Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: How many here know what happens when majority elderly on medicaid die?

Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 22, 2011, 5:47 p.m. EST by FrogWithWings (1367)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Medicaid, medicare, part this and that?

What happens is you sign off when you are ill and they take everything you own.

Now, when and if you get old and have something, do you want Bureaucrats from DC doing that, or would you prefer trying to see if you and your fellow statepersons can come up with a better and more neighborly plan?

Yeah, they go back 5 years and undo any Quit-claims or transfers to your assigned heirs and this isn't a problem for lawyered up uber-wealthy people as they have enough money for healthcare, and if not, they've got their legal arrangements made long before they are aged.

I just wonder how many have any idea there is another side of the coin.



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 years ago

There are a lot of sad things done. Some of it happens because we want government to take care of us but we don't want to pay for it. If you do want the entitlements you have to step up and push for tax reform. You need more then just an election phrase answer of "Tax the rich". There aren't enough rich. Tax them more, close off the deductions, increase corporate taxes, and personal income tax to cover what we want to spend.

[-] 2 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Just as I thought, the part very few ever have had to deal with. Even if your parents have "good" insurance, once they become terminal you get to witness all manners of insane antics pulled by even hospitals to make sure the bill comes out to more or nearly all of what a person's net worth happens to be, so if the government doesn't get it, the hospitals and their accomplices usually do.

It's a cold hard reality and I suspect many will learn this the hard way when they inherit virtually nothing.

[-] 1 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 12 years ago

I know about the scenario based on the deaths of two elderly relatives of friends. Medical care is a privilege, not a right, anyone earning under $250K who is self employed is not among the "affluent", anyone earning less than $80K per year can now consider themselves "lower middle class" if they are living in any of the major metropolitan areas, ie:New York City or San Francisco because you will, all expenses considered have a fairly difficult time affording top tier/platinum level private medical insurance.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Well tell about the specific scenarios. Many people have no idea there really are better ways of preserving dignity and bringing about real changes dependent upon actual humanity instead of corporate run everything.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 12 years ago

Both cases the elderly were hospitalized after long periods of treatment for chronic diseases prior to the "major event"/strokes that led to hospitalization and then attachment of assets effectively leaving NOTHING to heirs.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Yes, and most wealthy people understand and have access to wise estate planners that protect their assets whereas they can skate through as if they are paupers, on the taxpayers dimes.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 12 years ago

So true. This is why they set up corporations and then they themselves are "employees" of said corporations with the "correct" salaries that allow them to use and abuse the system, defer taxes indefinitely(thus enjoying little to zero to 'negative' taxation) I worked as a temp on an audit for a family owned real estate developer and since the temp service was unable to find anyone interested enough to do the job I spent the better part of several months poring through and organizing the hard copy files related to many corporations, sub chapter 'S' corporations etc. that allowed me to see first hand 'how it's done.' The founder/family had land and commercial real estate holdings throughout the western half of the US. Unfortunately, they started a REIT that was publicly traded for a short while but it failed. Shortly after that the company jet and hangar at Buchanan field were sold and I think the company scaled things way back with the founder being of elderly retirement age I haven't seen anything since that time.

Wanted to add too that there was also ownership of many small town papers and radio stations wherever they had a mix of residential and commercial interests. There was as you mention a corresponding team to attend to legal, accounting, marketing and other matters related to the real estate projects that was their business.

The rich really are different than you and me but not immune to failures either.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

I was quite fortunate to have an accomplished mentor show me the ropes of running a business quite young. It's hard for me to say if my college education or the nitty gritty business education was better, but, the business ropes schooling kept me out of a lot of trouble, provided me with some neat toys and taught me I could certainly land anywhere with just a smile and make out just fine, given enough time to catch my breath.

I certainly crashed and burned a time or two and may again before it's all said and done.

I'm amazed how few W2 employees refuse to obtain a business license, file long form and schedule C's to legally play the same game all this huge corporations play who file 50,000 page returns on billions of dollars of income to end up with a Tax Credit.

