Walmart wants to become a healthcare service provider

Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Walmart wants to become a healthcare service provider

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/walmart-medical-services-primary-care-shortage_n_1084335.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Caim%7Cdl...

Any opinions on this? Good, bad, don't care? My first thought was to just think "Walmart" and "Healthcare" in the same sentence = just plain wrong! But does anyone think this would help people find more affordable access to doctors?

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Recovering fundamentalist

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/walmart-medical-services-primary-care-shortage_n_1084335.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Caim%7Cdl...

Any opinions on this? Good, bad, don't care? My first thought was to just think "Walmart" and "Healthcare" in the same sentence = just plain wrong! But does anyone think this would help people find more affordable access to doctors?

 

Yes it would. It has in states that allow CVS to run their stores. You can get basic services from a minute clinic much faster than at a doctor and for less than $100, what most doctors charge just for walking in the door. http://www.minuteclinic.com/services/minorillness/ It is my understanding that they have one MD on staff but nurse practitioners and physician assistants provide most of the care. 

 

The basic idea is that there are a lot of medical services that don't require a super experienced doctor or a full fledged medical facility. For example, most people have a pretty good idea if they have strep throat or an ear infection. You don't need a doctor to tell you that you have what you know you have. You can go into the minute clinic, get tested and get your medication in a fraction of the time and significantly cheaper than going to a doctor for the same test. The added benefit is that the doctor has one less minor problem to deal with and can devote more time to patients with more serious issues.

 

If Walmart were to get involved I would predict that prices for this type of basic medical care would get even cheaper. Right now, CVS doesn't have much competition and I'm sure there is plenty of cushion in their prices. If you or your kid has an ear infection and you had three choices doctor, CVS or Walmart your probably going wherever is cheaper. Walmart and CVS will compete for your business by trying to be quicker or cheaper than the other.

 

It is such a good idea, I'm sure it is only a matter of time before the federal government outlaws it.

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10338
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is onlineOnline
It probably would, in the

It probably would, in the US. But thats one of the only places it would. It wouldn't if you had a decent health system.

The danger is that they'll run into false diagnosis legal trouble. It is inevitable that the low quality services they'll offer in order to keep a low price will result in injury or death. But for the average person the risks would be negligible, and cheap health care is something a great many people down there need access to, so it will certainly take off.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: It is

Beyond Saving wrote:

 

It is such a good idea, I'm sure it is only a matter of time before the federal government outlaws it.

One thing that seems to be very consistent throughout my lifetime is: If it ain't broke, the federal government will break it for you.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/walmart-medical-services-primary-care-shortage_n_1084335.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Caim%7Cdl...

Any opinions on this? Good, bad, don't care? My first thought was to just think "Walmart" and "Healthcare" in the same sentence = just plain wrong! But does anyone think this would help people find more affordable access to doctors?

 

Yes it would. It has in states that allow CVS to run their stores. You can get basic services from a minute clinic much faster than at a doctor and for less than $100, what most doctors charge just for walking in the door. http://www.minuteclinic.com/services/minorillness/ It is my understanding that they have one MD on staff but nurse practitioners and physician assistants provide most of the care. 

 

The basic idea is that there are a lot of medical services that don't require a super experienced doctor or a full fledged medical facility. For example, most people have a pretty good idea if they have strep throat or an ear infection. You don't need a doctor to tell you that you have what you know you have. You can go into the minute clinic, get tested and get your medication in a fraction of the time and significantly cheaper than going to a doctor for the same test. The added benefit is that the doctor has one less minor problem to deal with and can devote more time to patients with more serious issues.

 

If Walmart were to get involved I would predict that prices for this type of basic medical care would get even cheaper. Right now, CVS doesn't have much competition and I'm sure there is plenty of cushion in their prices. If you or your kid has an ear infection and you had three choices doctor, CVS or Walmart your probably going wherever is cheaper. Walmart and CVS will compete for your business by trying to be quicker or cheaper than the other.

