Empathy & Sympathy -Things of the Past

Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Empathy & Sympathy -Things of the Past
68
Fri, 09-25-2009 - 9:24am

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

At the Richmond Times-Dispatch “public square” forum yesterday, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) took questions from his constituents on the health reform debate for the first time this summer. One such constituent, Patricia Churchill, spoke about a close family member, now unemployed and thus uninsured, who is dying of tumors. Cantor suggested that Churchill’s relative seek “existing government programs” or find charity.

This is all interesting, because Cantor is against a public option, yet he wants Churchill to find a government program (or charity). Yeah, we know how easy that is.


 


CHURCHILL: I have a very close relative, a woman in her early forties, who did have a wonderful, high-paying job, owns her own home and was a real contributing member of society. She lost her job. Just a couple of weeks ago, she found out that she has tumors in her belly and that she needs an operation. Her doctors told her that they are growing and that she needs to get this operation quickly. She has no insurance. I am just wondering gentlemen, we can talk about high-flown ideas and we can talk theory all we want to. But this person is a very close member of my family, she's ill, and she has no way to get this operation. So I'm asking you, what would you do if this were your close relative

CANTOR: First of all, I guess I would ask what the situation is in terms of income eligibility and the existing programs that are out there. Because if we look at the uninsured that are out there right now, there is probably 23, 24% of the uninsured that is already eligible for an existing government program Beyond that, I know that there are programs, there are charitable organizations, there are hospitals here who do provide charity care that if there’s an instance of indigency and the individual is not eligible for existing programs that there can be some cooperative effort. No one in this country, given who we are, should be sitting without an option to go be addressed.


What? Cantor is saying no one in this country should not have an option? That would be the public option, or universal health care, that all other industrialized nations have, in one form or another.


But, truly, why would Representative Cantor CARE about anyone else? He HAS gold standard healthcare for himself and his loved ones. Everyone else can just go DIE.


 

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-23-2008
Sun, 09-27-2009 - 6:08pm
I agree with you wvaone, prisoners get healthcare, while those who cannot pay for insurance, even though they are working and lawabiding, must go without healthcare.
Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 10:18am
This is where you get your information?
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 10:30am

Your post is brilliant and you know how expensive healthcare REALLY is because you're a business owner trying to do the right thing for your employees.


But, sooner than we think, you and millions of other small to possibly medium-sized businesses will have to get out of the the benefits game because it will become a detriment to your company.


At that point, millions upon millions of Americans will be without healthcare. Most will NOT pay the astronomical rates of private insurance. Either it will be out of their financial reach or they will simply refuse to spend that kind of money. Wrong? Perhaps, but NO ONE should be screwed when it comes to the need for a doctor.


And that's what insurance companies do. No matter what flavor they are, their job is to screw you out of your money. Their job is to get you to spend money on a product that they will try desperately to keep you from obtaining.


We used to think of insurance companies as being our protectors, our benefactors... but if they ever were, they are no more.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 10:33am
I couldn't agree with you more!!!!
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 11:52am

I was responding to your question about why people didn't have insurance when their 'pre-existing conditions' came to light.


As for your question, I can't answer that because we don't even have a votable proposal before Congress yet.


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2008
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 12:06pm

"As an example...The premiums could be on a sliding scale"

Will the benefits also be on a sliding scale? If not, then you still have a portion of a premium that the uninsured can't afford. Who will pay it?

"the insurance companies could be 'encouraged' to offer realistic rates..."

Who decides what realistic is?

"most so exorbitantly priced so that they not only make their profit, but have tons of money for unnecessary advertising to the public. I mean...who needs to see all the Viagra, Cialis, etc. pharm ads?"

I just saw an unnecessary ad from some political group complaining about people like Rush Limbaugh attacking poor Democrats who only want to "fix" our healthcare. Do we get to tell them to cease because their ad is unneccessary? I hope not.

"The currently uninsured use hospital ERs for their med care & that's much more expensive than having access to a clinic & being able to see a doctor or nurse practitioner before the problem reaches ER levels...or just instead of feeling that their only option is an ER. Who do you think pays for the ER now?"

So greeedy insurance companies will save money by offering free insurance to uninsured? And they haven't thought of this before?

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2008
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 12:49pm
Guess it beats answering the questions.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 12:59pm

First of all, I prefaced with the fact that nothing is written in stone at this time so I couldn't answer your questions factually.


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2008
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 1:08pm

"Those ads are paid for by donations to such political groups. They have nothing to do with profits. How can you compare a paid political ad to a pharm inundating every sporting event with ad nauseum ads for Viagra, Cialis, etc. Or, during primetime, it seems like every other ad on TV is for some sleep aid, antidepressant, etc., plus some that don't even tell you what they are for! Same with magazines...3 or 4 pages devoted to advertising for one drug. "

As both are private entities it is a matter of them paying for their advertising time, and running their worthless ads. It's called free enterprise. I think movie ads are a waste as well.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2008
Mon, 09-28-2009 - 1:11pm

"Well it sure isn't the insurance industry! ROTFLMAO! Look how many people are paying versus how many are using benefits to any great degree. And don't worry, the insurance companies make their profits but it's not from direct premiums...it's from squirreling away the money & hiding it in other investments."

So who will do it?

Pages