Can you imagine how well the voice of the masses would be heard if most all were to do this and effectively prove how lousy they are at business while offsetting their liability?

Now that would be a cannon boom heard round the world.... and would damned sure glean results!

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 12 years ago

LOL! You are so right. Hmmm, maybe somebody needs to create some sort of site where people can partner together with those who know WTF they're doing. I'm 'so, so' when it comes to being good at record keeping and taking applicable deductions as a 1099 contractor/self employed and have helped a number of friends gratis to save several thousands on their taxes so that's a thought worth thinking about and pursuing.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

This done on a massive wide scale would do far more to bring about positive responses and change to all the demands, than any amount of assemblies, peaceful or otherwise.

I've tossed it out here several times with the initial reaction being one of crying foul, to now, more and more people are receptive to the very reasonable premise that it is indeed the very game all the fat cats play and why shouldn't the working masses..........


[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

Unfortunately, they set that up because too many people who could afford to pay for their own care made themselves "poor" by giving away huge amounts of money to their kids. The taxpayers then ended up paying the bills, usually nursing home bills.

So if you give your money away and get sick a few years later, okay. But if you are sick and try this scam, your estate gets billed.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

and of course, the charges will be both fair and reasonable...... why should anyone have any reason to doubt this?

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

The charges are set by state law, which anyone can read. Where I am, the money paid out for the person's care is charged, if it can be shown that the give-away was too recent.

There used to be ads by attorneys, telling people to come to them to learn how to get poor enough for Medicaid, in order to avoid paying for their own nursing home care.

I have long term care insurance, which is the legal way to do it. And, I think, fair.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Well, my approach is a bit different than most. If I ever get too feeble to take care of myself, I've got two and four wheeled vehicles specifically designed for high speed termination depending upon the limits of my physical condition. Hopefully I won't end up vegetating wishing I could go for one last ride, if so, there is enough stacked up to hopefully get me sprung from the scary people with needles and saws.

My estate, for now, shall be divided amongst a few that hopefully will appreciate it and share with others as I've made a way of life doing.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

Since being tied down by my wrists so I could be on a ventilator does not appeal to me either, I have legal papers drawn up as to what I do and don't want to happen, when my time comes, if I'm not able to say.

Things can happen without warning, so I'd encourage you to do that as well. When Palin called that type of planning "death panels", and people believed it, I was fuming. Most people don't want to end their days tied down & entubated, but they don't know to plan. It's sad.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

I have done the same. I witnessed one or two being the unwilling recipent of heroic efforts to revive a flat lined person multiple times despite a DNR having previously been signed. Why did they do it and risk lawsuits (which they know are unlikely on behalf a family that just lost a loved one who obviously was on the way out anyhow) or worse? To run up the bill? To practice highly invasive procedures where the results truly didn't matter so much? To polish up their god act?

I dunno for sure, but, I don't intend for that to be me either.

Human nature when it comes to death is interesting, especially when it comes to their own inevitable passing. My Rx for the masses? Take two doses of logic and accountability and call me from the other side.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 12 years ago

I must say, THIS is why everyone should acquire 3 or 4 SSN's now, they come in handy!

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Am I correct in that it is legal to actually have 5?

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 12 years ago

My 4th strawman SSN says no, but my 3rd SSN says yes. It happens.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 12 years ago

This is what I understand: You can keep your home if you live in it, you can pass your home directly to an heir who lives with you for 2 yrs and takes care of you. Moving OUT of the home and paying for nursing care out-of-pocket is a disaster, you lose protection of your home.

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

So you think all in all, it's a reasonable deal? A good deal even? Fair?

When you go in suddenly terminal, or end up that way if they screw up practicing, all bets are off if you haven't made prudent estate planning maneuvers, typically above and beyond the comprehension of most non-estate attorney reasonable everyday people.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I love this shit. Have you ever seen someone divorce their spouse because the only way to get them health care is medicaid? Everything that you have must be less than $2,000 for them to even be taken to a nursing home.

