Topic: Community Health | |
---|---|
Edited by
artlo
on
Fri 02/11/11 09:45 AM
|
|
Here's how Republicans like to save money. One of the cuts that Republicans want to make in the budget is a dramatic cut in funding for community Health Centers. Community Health centers where uninsured people can go to get basic (and often preventative) health care at a very low cost. If these community Health Centers go away, then one of three things will happen to the sick people:
1) They will get much sicker, then go to for-profit hospitals where they WILL be treated at a much, much higher cost. 2) They will go to the for-profit Emergency room, where they WILL be treated at a much, much, much higher cost. 3) They will just die. In the first two cases, the bills will be paid by those who hold health insurance policies. Penny-wise and pound-foolish. This concept just doesn't seem to get through. |
|
|
|
Pound foolish my eye...
Community is exactally where such things should be funded... My community has execellant care for people that can not afford it... Yet we do not go to another state or community expecting them to pay for it. Local communities should be paying for that type of care... (it is a local problem and each 'LOCALITY' is diferent). I should not have to pay for a local community care that is being provided in a community that has provide for so many 'freebies' that they can no longer fund anything... |
|
|
|
My community has execellant care for people that can not afford it...
Are you sure about that? Are you sure your local Community Health centers don't depend on any Federal money?
Yet we do not go to another state or community expecting them to pay for it. |
|
|
|
My community has execellant care for people that can not afford it...
Are you sure about that? Are you sure your local Community Health centers don't depend on any Federal money?
Yet we do not go to another state or community expecting them to pay for it. The good ones don't... |
|
|
|
But of course the only part of what I said that gets a response is the smallest part...
The actual point gets ignored. Comunity health is a function of the local community. Each community has its own set of problems and no 'one size fits all' program will ever be sucessful (although such a system will make it easy to 'steal' from it). I should not have to pay for the centers in another state. Someone in another state should not have to pay for centers in my state. I really don't want to be paying for the help needed in say, - San Francisco... They have 'local' problems that my community does not. |
|
|
|
I believe that was the exact point I was responding to.
|
|
|
|
But of course the only part of what I said that gets a response is the smallest part... The actual point gets ignored. Comunity health is a function of the local community. Each community has its own set of problems and no 'one size fits all' program will ever be sucessful (although such a system will make it easy to 'steal' from it). I should not have to pay for the centers in another state. Someone in another state should not have to pay for centers in my state. I really don't want to be paying for the help needed in say, - San Francisco... They have 'local' problems that my community does not. leftists believe that one size fits all when it comes to centralized government planning. that is exactly why leftist policy is a failure. they don't believe in local people doing what is best for their communities. they need to have their hands in everything because in their mind they believe that only they know what is best for you. Obamacare is going to be a total failure. The leftist central planners sit behind their little computer screens in their Washington DC offices and think that New York City and Topeka, Kansas are the same. |
|
|
|
It makes sense if you have the HC law and You are requiring everyone to have insurance then you should cut funding for places to help those without because now you would be helping those in violation of the law.
|
|
|
|
It makes sense if you have the HC law and You are requiring everyone to have insurance then you should cut funding for places to help those without because now you would be helping those in violation of the law. not exactly, as there is no LAW mandating EVERYONE have insurance, there are financial considerations given and exceptions and there is also crossover time for people to shop for insurance there will still be people without insurance and there will be those who CHOOSE to forego the insurance and pay the tax instead,,, |
|
|
|
No its a penalty for not having insurance. They are doing it because they want everyone to have insurance thus federal funding to places that give aid to those without insurance is counter productive. If people chose to pay they few instead that is their choice.
|
|
|