12 ms·

Funny how this thread is debating whether a crushed hand or severed fingers justifies an ambulance or ride share. It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide me

Funny how this thread is debating whether a crushed hand or severed fingers justifies an ambulance or ride share. It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport. The fact that an on-site physician would not call medical transport and put patients with crush hands/severed fingers in a ride share is per se illegal. Next we will hear the “SV disruption cult” begin making their claim that those regulations only exist because the EMT lobby industry is spending billions for legislation to protect the market incumbent. Well don’t forget your extra $150 Uber cleaning fee for bleeding all over your drivers car.

y4mi 8y ago
only $150? you need to add professional cleaning cost and lost revenue while cleaning to the bill. and not just professional cleaning... the injured person could've a serious illness (think HIV), so it will probably cost even more i'd wager you'll need at least twice that amount
- spamizbad 8y ago
  Which is why they should be using medical transportation services.
  - jimmaswell 8y ago
    They should ideally* use medical transportation services if there's bleeding or a broken neck, and be able to use something cheaper if there's no danger of further injury or creating biohazards. *Truly ideally there wouldn't be ambulance bills stuck on people, but I mean within the framework of what's currently in practice.
    - bfdm 8y ago
      See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. A person with a severe impact might not have much external signs or pain, but could be bleeding internally. That would present a problem in the backseat of an uber on the highway. Without stabilization, a broken bone can cut or puncture any number of blood vessels or organs (for a rib). There's a reason we use medical transport after injuries -- you don't really know what might follow. If the cost is the concern, using cheap transport isn't the answer. Either socialize the care or force workplaces to pay the EMT fees for workplace injuries. Sending someone in a cab is just not acceptable if a doctor deems medical transport necessary. Now, all of this hinges on the particulars and accuracy of the description of the situation, which I can't really judge from the outside. But if otherwise independent medical professionals are being urged to reduce ambulance use in order to save face for the factory, that's a real problem. I'm inclined to believe the ousted clinicians and former employees, though.
      - cma 8y ago
        Should it be illegal to drive a partner to the ER then?
        macintux 8y ago
        It's not illegal, but it's stupid except in dire need. If your partner goes into cardiac arrest while you're driving, what are you going to do? Stop to apply CPR and while simultaneously calling 911? Start driving faster, running red lights, and hope you both survive the trip?
        moate 8y ago
        That's an entirely different point. If you're out in the middle of nowhere or even the middle of downtown SF, and you cut your foot off, you can decide to do whatever you want about it. You could call an ambulance, have your wife drive you, or just lay there and bleed because you don't want to be an inconvenience. Freedom of choice, all legal options. If you went to a licensed medical professional with your foot cut off, they're not allowed to call you a cab. They have to call an ambulance. You can tell them, to hell with your fancy EMT's and expensive rides, I'll just have my wife take me over to the ER to get this foot sewn back on, but they have to call an ambulance if you need transport. This is a liability and safety issue. It's also a kickback issue. TL;dr- No, it shouldn't, and nobody wants to make that illegal.
        will_brown 8y ago
        Depends is your partner driving you to the ER in an emergency? Or is your partner offering emergency services to the public in exchange for money? If so is your partner properly licensed and registered to provide those services? Is your partner insured to provide those services?
      - jimmaswell 8y ago
        > See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. They are medical professionals, and thus held to the standard of only being allowed to call an ambulance. That was the whole point.
- dbuder 8y ago
  That is the cap uber will pay drivers for cleaning in my market, I'd be interested if you knew of cases where customers have had to pay more.
jsight 8y ago
Lyft and Uber are used by patients to go to the hospital and other doctors very regularly. I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Whether that should have been used in the cases described in the attached article is a reasonable debate. I'm more confident in the people on the ground making this choice than the news reporter.
- spamizbad 8y ago
  "medical transportation" has a specific meaning. It's perfectly legal to take an Uber to see your doctor. However, there are anti-kickback regulations in place for medical transportation providers for people who need things like emergency care.
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  Private Joe Citizen can take a taxi wherever they want (like how I took a cab to an urgent care a couple years ago after breaking my ankle in a bike accident). Medical practitioners, however, cannot send someone in a cab. It's a huge liability issue for them. If someone is injured and needs medical transport, they need to use proper medical transport. This is what Tesla is accused of violating. Their on-site nurses are licensed medical professionals. It's worlds different from random person taking a cab to a hospital.
