willbeurdaddy
Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aylee quote:
ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote:
ORIGINAL: lobodomslavery Lets put it like this if your partner is working and is earning a level of income above the threshold which isnt very high something like $10,000 annually, you wouldnt qualify, it is totally unfair, how can you consider people of above $10,000 well to do and capable of affording private health care, you cant and they arent but thats the system, it is only if both together , this is my understanding anyhow have income of less than $10,000 annually would the couple qualify for a medical card, like i say totally unfair and totally unfair that the people MOST in need of health care are DENIED it because of lack of money, ie they cant pay for it so the State doesnt provide for them, completely inequitable but our health care system is just that inequitable and dyfunctional kevin Nobody should not have access to basic healthcare, but your characterization that people above $10,000 are considered "well to do" strikes me as a strawman. It sounds to me that they are considered capable of funding a certain level of their own care, not that they are "well to do". I don't care for the "card" idea. I think a clinic model is far more cost effective. I think that a clinic model that accepted NO insurance whatsoever would be far more cost-effective. Yes, that is what I was referring to. Preferably run by medical schools, with a year of internship (or more depending on specialty) satisfied by working in the clinics.
_____________________________
Hear the lark and harken to the barking of the dogfox, gone to ground.
|