Federal Judge rules Obamacare unconstitutional

[hyperalgesia]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I think it's safe to say the VAST majority of Clinton Foundation donations were for political purposes or political dynasty worship.

Humanity is better off without both of these foundations but I have no sympathy for the donors.

 

[SSdoc33]

I think it's safe to say the VAST majority of Clinton Foundation donations were for political purposes or political dynasty worship.

Humanity is better off without both of these foundations but I have no sympathy for the donors.

there is no doubt that the clinton foundation has done a huge amount of humanitarian work over the years.

the trump foundation didnt have a board meeting since 1999. the treasurer, allen weisselberg didnt even know he was on the board until this lawsuit. it was a complete and utter farce.

again, much of the clinton foundation donations may indeed have been politically motivated. but at least it was a legitimate charity that did legitimate work. you cannot create a false equivalency here

 

[hyperalgesia]

there is no doubt that the clinton foundation has done a huge amount of humanitarian work over the years.

the trump foundation didnt have a board meeting since 1999. the treasurer, allen weisselberg didnt even know he was on the board until this lawsuit. it was a complete and utter farce.

again, much of the clinton foundation donations may indeed have been politically motivated. but at least it was a legitimate charity that did legitimate work. you cannot create a false equivalency here

Hard to compare. How many people were duped by Trump Foundation?

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

there is no doubt that the clinton foundation has done a huge amount of humanitarian work over the years.

the trump foundation didnt have a board meeting since 1999. the treasurer, allen weisselberg didnt even know he was on the board until this lawsuit. it was a complete and utter farce.

again, much of the clinton foundation donations may indeed have been politically motivated. but at least it was a legitimate charity that did legitimate work. you cannot create a false equivalency here

The Trump Foundation did some charity giving: Where Did Trump's Foundation Donate Its Money? IRS Documents Reveal Surprising Answers

No idea how this compares to the Clinton Foundation. For what its worth, total income into the foundation from start to 2015 was around 15 million. So having given 11 million from start to 2014 doesn't seem unreasonable.

 

[Doctodd]

Yea Haiti is doing great. An ortho who went down there in the relief effort said so. Funny how he committed suicide last year. How many surgeons stab themselves in the chest?

And Chelsea had a nice wedding.....but you are right the Clintons aren’t relevant anymore. “Winning” against the Trump foundation might be one of your straw man arguments. Nobody cares.....but great victory on taking it down. Congrats

 

[SSdoc33]

Yea Haiti is doing great. An ortho who went down there in the relief effort said so. Funny how he committed suicide last year. How many surgeons stab themselves in the chest?

And Chelsea had a nice wedding.....but you are right the Clintons aren’t relevant anymore. “Winning” against the Trump foundation might be one of your straw man arguments. Nobody cares.....but great victory on taking it down. Congrats

facepalm.

no, the clintons did not magically cure all the ills of haiti.

i agree the clintons are irrelevant. but then why are they the #1 talking point all the time for everyone on the right? and you were the one who brought it up in this thread, einstein.

 

[drusso]

According to this ruling, it does violate our constitutional rights.

I still fail to see how the private insurance era was better for Americans as a whole. The rich and healthy got insurance, the poor and sick did not.

...So much more at stake than whether or not poor people get insurance. What hangs in the balance is what it means for human being to be free or a slave. If a government can compel a natural person to buy a financial instrument, it can compel them to do anything.

 

[SSdoc33]

...So much more at stake than whether or not poor people get insurance. What hangs in the balance is what it means for human being to be free or a slave. If a government can compel a natural person to buy a financial instrument, it can compel them to do anything.

no, whats at stake is whether or not poor people can get insurance. this isnt an existential argument, its a practical one.

your brain is wired very differently than mine

 

[lobelsteve]

no, whats at stake is whether or not poor people can get insurance. this isnt an existential argument, its a practical one.

your brain is wired very differently than mine

The poor will always have health care, maybe not insurance. Public health needs to do a better job of preventative care including nutrition/exercise education. Society needs to change. But EMTALA exists as an unfunded mandate.