  - jimmaswell 8y ago
    Really sounds like that needs to be changed then. As long as healthcare isn't socialized, you shouldn't have to be stuck with an ambulance bill for a broken foot because some outdated regulation says you can't be given an Uber instead.
    - notyourwork 8y ago
      You are missing the point. No ones forcing you to use the ambulance. The point is a medical professional is recommending a ride share instead of calling an ambulance. You can say no my crushes hand will be ok and I’ll take an Uber to avoid a bill but that’s not a medical persons choice it is yours.
Latteland 8y ago
yes, those reports of serious injuries and poor medical care are pretty damning. So why doesn't osha or some other office that frequently does fine companies get involved?
- koreyb 8y ago
  OSHA completed their investigation and concluded that they are not under-reporting injuries (from the Q3 earnings call).
  - frakkingcylons 8y ago
    That statement in the Q3 earnings call is misleading. Per the article, Cal/OSHA found four other injury reporting violations but could not fine Tesla because those violations fell outside the statute of limitations. A state bill has been signed to extend it to six months, but it was passed too late for the Tesla investigation.
EADGBE 8y ago
Don't worry about the cleanup fee - your state has a number for that: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/workers-compensation-benefits-by-limb https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/workers-compensatio...
JshWright 8y ago
> EMT lobby industry I think you mean the "private EMS lobby". Individual EMTs are equally opposed to most of the legislation being pushed by big EMS companies (notably Prop 11, being voted on today, which is an attempt by AMR to avoid having to comply with meal break rules)
- moate 8y ago
  I think he was being sarcastic
- wiseleo 8y ago
  Yep... a "cute" proposition that was when I saw it on my ballot. I chose to give EMTs the chance to have a real lunch break. I am paying special attention to how that prop fares.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > I think you mean the "private EMS lobby". Individual EMTs are equally opposed to most of the legislation being pushed by big EMS companies (notably Prop 11, being voted on today, which is an attempt by AMR to avoid having to comply with meal break rules Usually, when employees in an industry oppose an initiative, they actually file opposition to it; Prop. 11 was unusual in having no opposing argument filed, which usually only happens with non-controversial proposals.
  - JshWright 8y ago
    There is no organized body of workers in the private EMS industry in California. Unions are extremely rare in private EMS. The group behind Prop 11, Californians for Emergency Preparedness and Safety, is an AMR shell corp. AMR provided all of its funding, and it's CEO, Thomas Wagner, is the CEO of AMR's Western Region operation.
eduah 8y ago
Just posting this here. Choose who to believe. The medical professional who will lose his lincence and be in legal trouble if he lying, or the "news“ org with a bone to pick with Tesla who have are been proven liars by OSHA, whose investigation proved thier story about under reporting of injuries false. "I spent nearly one hour with Reveal detailing Tesla’s decision earlier this year to bring me and my medical team on site at Fremont, providing its employees with state-of-the-art occupational and musculoskeletal health care. I detailed our vision for exemplary patient care and I gave specific examples of protocol improvements and subsequent successes in outcomes in only four short months, including accurate diagnoses and reducing needless delays for advanced testing and treatment. I patiently educated Will Evans on how Tesla allowed me to give the same care to Tesla employees that I do to my private patients including ones who are professional athletes, with the ability to get necessary testing and treatment in a timely manner without being hindered by an often cumbersome California Worker’s Compensation System that sometimes negatively effects injured workers. I counseled Will on the difference between subjective complaints of pain, which cannot be proven and are often magnified, and objective signs found only on careful clinical examination by an experienced physician. I even mailed Will a copy of a relevant chapter from the American Medical Association Return to Work Guidelines and offered to make myself available for additional questions. Research and evidence-based medicine indicate that deconditioning injuries involving sore muscles should not be treated with inactivity as this only exacerbates the problem, but should instead be treated by proactive conditioning, ergonomic modifications and supportive care. Not all patients in pain should be off work, at home and on opioids. In fact, it is most often in these patients’ best interest to have supportive care that enhances their activity, their function, and their well-being. As a physician, my foremost obligation is to perform a careful history and physical examination, order additional tests when clinically indicated, make an accurate diagnosis, and deliver the absolute best care possible. If patients are injured and continued work presents safety issues for the patient, myself