3 ms·

> And the actually sick people who have something they can get sued for are terrified to go because now they have to subsidize all the bad actors and they get g

> And the actually sick people who have something they can get sued for are terrified to go because now they have to subsidize all the bad actors and they get gutted to do so Or maybe they are dealing with hospital staff being openly hostile to them and calling them "hood rats" and claiming they are just there with STDs and the flu? > they have to subsidize all the bad actors You're right, we are all subsidizing the health insurance and private medical industry. The problem you describe "People go to the ER because they are uninsured while working" isn't a problem with people being lazy terrible people, it's a problem with the entire US healthcare which binds insurance and healthcare to employment. You want to make the whole thing cheaper and more efficient? Then nationalize health insurance either by expanding medicare or medicaid to everyone (I prefer medicare). Then you won't see these "hood rats" using the ER for more minor medical issues because they can simply afford to go to a clinic instead.

mothballed 1y ago
[flagged]
- vel0city 1y ago
  > when it is heard the real reasons why ER is broken from people that worked there You're confusing the symptom and the reason. The symptom is the ERs are flooded with non-emergency care. The reason is because they have nowhere else to go. The solution is to give them somewhere else to go, i.e. give them actual primary care doctors and regular clinics instead of having their only option be going to ERs. And FWIW, I personally don't like dehumanizing language, comparing people trying to get help to vermin.
  - mothballed 1y ago
    You're confusing the symptom and the reason. The symptom is that emergent cases are getting worse care. The reason is that non-emergent cases go to the ER even when it is known apriori the case is non-emergent. The solution is to disincentive non-emergent cases from going to the ER when it is known apriori they are non-emergent. How you actually accomplish that could be violence (use IRS men with guns to fund PCPs by taking away money from someone else they could have used on necessities as we currently do in social security), it could be charity (monetary or labor donations for medical services), or it could be finding ways to make people pay for abusing the ER system, or it could be deregulating health care so it's cheaper. There are lots of ways to implement the solution but your comment presents a false premise it's the only choice.
    - vel0city 1y ago
      Your reason here is the exact same as mine. Non-emergency cases go to the ER because they have nowhere else to go to deal with their needs. Your symptom is mostly just a rephrasing of my same symptom. ERs are flooded and have worse outcomes overall because of the crowding of non-emergency cases. So no, I don't think I'm confusing anything. And in the end, sure. I only gave one potential solution to "give them somewhere else to go", but in the end the solution is still to have them go somewhere else regardless of how we accomplish that. I personally think providing "free" primary care is one of the better ones. Seems like the charity route isn't working out well enough. You're not going to get people with nearly no money to "pay for abusing the ER system" unless you're talking about jailing people (rats according to you) just trying to access the only point of healthcare they have access to. While you might make some healthcare a bit cheaper with deregulation you'll probably still have crowds of people unable to afford it and you might also end up with a lot of other worse outcomes depending on the regulations you cut. Looking around the globe, it seems like funding primary care for all usually leads to the best outcome for society overall and would do a ton to reduce the reason we both agree leads to bad outcomes in ERs. We're already paying for their primary care, we're just paying for it in the least efficient manner. Its not really new money we'll have to find. Far cheaper for them to just stroll into a regular clinic and get these services than have them use up precious and expensive ER resources.
- cogman10 1y ago
  > Why are you so hostile in tone to the truth? Because it's not truth and because my family has been personally affected by this attitude. My wife went in several months to an urgent care with blood in her urine. They ran cultures that kept coming back negative. Didn't matter, antibiotics and she was told she needed to wash more thoroughly while being offered a doctor's note to get out of work each time. Eventually, they decided "hey, you are coming in here a lot, go to the ER and check to see if it's something else". So we did. Even there, she was treated as a "hood rat" (want to guess her skin color). They did a CT anyways and kidney cancer. We had her kidney removed as it was too big to salvage and unfortunately it ended up metastasizing to her liver. So, sorry of I'm hostile to someone "speaking truth" about "hood rats".
  - mothballed 1y ago
    You just contrived your sob story to falsely fit a narrative I didn't portray. Cancer isn't considered an STD and it's not the flu, and your wife was victimized by the very people I'm describing that wasted ER resources.
    - cogman10 1y ago
      Yeah, no way you can face that your terrible attitude has almost certainly hurt people like my wife. That's never your fault is it. The story isn't contrived or a sob story. We are in the middle of immuno and chemo therapies. You asked why I'm hostile, that's why and it's the truth.
      - mothballed 1y ago
        You called me a liar, how's it feal? >Yeah, no way you can face that your terrible attitude has almost certainly hurt people like my wife Lol, go work in an ER then and put your money where your mouth is. Show everyone how you're better. Pretty soon you'll know the truth too. No one is angry about someone with a fucking doctor referral showing up to the ER and then being found to have cancer using resources for that and it's "contrived" to try and fit that into the bucket I portrayed.