 

[hyperalgesia]

Let's be honest, if you walk the politically path, don't offend people, and kiss the ass of the media, it's easy to operate a corrupt foundation on the fringes of the law.

OTOH, if you are a flamboyant jeek, you will be under a microscope.

 

[Gauss]

...So much more at stake than whether or not poor people get insurance. What hangs in the balance is what it means for human being to be free or a slave. If a government can compel a natural person to buy a financial instrument, it can compel them to do anything.

and congress reduced the non insured penalty to 0 in the 2017 tax cuts. so whats still unconstitutional here?

 

[myrandom2003]

The supreme court ruled it legal back in the day because the tax was in place. The argument that made it constitutional was that "congress has the power to tax" and the mandate was essentially a tax in one way or another. Now that the tax portion has been removed but the mandate remains, it makes it unconstitutional based on the reason that the original reason why it was legal, no longer applies.

 

[SSdoc33]

The supreme court ruled it legal back in the day because the tax was in place. The argument that made it constitutional was that "congress has the power to tax" and the mandate was essentially a tax in one way or another. Now that the tax portion has been removed but the mandate remains, it makes it unconstitutional based on the reason that the original reason why it was legal, no longer applies.

The mandate was a small part of the ACA. Pre existing conditions, 26 year olds on parents plan, quality based payments, etc are all part of the plan. The judge way overstepped. This will be overturned on appeal, or at least part of the decision will be overturned

 

[hyperalgesia]

The supreme court ruled it legal back in the day because the tax was in place. The argument that made it constitutional was that "congress has the power to tax" and the mandate was essentially a tax in one way or another. Now that the tax portion has been removed but the mandate remains, it makes it unconstitutional based on the reason that the original reason why it was legal, no longer applies.

Absurd argument.

The law was not deemed constitutional because there MUST be a tax. It is contitutional because the mandate, which was the only really questionable part, falls within Congress' authority to tax. According to SC anyway.

Taking away the mandate removed the only part of the law that was potentially unconstitutional. The tax argument is now irrelevant.

Someone could bring another case to SC that says the law is unconstitutional for since other reason. But it's got nothing to do with the mandate.

 

[myrandom2003]

Absurd argument.

The law was not deemed constitutional because there MUST be a tax. It is contitutional because the mandate, which was the only really questionable part, falls within Congress' authority to tax. According to SC anyway.

Taking away the mandate removed the only part of the law that was potentially unconstitutional. The tax argument is now irrelevant.

Someone could bring another case to SC that says the law is unconstitutional for since other reason. But it's got nothing to do with the mandate.

I wasn’t trying to make an argument. Was just condensing my interpretation of the judges ruling and opinion on why it was ruled that way.

I am not sure why the government can’t just make the rules like the fcc decrees to telecoms.
If you want to play in the insurance game, then you have to play by these rules... must cover pre-existing conditions, etc etc.

Never made sense to me why they can’t do that.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[drusso]

no, whats at stake is whether or not poor people can get insurance. this isnt an existential argument, its a practical one.

your brain is wired very differently than mine

State and local governments can subsidize poor people for the general welfare as they see fit, but the Federal government should have no authority to compel citizens to engage in any commercial activity.

 

[Ducttape]

I fail to understand why the judge chose to decide that the entire law was unconstitutional because of the mandate portion.

...So much more at stake than whether or not poor people get insurance. What hangs in the balance is what it means for human being to be free or a slave. If a government can compel a natural person to buy a financial instrument, it can compel them to do anything.

Yet the govt compels us to pay taxes, drive under certain restrictions, keep our emotions in check and not randomly kill others, not steal from others, etc.

and our cultural mores tell us to take care of the poor, infirm, elderly.

IMO, debates such as this do not center around freedom or slavery, but center on whether we want to be caring human beings in the Judeo Christian society...

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

I fail to understand why the judge chose to decide that the entire law was unconstitutional because of the mandate portion.

