Are states' rights more important than human lives?

[SlowwHand]

But maybe it shouldn't be. I think veterans should be solely responsible for their own choices without being coddled.

What don't you define "coddled"? You may have just said one of the more stupid things that I've read here, but I want to make sure.

[Dr Strangelove]

There are very few hospitals that will turn away someone in need of acute care. The lost revenue is simply redistributed to other payers, public and private. The hospital will also get you out the door as soon as possible. For people without insurance that often means they don't get the necessary continuing care to get them back on their feet, which means their health continues to deteriorate until they finally qualify for SSI and Medicare. In the interim their may be repeated hospital admissions which further burden everyone else, not to mention prolonging their suffering. In my experience many of these people could have recovered sufficiently to go back to work if only they had received adequate aftercare. Sadly the system isn't set up like that.

[ricketyclik]

Why is it your assumption that she should get medical care?

Because he's a compassionate person who believes a society should take care of its members, that no one should be left to suffer unnecessarily, that one day he or someone he loves may rely on such care and it would be hypocritical to deny and wish for it at the same time.

[BlackCat]

There are very few hospitals that will turn away someone in need of acute care. The lost revenue is simply redistributed to other payers, public and private. The hospital will also get you out the door as soon as possible. For people without insurance that often means they don't get the necessary continuing care to get them back on their feet, which means their health continues to deteriorate until they finally qualify for SSI and Medicare. In the interim their may be repeated hospital admissions which further burden everyone else, not to mention prolonging their suffering. In my experience many of these people could have recovered sufficiently to go back to work if only they had received adequate aftercare. Sadly the system isn't set up like that.

[HC mode]But isn't that the essential problem ? If those hospitals denied such patiens treatment they wouldn't need aftercare and wealthy people would benefit by paying less taxes ?
[/HC mode exit]

[Hauldren Collider]

[HC mode]But isn't that the essential problem ? If those hospitals denied such patiens treatment they wouldn't need aftercare and wealthy people would benefit by paying less taxes ?
[/HC mode exit]

You really don't understand my position...

[MrFun]

What don't you define "coddled"? You may have just said one of the more stupid things that I've read here, but I want to make sure.

You understand what a "troll" is, don't you?

[MrFun]

Because he's a compassionate person who believes a society should take care of its members, that no one should be left to suffer unnecessarily, that one day he or someone he loves may rely on such care and it would be hypocritical to deny and wish for it at the same time.

I've often wondered if KH is simply an amoral person, with no comprehension of morality, or if he lacks the human trait of compassion.

[MrFun]

Tricare is part of the compensation package for veterans. You could take it away, but you'd get less recruits. It's not out of some sense of justice, it's just a component of the ****ing paycheck.

It's a waste of money to make it part of their paycheck. A lot of employees don't get health benefits as part of their paycheck.

And the reason it's a waste of money, is because the veterans are making an obviously risky decision to serve.

[SlowwHand]

You understand what a "troll" is, don't you?

Well, hell. OK, fine. You got me. I was shocked. Good one.

[MrFun]

Well, hell. OK, fine. You got me. I was shocked. Good one.

No way do I seriously think veterans should be denied a generous health care program.

[BlackCat]

You really don't understand my position...

Isn't your position "screw the poor and let them die horribly" ? That is what I get from what you have posted here.

[Hauldren Collider]

Isn't your position "screw the poor and let them die horribly" ? That is what I get from what you have posted here.

You should try actually reading them.

[BlackCat]

You should try actually reading them.

I have and you seem to be a strong opponent to health care for the poor. Even the feeble attempts in obamacare to do good for those in need seems to piss you off.

[KrazyHorse]

I've often wondered if KH is simply an amoral person, with no comprehension of morality, or if he lacks the human trait of compassion.

I'm a far more moral person than you are, son. In that I actually have a set of moral standards that I apply rationally rather than a series of responses driven entirely by how much I identify with the situation.

In particular, I would ask you the following questions:

1) how are you judging the benefit of giving this woman medical care?
2) how are you judging the costs?

In particular for 2, what framework are you applying? Direct costs? Indirect costs (including, e.g. deadweight losses from taxation to pay for direct costs as well as disincentive effects from redistribution). Opportunity costs (against alternatives such as saving many more lives in a different country where the fruit hangs lower)?

[MrFun]

1) The benefit of the woman getting the medical care could save her life.

2) I am judging the cost of the medical care that she needs, which with her meager financial resources, she would not be able to afford on her own.