mothballed 1y ago

[flagged]

vel0city 1y ago
> when it is heard the real reasons why ER is broken from people that worked there You're confusing the symptom and the reason. The symptom is the ERs are flooded with non-emergency care. The reason is because they have nowhere else to go. The solution is to give them somewhere else to go, i.e. give them actual primary care doctors and regular clinics instead of having their only option be going to ERs. And FWIW, I personally don't like dehumanizing language, comparing people trying to get help to vermin.
- mothballed 1y ago
  You're confusing the symptom and the reason. The symptom is that emergent cases are getting worse care. The reason is that non-emergent cases go to the ER even when it is known apriori the case is non-emergent. The solution is to disincentive non-emergent cases from going to the ER when it is known apriori they are non-emergent. How you actually accomplish that could be violence (use IRS men with guns to fund PCPs by taking away money from someone else they could have used on necessities as we currently do in social security), it could be charity (monetary or labor donations for medical services), or it could be finding ways to make people pay for abusing the ER system, or it could be deregulating health care so it's cheaper. There are lots of ways to implement the solution but your comment presents a false premise it's the only choice.
  - vel0city 1y ago
    Your reason here is the exact same as mine. Non-emergency cases go to the ER because they have nowhere else to go to deal with their needs. Your symptom is mostly just a rephrasing of my same symptom. ERs are flooded and have worse outcomes overall because of the crowding of non-emergency cases. So no, I don't think I'm confusing anything. And in the end, sure. I only gave one potential solution to "give them somewhere else to go", but in the end the solution is still to have them go somewhere else regardless of how we accomplish that. I personally think providing "free" primary care is one of the better ones. Seems like the charity route isn't working out well enough. You're not going to get people with nearly no money to "pay for abusing the ER system" unless you're talking about jailing people (rats according to you) just trying to access the only point of healthcare they have access to. While you might make some healthcare a bit cheaper with deregulation you'll probably still have crowds of people unable to afford it and you might also end up with a lot of other worse outcomes depending on the regulations you cut. Looking around the globe, it seems like funding primary care for all usually leads to the best outcome for society overall and would do a ton to reduce the reason we both agree leads to bad outcomes in ERs. We're already paying for their primary care, we're just paying for it in the least efficient manner. Its not really new money we'll have to find. Far cheaper for them to just stroll into a regular clinic and get these services than have them use up precious and expensive ER resources.
cogman10 1y ago
> Why are you so hostile in tone to the truth? Because it's not truth and because my family has been personally affected by this attitude. My wife went in several months to an urgent care with blood in her urine. They ran cultures that kept coming back negative. Didn't matter, antibiotics and she was told she needed to wash more thoroughly while being offered a doctor's note to get out of work each time. Eventually, they decided "hey, you are coming in here a lot, go to the ER and check to see if it's something else". So we did. Even there, she was treated as a "hood rat" (want to guess her skin color). They did a CT anyways and kidney cancer. We had her kidney removed as it was too big to salvage and unfortunately it ended up metastasizing to her liver. So, sorry of I'm hostile to someone "speaking truth" about "hood rats".
- mothballed 1y ago
  You just contrived your sob story to falsely fit a narrative I didn't portray. Cancer isn't considered an STD and it's not the flu, and your wife was victimized by the very people I'm describing that wasted ER resources.
  - cogman10 1y ago
    Yeah, no way you can face that your terrible attitude has almost certainly hurt people like my wife. That's never your fault is it. The story isn't contrived or a sob story. We are in the middle of immuno and chemo therapies. You asked why I'm hostile, that's why and it's the truth.
    - mothballed 1y ago
      You called me a liar, how's it feal? >Yeah, no way you can face that your terrible attitude has almost certainly hurt people like my wife Lol, go work in an ER then and put your money where your mouth is. Show everyone how you're better. Pretty soon you'll know the truth too. No one is angry about someone with a fucking doctor referral showing up to the ER and then being found to have cancer using resources for that and it's "contrived" to try and fit that into the bucket I portrayed.