Yet the govt compels us to pay taxes, drive under certain restrictions, keep our emotions in check and not randomly kill others, not steal from others, etc.

and our cultural mores tell us to take care of the poor, infirm, elderly.

IMO, debates such as this do not center around freedom or slavery, but center on whether we want to be caring human beings in the Judeo Christian society...

Those are poor analogies.

In the case of killing other people, the government is protecting the right to life. Stealing is the government protecting the right to property.

Driving is not a requirement - see NYC for this. You only have to buy car insurance if you own and drive a car.

The ACA was different, there was no way to avoid either the penalty or being forced to buy a commercial product. Even if you literally never left your house, you still had to comply.

 

[SSdoc33]

State and local governments can subsidize poor people for the general welfare as they see fit, but the Federal government should have no authority to compel citizens to engage in any commercial activity.

first of all, what the difference if a federal gvt does it or a state gvt does it?

also, I really don't think of health care as a "financial instrument" or a "commercial activity". this boils down to whether or not you believe heath care to be a "right". most of us believe that there should be some basic level of healthcare that is provided to everyone. where exactly that line lies is the sticking point.

if one is indigent, do you really think they care about your existential nonsense? or do they want to be able to go the doctor when they have a heart attack or cancer and not worry about being financially ruined forever?

 

[Gauss]

State and local governments can subsidize poor people for the general welfare as they see fit, but the Federal government should have no authority to compel citizens to engage in any commercial activity.

BS -Medicaid is jointly funded between feds and states: Financial Management | Medicaid.gov
ok Paul Ryan, don't let the door hit you on the way out...

 

[drusso]

also, I really don't think of health care as a "financial instrument" or a "commercial activity". this boils down to whether or not you believe heath care to be a "right". most of us believe that there should be some basic level of healthcare that is provided to everyone. where exactly that line lies is the sticking point.?

...I've never heard anyone say that. How do you think that the whole system of health care financing and delivery operates?

 

[Gauss]

State and local governments can subsidize poor people for the general welfare as they see fit, but the Federal government should have no authority to compel citizens to engage in any commercial activity.

fail
The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday is proposing a rule that would restrict the ability of states to exempt work-eligible adults from having to obtain steady employment to receive food stamps.
USDA moves to tighten restrictions on food stamps

 

[drusso]

fail
The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday is proposing a rule that would restrict the ability of states to exempt work-eligible adults from having to obtain steady employment to receive food stamps.
USDA moves to tighten restrictions on food stamps

I've volunteered at our local food bank for 8 years. It's tremendously powerful thing to see neighbors & community business members come together to end food insecurity in our community.

 

[lonelobo]

I've volunteered at our local food bank for 8 years. It's tremendously powerful thing to see neighbors & community business members come together to end food insecurity in our community.

Unfornuately most people who are hungry probably don't have access to something like that

 

[SSdoc33]

...I've never heard anyone say that. How do you think that the whole system of health care financing and delivery operates?

i realize that there is money involved.

i am not comfortable with the idea of "forcing" people to buy health insurance, especially from private insurances where the CEOs pay themselves 8-9 figure salaries. however, i am also not comfortable with the indigent or working poor not being able to afford basic, bare-bones preventative care or care for a heart attack / cancer.

 

[Gauss]

I've volunteered at our local food bank for 8 years. It's tremendously powerful thing to see neighbors & community business members come together to end food insecurity in our community.

humblebrag...
private food banks dispense about $8 billion in food each year; while $70 billion in food is provided through food stamps: private charity alone will not feed everyone who needs feeding.

 

[Ducttape]

Those are poor analogies.

In the case of killing other people, the government is protecting the right to life. Stealing is the government protecting the right to property.

Driving is not a requirement - see NYC for this. You only have to buy car insurance if you own and drive a car.