and my fellow physicians prescribe the appropriate work restrictions. Any suggestion that myself or any of my medical team at AOC allow external factors to influence our medical care in any way is false and inaccurate. I advised Will on why ambulances should be reserved for life or limb threatening injuries and that every ambulance that is thoughtlessly called for a non-life-threatening injury is one less ambulance that is available to actually save a life rather than be used as a convenience. Most importantly, all members of my team are empowered to call 911 for any limb or life-threatening condition. Rather than deliver an informative and balanced piece of journalism, Reveal has instead chosen to hitch its wagon to Ms. Anna Watson, a provider with whom we severed ties after less than two weeks at our clinic and about whom I cannot provide any additional comment as she is currently the subject of an investigation by the California Medical Board. Instead of highlighting the tremendous progress being made in both patient safety and patient care at Tesla, this report uses poor sourcing to tell a story consistent with a predetermined agenda.” 26 PM_ME_UR_Definitions • 1h Maybe you don't believe this guy? Maybe you think he's a genius? It doesn't really matter, leaving out this kind of information from someone you interviewed is the definition of bias. The reporter was filtering out information not because it's inaccurate, but because it didn't fit with the narrative they wanted to tell."
leroy_masochist 8y ago
> It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport. Really? A couple years ago I brought my buddy to the hospital in an Uber and he was pretty close to dying, nobody at the hospital seemed to have any issues with it. I later emailed Uber to praise the driver and they thanked me for the writeup of what happened and said they distributed it on their internal listserv. Definitely did not feel like anything illegal was happening throughout process.
- bildung 8y ago
  > A couple years ago I brought my buddy to the hospital in an Uber In your role as on-site physician for a corporation?
- diminoten 8y ago
  I don't think it is illegal, or at least I couldn't find anything saying it was. Here are three articles I found, and I'd assume at least one of them would have mentioned the legal trouble. Maybe I missed it? https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/when-should-you-uber-to-the-hospital-and-when-should-you-call-an-ambulance.html https://www.webmd.com/health-insurance/news/20170515/uber-lyft-er-trips#1 https://www.rewire.org/living/uber-emergency-room/
  - holtalanm 8y ago
    It is illegal for a medical practitioner to send someone to the hospital in a non-medical transport.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - alphaoverlord 8y ago
      As a physician, I can say that is not true
      - hef19898 8y ago
standerman 8y ago
Why isn't there an Uber for ambulances yet? Seems like cutting out the dispatcher middle man for the closest available would be valuable.
- clavalle 8y ago
  In a word? Liability.
  - moate 8y ago
    Also, where are all these privately owned gypsy ambulances that would be signing up for this service? You'd need fleets of rando EMT's just trolling around towns hoping they're going to be the closest to an emergency. The reason independent ambulances work is because they have a central dispatch to make sure things get evened out across the board.
gutnor 8y ago
From a European point of view, this whole thread is surreal. Your hand is crushed or your fingers are severed, you are sent to the ER in an Ambulance. This is impressive how far the US has normalised the concept that health is primarily a financial decision. Especially in the HN bubble that consists mostly of wealthy individuals.
- crankylinuxuser 8y ago
  This is what libertarian and 'eliminate regulation' types want. Human life isn't worth anything if the people can't use legal means to protect themselves. For these US citizens (SV elite), healthcare is akin to a status symbol or a luxury that only rich people or people bestowed by the rich (think: employment) should be able to attain. And then look at how much hatred there was when Obama tried to implement the Heritage Foundations plan, which was done by Mitt Romney in Massuchusetts. Republican, btw. These people really don't care about the "rest of us". That's why Trump was elected. He showed he had the similar hatred and focused it. Don't get me wrong- he's done horrible for the US... But that's why. EDIT: I would love to hear a description why I'm wrong. I've lived through the creation of Obamacare, my diabetes T2 diagnosis under it, and now the structured destruction of it, along with trying to eliminate 'preexisting conditions' exception. In short, if they get their way, I'll be dead sooner. Like 10 years sooner. Lack of health care + diabetes = death sentence. But in the end, having us "dead weights" dying isn't a bad thing when you boil us down to $$$.
  - rjplatte 8y ago
    > This is what libertarian and 'eliminate regulation' types want. False. Healthcare is not a human right, but the insane inflation of healthcare costs would be avoided by removing a large portion of the regulation surrounding it. If hospitals actually had to compete to get patients, based on affordability, among other factors, healthcare would be far cheaper, and private charity/need-sharing would take the place of insurance.
    - vernie 8y ago
      Hot dog, there's a cheaper ER 30 minutes from here!

