Unfortunately, they are legally allowed to let you die. The notorious cases are women with ectopic pregnancies who find themselves at Catholic hospitals (sometimes because that's the only local option), but poor and uninsured Americans are also dying because an emergency room isn't cancer treatment, and it may get you a prescription for blood pressure medicine, but you still have to pay for the pills. For that matter, few if any doctors (or most of the rest of us) would argue that it's unethical for a doctor to spend their time doing facelifts instead of having specialized in emergency medicine, infectious disease, or cardiology.
It's more "get insurance, you schmuck. Otherwise, if you do wind up in the hospital, you'll bankrupt your family."
I am questioning the "Get insurance, you shmuck. Doctors aren't ethically or legally allowed to let you die, and it's not fair to put them on the hook for the cost of your medical care."
You seem to be assuming that insurance is the only possible way to pay for medical care. It's also possible to pay out of pocket. Many people can afford to pay out of pocket for routine medical care and would only need insurance to cover low-probability catastrophic events. Some people can even afford to pay for catastrophic medical care out of pocket. If someone is willing and able to pay out of pocket, then the only party benefitting by forcing them to buy insurance is the insurance company.
Another thing: there should be an arrow for, "are insurers refusing to sell you insurance?"
THIS. I had a conversation the other day with a co-worker in which we tried to figure out how Obamacare would address this issue. Unsurprisingly, we didn't come up with anything useful.
ok that's really weird it's only upside down and backward on my flist, not in the post
unfortunately those who are too poor for the subsidy but no longer covered by the medicaid expansion are kinda SOL just now. no penalty, but no new insurance either.
For people who are self-employed, especially if they're living in cities where the cost of living is high, I think there can be quite a donut hole between "Obamacare will help you pay" and "Get insurance, you shmuck."
One can easily imagine that a single person making $48000, living in a city like New York or San Francisco, would have a rough time paying $400 a month for a high-deductible plan that barely covers anything. (If that sounds like a high salary, consider that self-employed people pay much more in taxes than people whose employers pay their social security tax, etc.)
I don't think we'll know for sure, until the exchanges are in place, whether the ACA will actually give good and affordable options to people who are making just a little bit too much money to qualify for subsidies.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xiphias![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
On the "get insurance" box
Date: 2012-07-27 03:15 pm (UTC)It's more "get insurance, you schmuck. Otherwise, if you do wind up in the hospital, you'll bankrupt your family."
(no subject)
Date: 2012-07-27 03:21 pm (UTC)You seem to be assuming that insurance is the only possible way to pay for medical care. It's also possible to pay out of pocket. Many people can afford to pay out of pocket for routine medical care and would only need insurance to cover low-probability catastrophic events. Some people can even afford to pay for catastrophic medical care out of pocket. If someone is willing and able to pay out of pocket, then the only party benefitting by forcing them to buy insurance is the insurance company.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2012-07-27 04:06 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2012-07-27 04:33 pm (UTC)THIS. I had a conversation the other day with a co-worker in which we tried to figure out how Obamacare would address this issue. Unsurprisingly, we didn't come up with anything useful.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2012-07-27 04:33 pm (UTC)ok that's really weird it's only upside down and backward on my flist, not in the post
unfortunately those who are too poor for the subsidy but no longer covered by the medicaid expansion are kinda SOL just now. no penalty, but no new insurance either.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-07-27 04:53 pm (UTC)One can easily imagine that a single person making $48000, living in a city like New York or San Francisco, would have a rough time paying $400 a month for a high-deductible plan that barely covers anything. (If that sounds like a high salary, consider that self-employed people pay much more in taxes than people whose employers pay their social security tax, etc.)
I don't think we'll know for sure, until the exchanges are in place, whether the ACA will actually give good and affordable options to people who are making just a little bit too much money to qualify for subsidies.