The ACA was different, there was no way to avoid either the penalty or being forced to buy a commercial product. Even if you literally never left your house, you still had to comply.

there are multiple other examples of situations and actions that all americans are required to do or not do (obey laws. serve on jury duty. defend the constitution. don't try to commit suicide. dont do heroin, ever. don't do surgery on someone if you are not trained, even if you have their consent. etc.)

this is a strawman argument, diverting from the true intent of my post.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

there are multiple other examples of situations and actions that all americans are required to do or not do (obey laws. serve on jury duty. defend the constitution. don't try to commit suicide. dont do heroin, ever. don't do surgery on someone if you are not trained, even if you have their consent. etc.)

this is a strawman argument, diverting from the true intent of my post.

You need to look up the definition of strawman argument because you're not using it correctly

 

[hyperalgesia]

i realize that there is money involved.

i am not comfortable with the idea of "forcing" people to buy health insurance, especially from private insurances where the CEOs pay themselves 8-9 figure salaries. however, i am also not comfortable with the indigent or working poor not being able to afford basic, bare-bones preventative care or care for a heart attack / cancer.

I would like to know what happens if we did an experiment and provided free basic housing, food, healthcare, and education to all citizens in a state. I would support this experiment on a state level with the federal govt accommodating with incentives and removal of some burdens, like medicare, etc.

But trying something like this on a federal level, across the board, just seems like insanity to me. My expectation is that it would put a major damper on economic growth because I think a lot of motivation is borne of insecurity. But who knows? The perfect formula could be developed...

 

[drusso]

humblebrag...
private food banks dispense about $8 billion in food each year; while $70 billion in food is provided through food stamps: private charity alone will not feed everyone who needs feeding.

...not to mention the afternoons with "Start Making a Reader Today" (SMART) early literacy program, the domestic violence shelter and self-sufficiency program, Meals on Wheels, etc. I give away a lot of my TIME to causes I believe in, but prefer more accountability from the Government when it comes to spending my MONEY. But, the Bureaucrats always want More Money, not TIME, but money...

I've always believed that Government works best for people when it works nearest to them...

Chew on this: About 4 years ago I offered to volunteer my time at the local Community Health Center seeing Medicaid Chronic Pain Patients 1/2 day twice a month. The word on the street was that the only Suboxone prescriber they had was buried up her eyeballs in opioid-tolerant-poly-co-morbid-high-dose-chronic-pain patients. Since Medicaid reimbursement doesn't pencil in a private practice setting without a site-of-service differential or capitated wrap-around fees, I thought it would be a good respite/burn-out prevention for their RX'er to maybe go spend some time with her kids/husband or catch up on charting every other Friday afternoon while I look after her clinic.

So, I called the Executive Director of the center and pitched my idea and it was a solid Green GO until I emphasized that I want to "VOLUNTEER" my time...I don't WANT to be paid. I thought that it was important that I volunteer my time in order to keep the expectations about the relationship clear for both parties. In other words, I wanted to DONATE my time for a worthy cause--seeing the WORST OF THE WORST chronic pain Medicaid patients that their facility could back into a half-day twice per month.

But, apparently, in Federally-Subsidized, Medicaid Contracted Community Health Centers this is virtually impossible--a doctor CAN'T work for free (unless they're a trainee)...It's ironic because Medicaid WOULD pay for the patient to be seen in the private practice specialty office (minus SOS and wrap around fees of course) under a payment pro-forma that would amount to a financial loss, but would not accept my discretionary effort for FREE to see the patient in another facility. Then, to add insult to injury, the overwhelmed/burnt out provider found out about my idea and called and chewed me out accusing me of trying to low-ball her boss and come after her job!

So, it's no Humblebrag when I say that putting your blind faith in Big Government to solve complex problems is stupid. Keep in mind that prior to 1959 the IRS REQUIRED that hospitals provide a certain amount of charity care in order to keep their non-profit tax status. And, Doctors were REQUIRED to offer a certain amount of charity care at hospitals (usually call coverage and working in the ED) in order to maintain medical staff privileges--it was a quid pro quo between hospitals and doctors. Simpler times. After passage of the un-Affordable Care Act, the Obama Administration directed the IRS to completely waive the charity care requirements for non-profit hospitals replacing them instead with nebulous "community benefit programs." The Goodwill has become monetized. And, that is what you will get in a Single-Payer-Socialized-Government-Run health care system...Monetized Goodwill: Everyone will be covered, but no one will really get anything of real value.