And some pieces of shit cannot get enough.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Well, I've married once and agreed to the terms of the marriage contract with the state. I have never done it since and never will. Yeah, write your own agreements and find a peace loving native American minister, or whomever suits you, and leave the government out of your matrimonial unions.

Your game is a bit less sharp than normal, of which pieces of shit do you refer?

I do know people who either got their marriages annulled or actually divorced for such reasons.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

:/ Frog, they are called medicaid divorces. They have been going on for some 20 years.

Some pieces of shit have privatized nursing homes that were actually originally run by government and then choose profit over people and don't deliver proper care. They take the social security as "rent" use medicaid and it isn't enough so they screw the person over.

It should be run by the government.

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 12 years ago

Come back and say that when the gubment takes your sorry ass away to a FEMA camp. Damn welfare recipient.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Woohoo. Starting to really shine now, aren't you? Look at the white right wing libertarian conspiracy nutfuck talk now.

You tell 'em baby. Show yourself for what you really are.

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 12 years ago

You are doing an outstanding job of showing the American people what OWS is all about. Keep up the good work and big daddy has a wonderful place waiting for you at a FEMA camp. Ahh yes it does feel good to be a 1% living large greedy right wing libertarian conspiracy nutfuck. I bet you dream of it and cry cause you will never achieve the most awesome way of life peeon.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I love your show of honesty. You just keep right on trolling sunshine. Keep talking.

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

they haven't come and gotten me yet.

I've been trying to get them to kill my lame ass for a while -

the chickenshitscum.


[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Yes, I am aware of those types of businesses and how they operate. However, they already are, and have been in cahoots with our corporate owned government for many years.

On the best resolution, we disagree, I see it as wiser to reduce the bureaucracy and large government corruption from the equation and allow families and communities of actual human beings to deal with realistic human issues that will certainly face us all, at some point in time.

I know from my first hand experience, as well as observed, that if given the chance, actual human people will step up and do the right things by other humans.

I know the last time I was admitted to the Eroom, they tried to get me to sign forms pretty much giving THE GOVERNMENT full rights to my property in order to liquidate it as they saw fit, in order to make the hospitals, doctors, pharma, and bureaucracies wealthier, and all because some uninsured twit decided to run over me.

I read the fine print, heavily medicated on morphine, and refused to sign. Guess what? They treated me anyhow and they are satisfied with the transaction. It wasn't easy.

I sure can't see bigger government being the answer to humanity being able to afford reasonable health care. Any power the Already Too large Government is given, it has proven to abuse that power and divide up the extracted wealth amongst the club members.

Are you in the Government Benefactors Club at all?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I see kicking those that have privatized the health care as getting kicked to the curb. I have been to the ER recently. :D

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

You may be carrying me too fast, but, I don't see health care as being anything other than squarely bedded down, and in deep, with government. It may appear privatized, but, if that were the case all related wealth extraction industries involved wouldn't have enough staff in DC to man a few large hospitals while slinging enough money to receive very favorable legislation sailing through as well as very favorable SCOTUS rulings.

I am also a fine triage surgeon and frontier midwife.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

You are deep in denial. I am done and I mean done with the health care being in the hand of those that are profiting on people's misery. I have dealt with hospitals that refuse treatment or deny treatment based on insurance and some other lovely facets that we have in our society.

People need access to health care. No, the time is over for for-profit hospitals AND various treatment facilities masquerading as non-profits. We not only pay taxes, we most often cover their property taxes. I see treatment denied all the damn time. Enough.

[-] 2 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

And you think more government mismanagement will fix it?

There are nations, which have EXCELLENT world class medical doctors in which medical care is readily afordable.

Granted, they do not have the impressive monuments to the gods of medicine that we have towering into our United States skies, nor do they always have the latest and greatest piece of technologically amazing equipment, but, they do have the qualified people who are willing to work for reasonable wages.

I think a good Doctor should make more money than a garbage man, I do not believe doctors should make rock star money, nor should rock stars and athletes make the insane money they make. It is a sad truth of our human condition that condones such irrational conflicts.