y4mi 8y ago

only $150? you need to add professional cleaning cost and lost revenue while cleaning to the bill. and not just professional cleaning... the injured person could've a serious illness (think HIV), so it will probably cost even more i'd wager you'll need at least twice that amount

spamizbad 8y ago
Which is why they should be using medical transportation services.
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  They should ideally* use medical transportation services if there's bleeding or a broken neck, and be able to use something cheaper if there's no danger of further injury or creating biohazards. *Truly ideally there wouldn't be ambulance bills stuck on people, but I mean within the framework of what's currently in practice.
  - bfdm 8y ago
    See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. A person with a severe impact might not have much external signs or pain, but could be bleeding internally. That would present a problem in the backseat of an uber on the highway. Without stabilization, a broken bone can cut or puncture any number of blood vessels or organs (for a rib). There's a reason we use medical transport after injuries -- you don't really know what might follow. If the cost is the concern, using cheap transport isn't the answer. Either socialize the care or force workplaces to pay the EMT fees for workplace injuries. Sending someone in a cab is just not acceptable if a doctor deems medical transport necessary. Now, all of this hinges on the particulars and accuracy of the description of the situation, which I can't really judge from the outside. But if otherwise independent medical professionals are being urged to reduce ambulance use in order to save face for the factory, that's a real problem. I'm inclined to believe the ousted clinicians and former employees, though.
    - cma 8y ago
      Should it be illegal to drive a partner to the ER then?
      - macintux 8y ago
        It's not illegal, but it's stupid except in dire need. If your partner goes into cardiac arrest while you're driving, what are you going to do? Stop to apply CPR and while simultaneously calling 911? Start driving faster, running red lights, and hope you both survive the trip?
      - moate 8y ago
        That's an entirely different point. If you're out in the middle of nowhere or even the middle of downtown SF, and you cut your foot off, you can decide to do whatever you want about it. You could call an ambulance, have your wife drive you, or just lay there and bleed because you don't want to be an inconvenience. Freedom of choice, all legal options. If you went to a licensed medical professional with your foot cut off, they're not allowed to call you a cab. They have to call an ambulance. You can tell them, to hell with your fancy EMT's and expensive rides, I'll just have my wife take me over to the ER to get this foot sewn back on, but they have to call an ambulance if you need transport. This is a liability and safety issue. It's also a kickback issue. TL;dr- No, it shouldn't, and nobody wants to make that illegal.
      - will_brown 8y ago
        Depends is your partner driving you to the ER in an emergency? Or is your partner offering emergency services to the public in exchange for money? If so is your partner properly licensed and registered to provide those services? Is your partner insured to provide those services?
    - jimmaswell 8y ago
      > See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. They are medical professionals, and thus held to the standard of only being allowed to call an ambulance. That was the whole point.
dbuder 8y ago
That is the cap uber will pay drivers for cleaning in my market, I'd be interested if you knew of cases where customers have had to pay more.

jsight 8y ago

Lyft and Uber are used by patients to go to the hospital and other doctors very regularly. I think that your idea that this is illegal is pretty novel. Whether that should have been used in the cases described in the attached article is a reasonable debate. I'm more confident in the people on the ground making this choice than the news reporter.

spamizbad 8y ago
"medical transportation" has a specific meaning. It's perfectly legal to take an Uber to see your doctor. However, there are anti-kickback regulations in place for medical transportation providers for people who need things like emergency care.
CydeWeys 8y ago
Private Joe Citizen can take a taxi wherever they want (like how I took a cab to an urgent care a couple years ago after breaking my ankle in a bike accident). Medical practitioners, however, cannot send someone in a cab. It's a huge liability issue for them. If someone is injured and needs medical transport, they need to use proper medical transport. This is what Tesla is accused of violating. Their on-site nurses are licensed medical professionals. It's worlds different from random person taking a cab to a hospital.
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  Really sounds like that needs to be changed then. As long as healthcare isn't socialized, you shouldn't have to be stuck with an ambulance bill for a broken foot because some outdated regulation says you can't be given an Uber instead.
  - notyourwork 8y ago
    You are missing the point. No ones forcing you to use the ambulance. The point is a medical professional is recommending a ride share instead of calling an ambulance. You can say no my crushes hand will be ok and I’ll take an Uber to avoid a bill but that’s not a medical persons choice it is yours.