 

[Ducttape]

Yet the alternative - a free market economy with no safeguard for those with limited financial resources - was not a viable situation prior to the initiation of Medicare and government involvement in medicine. The 1950s did not go down as a good time to be sick in the US...



Strawman: “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacybased on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] “

Go back and read my last paragraph. I clearly state that imo the issue is not about the mandate, but the mores regarding the sick and infirm in the US. You decided to criticize the analogies I made, not the argument I presented. Even your last sentence about the mandate was tangential to my point...

 

[hyperalgesia]

I've always believed that Government works best for people when it works nearest to them...

I've always thought that too but now I'm actually not so sure, when I look at the incompetence of my local/state. I think it might be even easier for local govts to get corrupted by local special interests/nepotism.

BUT, at least local governance and all its flaws are LOCALIZED.

The absurd idea that you can't develop local/state solutions to almost ALL issues is the worst form of cognitive dissonance. The fact is, it's easier to complain that the feds aren't doing it than to face the fact that it takes sacrifice locals aren't willing to make.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Yet the alternative - a free market economy with no safeguard for those with limited financial resources - was not a viable situation prior to the initiation of Medicare and government involvement in medicine. The 1950s did not go down as a good time to be sick in the US...



Strawman: “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacybased on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] “

Go back and read my last paragraph. I clearly state that imo the issue is not about the mandate, but the mores regarding the sick and infirm in the US. You decided to criticize the analogies I made, not the argument I presented. Even your last sentence about the mandate was tangential to my point...

I was only going after your second paragraph, the rest I had no major issue with.

For what it's worth, I'm not sure how removing the mandate all of a sudden makes the law unconstitutional either.

 

[drusso]

Yet the alternative - a free market economy with no safeguard for those with limited financial resources - was not a viable situation prior to the initiation of Medicare and government involvement in medicine. The 1950s did not go down as a good time to be sick in the US...



Strawman: “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacybased on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] “

Go back and read my last paragraph. I clearly state that imo the issue is not about the mandate, but the mores regarding the sick and infirm in the US. You decided to criticize the analogies I made, not the argument I presented. Even your last sentence about the mandate was tangential to my point...

Curious: How much time do you donate/volunteer to taking care of chronic pain patients? Which chronic pain charities do you support?

 

[Ducttape]

Currently none, because the preponderance of my experience with these organizations is that there is an overwhelming focus of their members in obtaining opioids

 

[drusso]

Currently none, because the preponderance of my experience with these organizations is that there is an overwhelming focus of their members in obtaining opioids

In your experience, do chronic pain patients experience barriers accessing treatment in health systems?

 

[tmvguy03]

...not to mention the afternoons with "Start Making a Reader Today" (SMART) early literacy program, the domestic violence shelter and self-sufficiency program, Meals on Wheels, etc. I give away a lot of my TIME to causes I believe in, but prefer more accountability from the Government when it comes to spending my MONEY. But, the Bureaucrats always want More Money, not TIME, but money...

I've always believed that Government works best for people when it works nearest to them...

Chew on this: About 4 years ago I offered to volunteer my time at the local Community Health Center seeing Medicaid Chronic Pain Patients 1/2 day twice a month. The word on the street was that the only Suboxone prescriber they had was buried up her eyeballs in opioid-tolerant-poly-co-morbid-high-dose-chronic-pain patients. Since Medicaid reimbursement doesn't pencil in a private practice setting without a site-of-service differential or capitated wrap-around fees, I thought it would be a good respite/burn-out prevention for their RX'er to maybe go spend some time with her kids/husband or catch up on charting every other Friday afternoon while I look after her clinic.