Get the government out of it all, if the medical industries want to hold the value of their services over the entire existences of humanity, then we shall march upon them, hold them accountable, and adjust their perspectives.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Actually, I think that if it was brought in house the people would fare better and there would be less mismanagement. People get better health through the government then they do with out it. The mismanagement comes from the hospitals.

[-] 1 points by 1169 (204) 12 years ago

do away with the middle man, your supporting an insurance industry that employs thousands, their raises bonusus etc. etc. single payer with no middle man

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I agree. There is no reason for insurance companies. In fact,

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Your position would almost be culpable and credible if not for the patent treason being SOP in DC on a daily basis as our representatives seem bent on waging war against The People.

I mean geeze, elected AND appointed persons de facto stealing from their constituents by using non-public information to quite effectively extract their wealth directly, that's theft and of such a large scale to be considered waging war...... and that is the least of the offenses against the American people.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Frog, the elected and the appointed don't do the work. They come and go. The people that actually work carry on to the best of their ability until they are prevented from doing so.

This is how it works. Somebody wants to get elected and they have all of these new ideas or old ideas repackaged. They say whatever they say and people buy it up. Too many on welfare, damned education and a fist in the air for crime and the other fist for a real or imaginary enemy. Said person gets elected and then "appoints" but we will focus on elected.

The services that any given department delivers goes on through out the whole process doing what they have to do. They continue despite the next speech or "meeting" or whatever. The job still must be done.

People strike wildly. Most think that they are hurting those elected officials when they buy into the propaganda from the speeches. This is not the case.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

The last three sentences, could you edify them a bit for me? Mix in some concrete please.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I'm sorry. I was really tired and I could have been more clear.

Ok, people have a tendency to run with phrases without paying attention to what they mean. Smaller government, state rights, bureaucratic, red tape, school choice are a few of those phrases. People hear these phrases or listen to what someone is campaigning on but pay very little attention to what they mean.

Let's say that someone is seeking to get elected or has already been elected on "government waste" at a specific department and so they say there is going to be a hiring and pay freeze and they talk about those people that are paid this huge salary.

The pay freeze happens, there are no new hires and in fact there may be people that are let go. Except for those that were making those top dollar salaries, like the elected officials. Those people carry on with this other magical word "reform". The actual job is still being carried out and the demand didn't decrease. The service is automatically slowed down because they are short staffed and corners cannot be cut. Nor should they be. However, now you see people with overtime accruing because family members die, illness, vacations, and things of this nature. People make the assumption that all government works from 8AM to 4PM and is off on holidays and weekends. That isn't true.

The next cowboy rolls in and campaigns on: there is so much waste from my opponent look at the overtime. Again points to those who make higher salaries to create a visual. We are going to make some serious cuts because it is inefficient. mainstreaming must occur and red tape must go. We must lower our taxes.

Duh!!! What did you think was going to happen with a hiring freeze?

So, this cowboy is elected and figures out that the red tape is actually a good thing yet he cannot get over his little assembly line dream. Services are cut. Those that directly impact the people or are sold to a faux privatization. Taxes don't decrease. The money is shifted to a for profit masquerading as a non profit organization.

They aren't there to screen you in, they are there to screen you out. Because profit is now motive then less people get what they need or get what they need done. Or when looking at nursing homes do not receive adequate care because to do so would mean less profit. They aren't usually held to a higher standard and are not required to keep the same type of records that they would have had to if they were a government agency. NO ACCOUNTABILITY.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

So in a paragraph or two, divulge the details and all consent implied by the 1992 SSAA. I wholeheartedly disagree with you that most laws are written within the grasp of everyday reasonable people. I can substantiate many non-frivolous cases brought before SCOTUS to get a ruling on what should be simple matters as well as representatives who have no idea what is contained in 300-2500 pages of legalese which typically comprises modern legislation.

Even the top law schools review legislation and are often stymied by the deceptive ambiguity or vagueness of many acts, statutes or legislation.