Latteland 8y ago

yes, those reports of serious injuries and poor medical care are pretty damning. So why doesn't osha or some other office that frequently does fine companies get involved?

koreyb 8y ago
OSHA completed their investigation and concluded that they are not under-reporting injuries (from the Q3 earnings call).
- frakkingcylons 8y ago
  That statement in the Q3 earnings call is misleading. Per the article, Cal/OSHA found four other injury reporting violations but could not fine Tesla because those violations fell outside the statute of limitations. A state bill has been signed to extend it to six months, but it was passed too late for the Tesla investigation.

EADGBE 8y ago

Don't worry about the cleanup fee - your state has a number for that: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/workers-compensation-benefits-by-limb https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/workers-compensatio...

JshWright 8y ago

> EMT lobby industry I think you mean the "private EMS lobby". Individual EMTs are equally opposed to most of the legislation being pushed by big EMS companies (notably Prop 11, being voted on today, which is an attempt by AMR to avoid having to comply with meal break rules)

moate 8y ago
I think he was being sarcastic
wiseleo 8y ago
Yep... a "cute" proposition that was when I saw it on my ballot. I chose to give EMTs the chance to have a real lunch break. I am paying special attention to how that prop fares.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I think you mean the "private EMS lobby". Individual EMTs are equally opposed to most of the legislation being pushed by big EMS companies (notably Prop 11, being voted on today, which is an attempt by AMR to avoid having to comply with meal break rules Usually, when employees in an industry oppose an initiative, they actually file opposition to it; Prop. 11 was unusual in having no opposing argument filed, which usually only happens with non-controversial proposals.
- JshWright 8y ago
  There is no organized body of workers in the private EMS industry in California. Unions are extremely rare in private EMS. The group behind Prop 11, Californians for Emergency Preparedness and Safety, is an AMR shell corp. AMR provided all of its funding, and it's CEO, Thomas Wagner, is the CEO of AMR's Western Region operation.

eduah 8y ago

Just posting this here. Choose who to believe. The medical professional who will lose his lincence and be in legal trouble if he lying, or the "news“ org with a bone to pick with Tesla who have are been proven liars by OSHA, whose investigation proved thier story about under reporting of injuries false. "I spent nearly one hour with Reveal detailing Tesla’s decision earlier this year to bring me and my medical team on site at Fremont, providing its employees with state-of-the-art occupational and musculoskeletal health care. I detailed our vision for exemplary patient care and I gave specific examples of protocol improvements and subsequent successes in outcomes in only four short months, including accurate diagnoses and reducing needless delays for advanced testing and treatment. I patiently educated Will Evans on how Tesla allowed me to give the same care to Tesla employees that I do to my private patients including ones who are professional athletes, with the ability to get necessary testing and treatment in a timely manner without being hindered by an often cumbersome California Worker’s Compensation System that sometimes negatively effects injured workers. I counseled Will on the difference between subjective complaints of pain, which cannot be proven and are often magnified, and objective signs found only on careful clinical examination by an experienced physician. I even mailed Will a copy of a relevant chapter from the American Medical Association Return to Work Guidelines and offered to make myself available for additional questions. Research and evidence-based medicine indicate that deconditioning injuries involving sore muscles should not be treated with inactivity as this only exacerbates the problem, but should instead be treated by proactive conditioning, ergonomic modifications and supportive care. Not all patients in pain should be off work, at home and on opioids. In fact, it is most often in these patients’ best interest to have supportive care that enhances their activity, their function, and their well-being. As a physician, my foremost obligation is to perform a careful history and physical examination, order additional tests when clinically indicated, make an accurate diagnosis, and deliver the absolute best care possible. If patients are injured and continued work presents safety issues for the patient, myself and my fellow physicians prescribe the appropriate work restrictions. Any suggestion that myself or any of my medical team at AOC allow external factors to influence our medical care in any way is false and inaccurate. I advised Will on why ambulances should be reserved for life or limb threatening injuries and that every ambulance that is thoughtlessly called for a non-life-threatening injury is one less ambulance that is available to actually save a life rather than be used as a convenience. Most importantly, all members of my team are empowered to call 911 for any limb or life-threatening condition. Rather than deliver an informative and balanced piece of journalism, Reveal has instead chosen to hitch its wagon to Ms. Anna Watson, a provider with whom we severed ties after less than two weeks at our clinic and about whom I cannot provide any additional comment as she is currently the subject of an investigation by the California Medical Board. Instead of highlighting the tremendous progress being made in both patient safety and patient care at Tesla, this report uses poor sourcing to tell a story consistent with a predetermined agenda.” 26 PM_ME_UR_Definitions • 1h Maybe you don't believe this guy? Maybe you think he's a genius? It doesn't really matter, leaving out this kind of information from someone you interviewed is the definition of bias. The reporter was filtering out information not because it's inaccurate, but because it didn't fit with the narrative they wanted to tell."