So, I called the Executive Director of the center and pitched my idea and it was a solid Green GO until I emphasized that I want to "VOLUNTEER" my time...I don't WANT to be paid. I thought that it was important that I volunteer my time in order to keep the expectations about the relationship clear for both parties. In other words, I wanted to DONATE my time for a worthy cause--seeing the WORST OF THE WORST chronic pain Medicaid patients that their facility could back into a half-day twice per month.

But, apparently, in Federally-Subsidized, Medicaid Contracted Community Health Centers this is virtually impossible--a doctor CAN'T work for free (unless they're a trainee)...It's ironic because Medicaid WOULD pay for the patient to be seen in the private practice specialty office (minus SOS and wrap around fees of course) under a payment pro-forma that would amount to a financial loss, but would not accept my discretionary effort for FREE to see the patient in another facility. Then, to add insult to injury, the overwhelmed/burnt out provider found out about my idea and called and chewed me out accusing me of trying to low-ball her boss and come after her job!

So, it's no Humblebrag when I say that putting your blind faith in Big Government to solve complex problems is stupid. Keep in mind that prior to 1959 the IRS REQUIRED that hospitals provide a certain amount of charity care in order to keep their non-profit tax status. And, Doctors were REQUIRED to offer a certain amount of charity care at hospitals (usually call coverage and working in the ED) in order to maintain medical staff privileges--it was a quid pro quo between hospitals and doctors. Simpler times. After passage of the un-Affordable Care Act, the Obama Administration directed the IRS to completely waive the charity care requirements for non-profit hospitals replacing them instead with nebulous "community benefit programs." The Goodwill has become monetized. And, that is what you will get in a Single-Payer-Socialized-Government-Run health care system...Monetized Goodwill: Everyone will be covered, but no one will really get anything of real value.

This is not a sarcastic or cynical comment (is it bad that I have to preface that?): Volunteering to see those patients to help that other MD is very noble and kind thing to do. Good on you.

 

[drusso]

This is not a sarcastic or cynical comment (is it bad that I have to preface that?): Volunteering to see those patients to help that other MD is very noble and kind thing to do. Good on you.

...except that in certain parts of our health care system, patients are "held hostage" to their system. This will get worse under a Federalized Single Payer System.

It's almost impossible to try to help them for free: Try it sometime. Ask if you can volunteer at a Medicaid clinic (no charge to you, no billing submitted to the state, and no charge to the patient)...or, maybe offer to do a charity epidural on patients with refractory radiculpathy at the hospital-owned ASC...or, try to get a hospital to "comp" the OR for a charity stim patient whose insurance won't cover neuromodulation but has raised money on GoFundMe to pay for the trial leads...try "giving away" an "experimental" SIJ injection to a worker's comp patient. Once, an IME wouldn't approve a SIJ injection I requisted on grounds that it was "experimental" so I asked the claims adjuster if they would provide a "waiver" of medical necessity for a free SIJ just in case there was medico-legal issue. Nope. They thought I was nuts for asking.

 

[hyperalgesia]

...except that in certain parts of our health care system, patients are "held hostage" to their system. This will get worse under a Federalized Single Payer System.

It's almost impossible to try to help them for free: Try it sometime. Ask if you can volunteer at a Medicaid clinic (no charge to you, no billing submitted to the state, and no charge to the patient)...or, maybe offer to do a charity epidural on patients with refractory radiculpathy at the hospital-owned ASC...or, try to get a hospital to "comp" the OR for a charity stim patient whose insurance won't cover neuromodulation but has raised money on GoFundMe to pay for the trial leads...try "giving away" an "experimental" SIJ injection to a worker's comp patient. Once, an IME wouldn't approve a SIJ injection I requisted on grounds that it was "experimental" so I asked the claims adjuster if they would provide a "waiver" of medical necessity for a free SIJ just in case there was medico-legal issue. Nope. They thought I was nuts for asking.

Charity is the mortal enemy of big govt.

 

[Ducttape]

In your experience, do chronic pain patients experience barriers accessing treatment in health systems?

not from my standpoint. because out of all the pain doctors in town, with the exception for the University clinic, i see all patients with all insurances. ergo a practice of probably 60% medicaid.