It almost sounds like you think The People's government needs to always be run by esoteric and highly specialized experts, instead of average reasonable persons.

There is no future in having the crafty and clever wolves in control and reigning superior over people who should not have to be bothered with what should be simple and reasonable governance. It doesn't work.

Most laws, are far removed from "straight forward".

I also disagree that I do have a problem with the rampant and unbridled corruption and unresponsiveness of our DC government as opposed to privatized businesses. I surely desire no efforts for further empower the out of control beast.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Ok, thanks clarifying that for me. I do agree with your analysis 100% to the point that you infer having these government services indeed controlled and administered at the DC level could ever result in a more direct and efficient means of serving the people of all 50 states, whose needs are inherently different and should reasonably expected to be that way, than if indeed done within the bounds of each state as best suited to the needs of all in said state.

I mean, your actual chances of being able to hold a state run administration, in your own state, not only accountable, but to even change it, are far greater than if you combine all 50 states into a District of Criminals Cluster Copulation, in which historically, The People, not the uber-elite power grabbers, have always lost.

Do you find my views on this overly simplistic and flawed?

I truly find our current system of government, which now operates completely without regard for the beauty provided by the repeated qualifier, "reasonable man" (of which I strongly believe should be changed to "reasonable man or woman", and for those who do not believe our DOI prohibited slavery of colored persons, "of any race or color") whereas I truly believe our laws beyond the Constitution can and should be written in plain English so that reasonable person should be expected to understand them. To accompany that, all would be voters should again, have to prove reasonableness.

I know at some level you agree as I see you trying to reason with people, patently unable to be reasoned due to obvious realities, they simply are not reasonable at a level acceptable to have a say in the running of our government. It's a sad reality, but, one which reasonable people should no longer be willing to ignore.

Even administering health care to those in your states can be written without braces of lawyers and all the various related experts to the field. Simple language and simple terms. Violate them and harm anyone, bring your case to a bona-fide Article III common law court, no attorney required. Such direct access to justice has long since been stripped away from Americans.

Things need to be much simpler and I truly believe it is possible. I absolutely know until the myriads of deceptive experts are cast out of our government, there will be no cessation of the unchecked waring of their written words against our people, who without access to the same experts, should never be expected to have any clue what legislation or tricky structures are being devised and for what actual means to specific ends. Most are simply beyond the grasp of average people!

I mean, to even grasp the amazing magnitude of the Social Security Administration Act of 1992 reasonably requiring self-study and verification of which 2 solid years to fully grasp, means the student is located decisively to the right of the Bell hump.

This exempts 80% of the population of which such consent stealing agreements have violently changed many lives as very few have any idea what they were coerced or persuaded to sign. 'Just do it, you have to, everyone does it, if you don't there will be consequences'....

where is the good faith and honesty in that?

And I'm not singling out just that one example, I'm talking about 99% of all contracts and legislation of which people are subject and accountable to because they've unknowingly consented.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Yes, overly simplistic and flawed.

Historically, state rights=no accountability. I'll be damned if I am going to sit here with my wallet open. I want the states to say, we are spending the money here, here and here and then I want them to prove that is where it was spent. Period. I also want them to prove that the job that they were given to do is done appropriately. Thus far, this is not what is happening. In fact, many of the states are moving to less and less accountability and deregulation and it is failing.

Your problems lie not with the government but with faux privatization and for profit hospitals and other services masquerading as not for profits. We need health care reform, universal health care. It really is that simple.

Most laws are pretty straight forward, unless your friendly lobbyist is involved. You simply have to adapt to reading the material. People are not too stupid to read the material. They just need to stop relying on others to tell them what it means. Social Security is still pretty straight forward.

Deregulation means no accountability. It is pretty simple.


[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

We aren't friends, bitch. Here is a little news flash you fucking whore. You do not win a fucking ticket to steal from the people. We the people want our money put to those things that benefit the people. Keep your fucking mitts off little right wing libertarian fucktwit.

