7 ms·

call me a cynnic but as an american...this is theater. people already avoid a call to 911 because the subsequent ambulance service is unaffordable and can land

call me a cynnic but as an american...this is theater. people already avoid a call to 911 because the subsequent ambulance service is unaffordable and can land you in collections. they avoid the ER for the same reason. 988 assumes anyone who needs crisis care will be able to get it, or even afford it and the ecosystem of services and medications that may ensue. 988 gives, as amber alert did, a can for politicians to kick down the road and cheerlead.

Waterluvian 4y ago
I don’t disagree. But I’m not sure what alternative I have to hoping this might be the start of something. In Ontario an ambulance trip is about $40. But in the US it can be crippling.
- nimbius 4y ago
  healthcare reform, gun control, education reform and labor reform. these are all very hard, but adding a telco service is relatively easy. btw many is cities can barely keep their dispatch for 911 staffed.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    They are all very expensive, and so it is a political football of how to minimally fund them while also being able to say society is “offering” them.
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    > healthcare reform, gun control, education reform and labor reform One of these things is not like the others. There's no need for gun control once a society has implemented the other three; violence and suidice (with or without access to firearms) is a direct function of socioeconomic inequality - and I'm uncomfortable (to say the least) with disarming the very working class most impacted by said socioeconomic inequality at all, let alone before actually addressing that socioeconomic inequality.
    - nicoburns 4y ago
      > I'm uncomfortable (to say the least) with disarming the very working class most impacted by said socioeconomic inequality at all, let alone before actually addressing that socioeconomic inequality. Does that imply you'd support an armed insurrection? That seems pretty extreme! And if not, then why exactly do these people need guns?
      - stinkass 4y ago
        I would, if the right people were getting shot at. If it were realistic to hold them to account without killing them, guns might actually be unnecessary...unless you're hiking in griz country.
      - yellowapple 4y ago
        > Does that imply you'd support an armed insurrection? That seems pretty extreme! It implies that I support the right to self defense - including against an oppressive regime and the enforcers thereof. Specifically, it implies that I support the exercise of that right among the class of people typically excluded from it. Violence is the last resort, but it is a resort nonetheless. "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" -- Karl Marx "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell "A man's rights rest in three boxes. The ballot box, jury box and the cartridge box." -- Frederick Douglass > And if not, then why exactly do these people need guns? Because even when a government is not actively oppressing its people, it is demonstrably (with considerable regularity) incapable of protecting each and every one of its citizens from one another. Like the saying goes: when seconds count, the police are an hour away. Every person has the right to ensure one's own safety and security, even if their government can't or won't ensure it for them. And that's entirely ignoring things like non-combative use of firearms, like hunting or pest control or defense against predators or marksmanship or what have you. Quite frankly: the purpose for one's ownership of a firearm is the business of none but oneself.
        4y ago
- pigtailgirl 4y ago
  -- An ambulance in Ontario is $40 if you have OHIP - I know plenty of non-OHIP folks who have gotten hit with $200+ ambulance bills - myself included --
  - morelisp 4y ago
    My last ambulance trip in the US was billed at $12000. With my (good!) insurance I still had to pay $500.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      $500 for a specialized vehicle on demand 24/7 with somewhat trained workers who have to deal with undesirable work seems pretty good. Assuming that was under the deductible, so the ambulance provider did not get paid anything else, and $500 was the negotiated pricing for members of your insurance plan.
      - morelisp 4y ago
        [flagged]
      - freeflight 4y ago
        Would you also calculate the economics of privatized firefighters like that? Or are you at some point willing to admit that not everything should be a private, purely for profit/shareholder value, venture?
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I did not claim anything about what should or should not be subsidized by taxpayers. My comment was simply about the actual cost of providing ambulance services. The fact that the insurance company can negotiate the bill to $500 indicates what the real price is. The $12k number is just fantasy numbers that healthcare providers throw out to start the negotiation.
        4y ago
- JohnTHaller 4y ago
  An ambulance to come get me after I slipped on the ice and broke my leg took me about 3/4 of a mile to the hospital, providing no additional care en route, cost $975 about a decade ago here in NYC.

Waterluvian 4y ago

I don’t disagree. But I’m not sure what alternative I have to hoping this might be the start of something. In Ontario an ambulance trip is about $40. But in the US it can be crippling.

nimbius 4y ago
healthcare reform, gun control, education reform and labor reform. these are all very hard, but adding a telco service is relatively easy. btw many is cities can barely keep their dispatch for 911 staffed.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  They are all very expensive, and so it is a political football of how to minimally fund them while also being able to say society is “offering” them.
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > healthcare reform, gun control, education reform and labor reform One of these things is not like the others. There's no need for gun control once a society has implemented the other three; violence and suidice (with or without access to firearms) is a direct function of socioeconomic inequality - and I'm uncomfortable (to say the least) with disarming the very working class most impacted by said socioeconomic inequality at all, let alone before actually addressing that socioeconomic inequality.
  - nicoburns 4y ago
    > I'm uncomfortable (to say the least) with disarming the very working class most impacted by said socioeconomic inequality at all, let alone before actually addressing that socioeconomic inequality. Does that imply you'd support an armed insurrection? That seems pretty extreme! And if not, then why exactly do these people need guns?
    - stinkass 4y ago
      I would, if the right people were getting shot at. If it were realistic to hold them to account without killing them, guns might actually be unnecessary...unless you're hiking in griz country.
    - yellowapple 4y ago
      > Does that imply you'd support an armed insurrection? That seems pretty extreme! It implies that I support the right to self defense - including against an oppressive regime and the enforcers thereof. Specifically, it implies that I support the exercise of that right among the class of people typically excluded from it. Violence is the last resort, but it is a resort nonetheless. "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" -- Karl Marx "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell "A man's rights rest in three boxes. The ballot box, jury box and the cartridge box." -- Frederick Douglass > And if not, then why exactly do these people need guns? Because even when a government is not actively oppressing its people, it is demonstrably (with considerable regularity) incapable of protecting each and every one of its citizens from one another. Like the saying goes: when seconds count, the police are an hour away. Every person has the right to ensure one's own safety and security, even if their government can't or won't ensure it for them. And that's entirely ignoring things like non-combative use of firearms, like hunting or pest control or defense against predators or marksmanship or what have you. Quite frankly: the purpose for one's ownership of a firearm is the business of none but oneself.
      - 4y ago
pigtailgirl 4y ago
-- An ambulance in Ontario is $40 if you have OHIP - I know plenty of non-OHIP folks who have gotten hit with $200+ ambulance bills - myself included --
- morelisp 4y ago
  My last ambulance trip in the US was billed at $12000. With my (good!) insurance I still had to pay $500.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    $500 for a specialized vehicle on demand 24/7 with somewhat trained workers who have to deal with undesirable work seems pretty good. Assuming that was under the deductible, so the ambulance provider did not get paid anything else, and $500 was the negotiated pricing for members of your insurance plan.
    - morelisp 4y ago
      [flagged]
    - freeflight 4y ago
      Would you also calculate the economics of privatized firefighters like that? Or are you at some point willing to admit that not everything should be a private, purely for profit/shareholder value, venture?
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I did not claim anything about what should or should not be subsidized by taxpayers. My comment was simply about the actual cost of providing ambulance services. The fact that the insurance company can negotiate the bill to $500 indicates what the real price is. The $12k number is just fantasy numbers that healthcare providers throw out to start the negotiation.
        4y ago
JohnTHaller 4y ago
An ambulance to come get me after I slipped on the ice and broke my leg took me about 3/4 of a mile to the hospital, providing no additional care en route, cost $975 about a decade ago here in NYC.