...except that in certain parts of our health care system, patients are "held hostage" to their system. This will get worse under a Federalized Single Payer System.

It's almost impossible to try to help them for free: Try it sometime. Ask if you can volunteer at a Medicaid clinic (no charge to you, no billing submitted to the state, and no charge to the patient)...or, maybe offer to do a charity epidural on patients with refractory radiculpathy at the hospital-owned ASC...or, try to get a hospital to "comp" the OR for a charity stim patient whose insurance won't cover neuromodulation but has raised money on GoFundMe to pay for the trial leads...try "giving away" an "experimental" SIJ injection to a worker's comp patient. Once, an IME wouldn't approve a SIJ injection I requisted on grounds that it was "experimental" so I asked the claims adjuster if they would provide a "waiver" of medical necessity for a free SIJ just in case there was medico-legal issue. Nope. They thought I was nuts for asking.

for some systems, why would a hospital allow an individual practitioner to provide charity care, using their offices, their equipment, their staff, when they already receive less than adequate compensation already, to a patient who essentially feels entitled to that care and will not pay out of pocket anyways? in addition, being that they are a "hospital system", such charity care may not obviate the need for malpractice insurance to the provider and coverage for the property.

 

[drusso]

not from my standpoint. because out of all the pain doctors in town, with the exception for the University clinic, i see all patients with all insurances. ergo a practice of probably 60% medicaid.


for some systems, why would a hospital allow an individual practitioner to provide charity care, using their offices, their equipment, their staff, when they already receive less than adequate compensation already, to a patient who essentially feels entitled to that care and will not pay out of pocket anyways? in addition, being that they are a "hospital system", such charity care may not obviate the need for malpractice insurance to the provider and coverage for the property.

Excellent observation. Now, explain to me how a Federalized Health Care Financing fixes that problem. The battered women and families at the domestic violence shelter are thrilled that the Rotary will come around and drop off some pizzas, clean the rain gutters, and do some volunteer crisis counseling. The Admin at the Medicaid Clinic...not so much.

 

[callmeanesthesia]

 

[lobelsteve]

While we are OT....
Ron Paul: Trump withdrawing US troops from Syria is 'fantastic' - CNNPolitics

 

[Ducttape]

I read that. Of course, he wants the US to be a Republic and essentially completely withdraw from all world politics... a view that worked so well for the US in the past.... not.

 

[emd123]

The best proof that Democrats are infested with terminal Trump Derangement Syndrome is that Trump has turned these formerly anti-war pacifists into war-hungry military hawks drooling for perpetual war in every part of the world too hopeless and desolate for them to ever imagine visiting themselves. The guy's power of hypnosis is mind boggling.

 

[Ducttape]

Or they are upholding the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness against a politician that has shown disdain for the rule of law and is a racist.

It all depends on one’s perception. Both are clearly biased.

But ignore the warnings of those he fired at your country’s - and your children’s- peril.

 

[emd123]

Or they are upholding the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness against a politician

Supporting never ending pointless wars that one knows are wrong is an interesting means of "upholding the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But, you do you.

 

[Ducttape]

Allowing ISIS to flourish is what pulling out of Syria will most likely accomplish.

If you don’t believe me, read up on what all republicans but Rand Paul has stated about this action.

 

[lobelsteve]

Allowing ISIS to flourish is what pulling out of Syria will most likely accomplish.

If you don’t believe me, read up on what all republicans but Rand Paul has stated about this action.

Is it our job to be the world police?

 

[emd123]

Every Democrat, every leftist, from Key West to the tip of Alaska has always cheered & praised any President when war was ended and troops brought home. Now suddenly I'm supposed to believe they're war hawks that agree with Lindsey Graham on war as preventative medicine & suddenly see merit in US troops being in the Middle East forever "cuz ISIS"?

Lol, puhlease.

Trump could cure cancer and the Trump haters would come out against it, claiming he's a scourge on oncologists & the life-saving chemo companies