct estimate of their profit margin. Majority of the CEO's are considered some of the wealthiest persons in the U.S. Sorry other countries, but the reason you get med.'s so cheap is we (U.S.) pay for them. 

The other is to cap HMO profit margin. No, you won't see that happen since they have the highest paid lobbyist and PAC groups around. Yes, the Senate & Congress knows where their bread is buttered. Sure, they talk but that's all. 

Just by reducing those two industries, and if the monies really went into funding health care for everyone; we would have no problem. Yet, that's not going to happen....ever. 
The fat will never be trimmed as long as people are hungry and greedy, those of the bone will always be those that will suffer.   

R/r 911


----------