 

It is such a good idea, I'm sure it is only a matter of time before the federal government outlaws it.

I can see where it would work unless you were a Wal-Mart employee. Then they'd deny you service

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/walmart-medical-services-primary-care-shortage_n_1084335.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Caim%7Cdl...

Any opinions on this? Good, bad, don't care? My first thought was to just think "Walmart" and "Healthcare" in the same sentence = just plain wrong! But does anyone think this would help people find more affordable access to doctors?

 

Yes it would. It has in states that allow CVS to run their stores. You can get basic services from a minute clinic much faster than at a doctor and for less than $100, what most doctors charge just for walking in the door. http://www.minuteclinic.com/services/minorillness/ It is my understanding that they have one MD on staff but nurse practitioners and physician assistants provide most of the care. 

 

The basic idea is that there are a lot of medical services that don't require a super experienced doctor or a full fledged medical facility. For example, most people have a pretty good idea if they have strep throat or an ear infection. You don't need a doctor to tell you that you have what you know you have. You can go into the minute clinic, get tested and get your medication in a fraction of the time and significantly cheaper than going to a doctor for the same test. The added benefit is that the doctor has one less minor problem to deal with and can devote more time to patients with more serious issues.

 

If Walmart were to get involved I would predict that prices for this type of basic medical care would get even cheaper. Right now, CVS doesn't have much competition and I'm sure there is plenty of cushion in their prices. If you or your kid has an ear infection and you had three choices doctor, CVS or Walmart your probably going wherever is cheaper. Walmart and CVS will compete for your business by trying to be quicker or cheaper than the other.

 

It is such a good idea, I'm sure it is only a matter of time before the federal government outlaws it.

You suck the dick of the private sector as an absolute solution to everything, and considering what it has done to our economy is laughable to say Wal Mart would give one shit about what someone pays  for health care. They are out to do one thing and one thing only, make a profit. If I actually believed they truly cared about health care, I'd agree with you. But considering their history of buying off counties and city councils to kick people off their land to build a Wal Mart there, you are out of your fucking mind.

Health care should be free and universal. You sell this bullshit utopia that the private sector can never go off the rails. The banks, car companies, insurance monopolies, AND Wal Mart kicking people out of their houses to get the land. NUTS JUST PLAIN NUTS.

The private sector is needed, but under our current conditions and the corporate climate I wouldn't trust them with scooping up dog shit. Unless oversight and anti-trust laws kick in like they should, there is no reason to trust ANY ENTITY.

But I am sick of your bullshit utopia that the private sector can never screw anyone over. The last entity I would trust is the bully Wal Mart with a basic human necessity.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:You suck the

Brian37 wrote:

You suck the dick of the private sector as an absolute solution to everything, and considering what it has done to our economy is laughable to say Wal Mart would give one shit about what someone pays  for health care. They are out to do one thing and one thing only, make a profit. If I actually believed they truly cared about health care, I'd agree with you. 

I never said Walmart gives a shit about what you pay for healthcare. Their goal is to make a profit. The way Walmart has historically made a profit is by attracting a high volume of consumers by offering below average prices on many of their products. So, it is probable that it would take the same approach to healthcare that it does for everything else- attempt to undercut its competition by offering a lower price. 

 

I have news for you, odds are the doctor in the emergency room doesn't truly care about you. If you die, he or she might be upset that they were unable to help you, but they will go on living their lives and probably won't remember your name next week. I don't really give a shit if my doctor cares about me, I simply want them to care about doing their job as best they can. Give me Dr. House over any doctor who is going to give me a load of crap trying to make me believe they care personally about me. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Health care should be free and universal. You sell this bullshit utopia that the private sector can never go off the rails.

Why should healthcare be "free"? And you accuse me of living in a utopia. Nothing is free without slave labor, it is simply a question of who pays for it. If healthcare should be free, what about food? Shelter? Clothing? Cars? Tv's? Why or why not? Where do you draw the line? 

