 |
 |
If health care isn't affordable for everyone - we all lose. If vaccinations aren't available to poor children, rich children are at risk of infection. We are seeing alarming increases in Whooping Cough and Measles. Those infections can kill. There are diseases that are not covered by vaccinations - such as TB. Bet you don't want to sit next to someone on a bus, in a taxi or in a work place with TB. How many people work through a chronic cough because they can't afford healthcare?? ER visits and hospital stays are expensive. Hospitals may not turn away the indigent - so the taxpayer has to pay for their care. I work as the resident RN (volunteer) for a homeless shelter. One of our guests last year lost both of his feet to frostbite. Because the hospital could not find a Medicaid nursing home bed for him, the hospital kept discharging him to our shelter. Five times he developed infections in his wounds which required ER visits, 5 hospitalizations in isolated rooms because his infections were hospital acquired, powerful antibiotics and advanced wound care. All of that in a 6 month period. We figure that he cost taxpayers $1 million dollars until he was finally placed in a Medicaid facility (for which the taxpayer is still paying - but the bill is cheaper). We all pay when health care isn't provided. -------- > Why should health care be FREE? If you are poor, why should the tax > payers > pay for your care? > Why is everyone entitled to a better life? Please enlighten me. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Rack > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 8:46 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: as if > >>Denying treatment, denying choice is already a feature of medical care, >>and has been for some time. For-profit insurers are certainly not >>averse to piling on the procedures, diagnostics, and drugs for which >>they will not pay, meaning that, as always, it's the very rich who can >>get the best that medicine has to offer, anywhere in the world, while >>the rest of us figure out what we will forego in order to, let's say, >>continue to take brand name Sinemet when our coverage is limited to >>generics. (And for many, all assertions to the contrary, there IS a >>difference between the two.) Or perhaps we wake up from a colonoscopy >>to find that a preventive exam turned into something else, something >>not covered, when a suspicious polyp was removed while we were >>unconscious. >> >>Thanks to the new policies under Obama, my 23-year-old nephew is able >>to remain on his parents' policy, not stranded without insurance, as my >>kids were after college; and my friend with cancer can't be denied >>coverage because of her condition. Those are HUGE changes that >>positively affect the lives of countless Americans. >> >>If the Supreme Court undoes the new health care laws, what's the point? >>Congress might as well go home. It's what they seem to do best, anyway. >> >>Kathleen >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Kathleen, > You have stated this issue clearly and succinctly. > Thank you for spreading the word. > -- > Steve in VT > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn