The question, for some, is then, do you think healthcare is a right? I mean if an illegal immigrant comes in with a life threatening injury or sickness would you turn her or him away because they do not have the means to pay? Does it even have to be an illegal immigrant? What about a regular person off of the street who is diagnosed with cancer? Will you turn them away? How do you look at someone and condemn them?
What about if they look like they are broke and in the ER? Lets say they have no cash or credit cards on them and they have no money but they were the victim of a car accident. Do you turn them away? You cannot be sure they have the money so is it a risk your taking as a doctor or hospital administrator giving someone service they are not able to pay for?
First, health care is NOT a right. If it was, are people who do not live in areas with access to physicians and nurses being denied their rights? Keep in mind, health care is provided by people. We are not slaves, we have the right to fair compensation for our time and expertise. Anyone who thinks health care is a right either supports slavery, or is an idiot. That said, moving on.
If someone shows up at the ER
with an emergency, you treat first. Really, for the health care industry to work we pretty much have to keep you alive, so letting you die while we verify if you can pay is just stupid. So, ensure you live first.
However I could turn away non-emergency patients without a second thought. The first day I was in an ER I got flat out sick, not by what I saw, but why they came in. "My baby has the sniffles" "I don't feel good" and the crap goes on...
I expect your next line will be about people who cannot pay. Question: Should I work for free? If the answer is no, because I deserve just compensation, then you agree that people who cannot pay should be turned out. If you think I am a slave who should give away my time and abilities for some lazy slob who has no insurance or money saved for health care, then (insert very very impolite feelings that I have towards you here).
Now, here is where you simply say the government should pay for it. Basically, by saying the gov should pay for healthcare, you say that I, a health care worker, should pay taxes, that earn through providing health care, so other people can get free health care. Sounds sort of like I am paying for someone else's health care. Like a slave. Oh, you say it would not be like that? The government would set prices, and keep costs down. In other words, the government will determine what I am worth. Like a master determines what a slave is worth.
No matter how you cut it, government is not the solution, it is just more and more problem. Maybe I have read the constitution, and my spirit of freedom is strong. Maybe I have just read too much Heinlein, and have a low tolerance for any form of oppressive idea. But the fact is, government involvement is just plain bad. Its current involvement makes the problem, added participation by the gov will only make it worse.
Man that was a good vent.
Getting back on topic. This is not surprising. The old and those who made their conditions worse are the most expensive patients to treat. A good friend of mine used to work for a local (and large) insurance company. He said something like 50% of all health care costs a person has, are in the last 6 - 12 months of the persons life. So, if you knock out treating old people, you knock out their most expensive part of treatment. On top of that, you shunt health care towards younger people, who tend to work and pay taxes, and will pay taxes after they receive health care. Whereas old people will not. Sort of like a farmer letting worthless crops die, and only replanting good seeds. Isn't it nice when the government plays Master?