 

Brian37 wrote:

The banks, car companies, insurance monopolies, AND Wal Mart kicking people out of their houses to get the land. NUTS JUST PLAIN NUTS.

Completely separate issue. I am 100% against eminent domain, even when used by the government for a school and when it is used by a private company, it is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court disagreed with me because of all those fucking big government judges that have no respect for the Constitution. But that has no relation to whether or not Walmart offering medical services is a positive thing.

 

Brian37 wrote:

The private sector is needed, but under our current conditions and the corporate climate I wouldn't trust them with scooping up dog shit. Unless oversight and anti-trust laws kick in like they should, there is no reason to trust ANY ENTITY.

But I am sick of your bullshit utopia that the private sector can never screw anyone over. The last entity I would trust is the bully Wal Mart with a basic human necessity.

 

Then don't go to Walmart, no one will force you to. For those who don't share your blind hatred, Walmart might be able to provide them essential services at a lower price than their other options. I think that would be a positive thing for many people who are on a tight budget and need these types of services. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

You suck the dick of the private sector as an absolute solution to everything, and considering what it has done to our economy is laughable to say Wal Mart would give one shit about what someone pays  for health care. They are out to do one thing and one thing only, make a profit. If I actually believed they truly cared about health care, I'd agree with you. 

I never said Walmart gives a shit about what you pay for healthcare. Their goal is to make a profit. The way Walmart has historically made a profit is by attracting a high volume of consumers by offering below average prices on many of their products. So, it is probable that it would take the same approach to healthcare that it does for everything else- attempt to undercut its competition by offering a lower price. 

 

I have news for you, odds are the doctor in the emergency room doesn't truly care about you. If you die, he or she might be upset that they were unable to help you, but they will go on living their lives and probably won't remember your name next week. I don't really give a shit if my doctor cares about me, I simply want them to care about doing their job as best they can. Give me Dr. House over any doctor who is going to give me a load of crap trying to make me believe they care personally about me. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

Health care should be free and universal. You sell this bullshit utopia that the private sector can never go off the rails.

Why should healthcare be "free"? And you accuse me of living in a utopia. Nothing is free without slave labor, it is simply a question of who pays for it. If healthcare should be free, what about food? Shelter? Clothing? Cars? Tv's? Why or why not? Where do you draw the line? 

 

Brian37 wrote:

The banks, car companies, insurance monopolies, AND Wal Mart kicking people out of their houses to get the land. NUTS JUST PLAIN NUTS.

Completely separate issue. I am 100% against eminent domain, even when used by the government for a school and when it is used by a private company, it is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court disagreed with me because of all those fucking big government judges that have no respect for the Constitution. But that has no relation to whether or not Walmart offering medical services is a positive thing.

 

Brian37 wrote:

The private sector is needed, but under our current conditions and the corporate climate I wouldn't trust them with scooping up dog shit. Unless oversight and anti-trust laws kick in like they should, there is no reason to trust ANY ENTITY.

But I am sick of your bullshit utopia that the private sector can never screw anyone over. The last entity I would trust is the bully Wal Mart with a basic human necessity.

 

Then don't go to Walmart, no one will force you to. For those who don't share your blind hatred, Walmart might be able to provide them essential services at a lower price than their other options. I think that would be a positive thing for many people who are on a tight budget and need these types of services. 

"Bind hatred"? No, unlike you I have not been asleep for the past 30 years. This is not just about Wal Mart, this is about an entire extraction market climate  because of attitudes like yours. Wal Mart happens to be one of the bigger monsters, but not the only one.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:"Bind hatred"?

Brian37 wrote:

"Bind hatred"? No, unlike you I have not been asleep for the past 30 years. This is not just about Wal Mart, this is about an entire extraction market climate  because of attitudes like yours. Wal Mart happens to be one of the bigger monsters, but not the only one.

Ok, correction accepted, you don't just have blind hatred towards Walmart but most every other corporation in existence except those owned by Warren Buffett. Who cares if you like them? No one is going to force you to get medical care through Walmart or CVS or anywhere else. You can go to whatever doctor you want, anywhere you want, at least until the government says you can't. 

