Re: Health care (again) -- WAS: DSC 832 on Cable VoIP

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

G. Morgan wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:22:37 -0800 (PST), mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> What you don't understand is healthcare is not a right,
>
> That's the crux of the argument right there.  Healthcare for all
> citizens of the richest country in the world absolutely should be an
> entitlement.
>
> What you're essentially saying is, "If you don't have a decent job
> that offers a health care supplement. You deserve to die, be in pain,
> be crippled, or whatever."
>
> All so "capitalism" can rule, and line the pockets of overpaid
> executives and a slew of administrative bureaucracy.  It's broken
> Mark.  Something needs to be done.
>

The only way to take the 'money' out of the healthcare issue would be to
  have the Government take over all healthcare facilites and make all
the healthcare workers, from the Doctors to the EMT's & nurses aids
Government employees.  There, all fixed - well, except for the problems
THAT would cause...

Not sure of I've spoken out about it here, but I have on the other forum
- I think all they needed to do was expand medicare/medicaid to
encompass those folks who needed help getting coverage either due to a
preexisting condition or lack of benefits.

As to your plight - I hope your injury was on the fob and you are
getting workman's comp from your employer and it is causing them to
reassess the choices they made regarding the health insurance they offer.

That is one of the areas of our current system that bothers me.  Right
now we really DON'T have much of a choice about our health insurance
(and the programs being presented won't change that).  Most folks have
to take what their employer decides to offer with no say in the decision
process.  Some folks get great insurance, some folks get crappy
insurance similar to those on OUR industry we like to call 'trunk
slammers' - they offer a cheap product but the service sucks.

I don't know what the fix would be for that though.  Nothing I can think
of would really work short of forcing adjusters to personally visit
every person whose claim they are denying and inform them of the
decision and why it was made.

Oh Yeah - that person gets to have six of their largest male
relatives/friends/acquaintances on hand to help explain their side of it...