And have a blessed day. :D

[-] 1 points by Frizolio (80) 12 years ago

Now I want the people here to see the typical OWS crybaby. Just like the news the other night about the meth bust and the punks had a Occupy Eugene and Obama bumperstickers and the cops were pulling out all their Meth lab equipment. I bet you are one of those left-winged lunatic tweekers.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Fritzolio works for Americans for Prosperity and spends her time on his knees for the Koch heads. :D.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Have a glass of wine and lemme give ya a manicure.

I've been kicking about making a complex board game like combining "Life" and "Risk" where many different scenarios can be played out. Like all the wealth extracting elitist moving to a specific state or two and regular people living in regular states making their world work for them, while the rich destroy themselves.

i am aware of AI, even as outdated as TerraFlop, being quite accurate making tested and proven real world predictions based on various entered scenarios. Far more accurate that Nancy Regan's chart readers ever dreamed of being.

It is a shame those in possession of the results will never share them with humanity and now newer and much more capable AI exists almost solely for the betterment of the elite.

Sick some hound dogs on unearthing those "experiments". There is a reason why the Owners do not want our Republic properly restored.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

The uber rich would need to rely on someone else to do the work. That plays out around the US in various forms. Local towns do the same. They can leave.

As sophisticated as AI is, it is entirely too predictable. Isn't it?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Well, what little bit I've been privy to has revealed most all social and society engineering experiments with it so far, have been exactly the opposite of predictable. I know many of it's tests and results are highly classified.

I'll be the first to admit that combining a tenth of the variables which comprise our real planet and my head starts swimming and I quickly lose interest. I think it's likely that I have a higher level of "anti-head swim" than many and less than some.

People are the most unpredictable variable, one notch below what is unknown about our planet and universe.

Sound plausible?

[-] 0 points by earnyours (124) 12 years ago

Taxes go down?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Well, I'd say with medical related CEO's being paid 150million a year, and that's just the top dog, there certainly seems to be plenty of room for health care costs to be much more affordable.

The insurance companies need to get out of the way and masses of people should reject their "wealth extraction while adding no value" services.

You think Dr's and Hospitals will refuse to become much more reasonable if everyone worked out terms up front?

They will. The last time I went in and paid upfront, it was 1/4th the amount (very reasonable, even affordable) it would have cost on 5 year payments, and 1/10th of what it would have cost had I had insurance, which also seems to result in a higher cases of costly unforeseen complications.

[-] 1 points by earnyours (124) 12 years ago

Yeah, government will make it more efficient. LOL

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Such logic, or lack thereof, is completely beyond belief. It's almost like anyone with eyes and ears should be able to see what has happened as our government has grown well beyond any reasonable bounds set up by our Constitution. It enslaves all and uses our produced wealth against us.

How can anyone sane not see this and advocate even more federal government involvement/oppression?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Why no, my little right wing troll.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

I need to file your talons, Darlin. I'm also quite an accomplished amateur dentist and OB/GYN if your fangs or anything else needs attention. ;-)

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 12 years ago

Quit depressing. You work all your life, you are forced to go on Medicare and then you get sick and they take everything. Can they take part of your Social Security too? What exactly do we get out of the deal in keeping our economy going? A meager paycheck to pay our housing, clothing, food and education with not enough to save for retirement while all the profit goes to share holders and CEOs?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 12 years ago

Yeah, that's pretty much the reality of taking everything. For all that rail about doing away with this system and making things work differently, does it not dawn on them that the CEO's of all the wealth extracting medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance companies are making out like actual bandits who can afford having any surgery they need done, on Mars for sucks fake?

America has the highest cost of medical care of any nation while having the lowest level of "customer satisfaction" to go with the impossible bills.

One accident can ruin a working person, insured or not. A major illness? Game over, if you recover, finding a double corrugated waxed box and a nice spot under a bridge has become viable survival options for many.

The last time I checked on flying to India to have a procedure performed, about 5 years ago, the Doctors there are paid about 35 bucks an hour.