 

I'm sure there is some MD out there who shares your far left ideology, I'm not going to stop you from rewarding that person with your business if you so choose. Meanwhile, Walmart and CVS can provide people of modest means medical care at a lower cost. That is good. You go to the medical facility you want, everyone else goes to the medical facility they want, where is your problem with that?

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

"Bind hatred"? No, unlike you I have not been asleep for the past 30 years. This is not just about Wal Mart, this is about an entire extraction market climate  because of attitudes like yours. Wal Mart happens to be one of the bigger monsters, but not the only one.

Ok, correction accepted, you don't just have blind hatred towards Walmart but most every other corporation in existence except those owned by Warren Buffett. Who cares if you like them? No one is going to force you to get medical care through Walmart or CVS or anywhere else. You can go to whatever doctor you want, anywhere you want, at least until the government says you can't. 

 

I'm sure there is some MD out there who shares your far left ideology, I'm not going to stop you from rewarding that person with your business if you so choose. Meanwhile, Walmart and CVS can provide people of modest means medical care at a lower cost. That is good. You go to the medical facility you want, everyone else goes to the medical facility they want, where is your problem with that?

In a rigged market it doesn't matter where you go, BUT, you are right, if more people did what that lady did to Bank of America and the following movement to move to smaller banks, then yea, going somewhere else could work. I even saw a local add to buy at local small businesses on black Friday, If that type of movement grows then your mindset types will be defeated and the monopoly bullies at the top will have to change their tune, But as of now, the buyer needs more numbers and more force(wallet and voice)

Take a good look at what is going on around the world. Your attitude wont win long term. Making a buck is one thing, building an extraction market wont last.

But medical care, that should be universal. And the thought of Wal Mart running a health care system is scary. It is bad enough in the insurance industry that a guy in a cubical decides what care you get, not to mention the cost and the monopolies. I would hate to think what Wal Mart would do long term,

And stop accusing me of hating wealth or the open market. I think you simply cannot stand that people are standing up to the abuse of the market because your side has been so used to getting everything they want as far as law making. That is what set up our collapse. Pointing that out does not make me a "lefty".

If you are going to masturbate over how great the open market is, then don't bitch when others challenge you. Part of the free market is the ability to criticize it. I think you only like free speech and the open market when it benefits you.

Keep sucking up to the monopoly whores. I hate to tell you this, you ARE out numbered and you will be defeated. This is not China, or India.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:In a rigged

Brian37 wrote:

In a rigged market it doesn't matter where you go, BUT, you are right, if more people did what that lady did to Bank of America and the following movement to move to smaller banks, then yea, going somewhere else could work. I even saw a local add to buy at local small businesses on black Friday, If that type of movement grows then your mindset types will be defeated and the monopoly bullies at the top will have to change their tune, But as of now, the buyer needs more numbers and more force(wallet and voice)

And as demonstrated by BOA the customer holds the ultimate power. The fact is a lot of people like to shop at Walmart. You don't. That is fine, those who like it will go there, those who don't go elsewhere. How is that "rigged"?

 

Brian37 wrote:

But medical care, that should be universal.

Why? Should everything else be universal too? 

 

Brian37 wrote:

And the thought of Wal Mart running a health care system is scary. It is bad enough in the insurance industry that a guy in a cubical decides what care you get, not to mention the cost and the monopolies. I would hate to think what Wal Mart would do long term,

What is Walmart doing other than expanding your options? If anything it is an anti-monopoly force in the medical industry as it is increasing the number of competitors. Monopoly means exclusive possession or control of the supply of a commodity or service. Where is the monopoly? And it what world does increasing the number of providers increase the likelihood of a monopoly? 

 

Brian37 wrote:
 

And stop accusing me of hating wealth or the open market. I think you simply cannot stand that people are standing up to the abuse of the market because your side has been so used to getting everything they want as far as law making. That is what set up our collapse. Pointing that out does not make me a "lefty".