leroy_masochist 8y ago

> It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport. Really? A couple years ago I brought my buddy to the hospital in an Uber and he was pretty close to dying, nobody at the hospital seemed to have any issues with it. I later emailed Uber to praise the driver and they thanked me for the writeup of what happened and said they distributed it on their internal listserv. Definitely did not feel like anything illegal was happening throughout process.

bildung 8y ago
> A couple years ago I brought my buddy to the hospital in an Uber In your role as on-site physician for a corporation?
diminoten 8y ago
I don't think it is illegal, or at least I couldn't find anything saying it was. Here are three articles I found, and I'd assume at least one of them would have mentioned the legal trouble. Maybe I missed it? https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/when-should-you-uber-to-the-hospital-and-when-should-you-call-an-ambulance.html https://www.webmd.com/health-insurance/news/20170515/uber-lyft-er-trips#1 https://www.rewire.org/living/uber-emergency-room/
- holtalanm 8y ago
  It is illegal for a medical practitioner to send someone to the hospital in a non-medical transport.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - alphaoverlord 8y ago
    As a physician, I can say that is not true
    - hef19898 8y ago

standerman 8y ago

Why isn't there an Uber for ambulances yet? Seems like cutting out the dispatcher middle man for the closest available would be valuable.

clavalle 8y ago
In a word? Liability.
- moate 8y ago
  Also, where are all these privately owned gypsy ambulances that would be signing up for this service? You'd need fleets of rando EMT's just trolling around towns hoping they're going to be the closest to an emergency. The reason independent ambulances work is because they have a central dispatch to make sure things get evened out across the board.

gutnor 8y ago

From a European point of view, this whole thread is surreal. Your hand is crushed or your fingers are severed, you are sent to the ER in an Ambulance. This is impressive how far the US has normalised the concept that health is primarily a financial decision. Especially in the HN bubble that consists mostly of wealthy individuals.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago
This is what libertarian and 'eliminate regulation' types want. Human life isn't worth anything if the people can't use legal means to protect themselves. For these US citizens (SV elite), healthcare is akin to a status symbol or a luxury that only rich people or people bestowed by the rich (think: employment) should be able to attain. And then look at how much hatred there was when Obama tried to implement the Heritage Foundations plan, which was done by Mitt Romney in Massuchusetts. Republican, btw. These people really don't care about the "rest of us". That's why Trump was elected. He showed he had the similar hatred and focused it. Don't get me wrong- he's done horrible for the US... But that's why. EDIT: I would love to hear a description why I'm wrong. I've lived through the creation of Obamacare, my diabetes T2 diagnosis under it, and now the structured destruction of it, along with trying to eliminate 'preexisting conditions' exception. In short, if they get their way, I'll be dead sooner. Like 10 years sooner. Lack of health care + diabetes = death sentence. But in the end, having us "dead weights" dying isn't a bad thing when you boil us down to $$$.
- rjplatte 8y ago
  > This is what libertarian and 'eliminate regulation' types want. False. Healthcare is not a human right, but the insane inflation of healthcare costs would be avoided by removing a large portion of the regulation surrounding it. If hospitals actually had to compete to get patients, based on affordability, among other factors, healthcare would be far cheaper, and private charity/need-sharing would take the place of insurance.
  - vernie 8y ago
    Hot dog, there's a cheaper ER 30 minutes from here!