I don't know what makes you a lefty but you are one. No sense in denying it. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

If you are going to masturbate over how great the open market is, then don't bitch when others challenge you. Part of the free market is the ability to criticize it. I think you only like free speech and the open market when it benefits you.

 

Show me one instance where I challenged anyone's right to free speech or where I argued against an open market. I think on both of those issues I have been extremely consistent. It would be nice if you addressed what I'm saying for once instead of making shit up about what I supposedly said. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Why

Beyond Saving wrote:

Why should healthcare be "free"? If healthcare should be free, what about food? Shelter? Clothing? Cars? Tv's? Why or why not? Where do you draw the line? 

I think you draw the line at ensuring that all necessities to live a long and healthy life are available in such a manner as to be affordable for all.  We should all be fighting for that.  We can't accept a system that kills people because they can't afford to live.  Republicans make up fake Obama death panels in their political schemes and where is anyone to argue that we already are allowing our citizens to be killed by how expensive healthcare is in this country.

Food? We don't need free food as it is still affordable.  However there are plenty of places around the world that do need food, and we provide it to them.... so there was no line drawn at food.  $5 dinner... $300,000 major surgery.

Shelter?  We do in fact do quite a bit to keep our citizens in shelters if they are without home.  In areas where there isn't room for them in a shelter, they are often given food.  The system isn't perfect, it could use more money.    

Clothing? There is free clothing available to those who need it.  They don't get brand new gucci, but it's out there.  Humans have always been willing to donate their goods to others when in need, and we must hope for this to continue, we must lead by example.  It is good as a rule to give to those in need.  You probably have several thrift stores or churches in your areas that have low cost clothing from donations.  $1 shirts... $20,000 cancer treatment.  

Cars? Have already received government subsidies in many fashions.  And some of those have been for the purpose of keeping cars affordable... just as should be done with healthcare.  $5,000 used car you own for 3 years... $5,000 prescription meds you get in one month.

TVs? TV is not a necessity for life.  $300 TV.... random accident with no health insurance $2,000-$10,000

 

I have no health insurance.  Instead I live my life avoiding any risky situation, to avoid potential hazards.  Sometimes I don't want to be missing out on whatever it is I'm missing... but I can't afford for anything to happen to me.  I went to the doctors 3 years ago for a prescription for a bad cold, otherwise I don't go.  I pay for the flu shot every year since then to save me from missing work, as I couldn't afford that.  I "invested" in Lasik recently to save the long term costs of my prescription glass and contacts.  That was about $700 per year.  I used to get headaches from the vision problems I had looking through scratched lenses, but not wanting to spend the money on the expensive glasses to be replaced every 3 months ($200) ensured I had lots of headaches.  

 

If we make anything happen on healthcare in the next 5 years with democratic control all we can hope for is AFFORDABLE or FREE healtcare for all.  Yes... the rich have to pay more to help support the poorest.  It makes us stronger as a society and therefore the rich get something for their money.  We don't work alone, we function as a whole, the wealthy want to give their money... stop protecting it in exchange for campaign donations.  Fucking treasonous assholes.

I think the word "affordable" really needs to be added to the conversation.

Just 12 days ago a little progress was made there.  Clinics are popping up everywhere, the need to be supported as much as possible.

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Beyond Saving

Sapient wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Why should healthcare be "free"? If healthcare should be free, what about food? Shelter? Clothing? Cars? Tv's? Why or why not? Where do you draw the line? 

I think you draw the line at ensuring that all necessities to live a long and healthy life are available in such a manner as to be affordable for all.  We should all be fighting for that.  We can't accept a system that kills people because they can't afford to live.  Republicans make up fake Obama death panels in their political schemes and where is anyone to argue that we already are allowing our citizens to be killed by how expensive healthcare is in this country.

The death panels are fake in the sense that people with money will always be able to pay a doctor to treat them. I'm not really worried about me, if worse comes to wrose I pay cash and get the best treatment available. When I was in the military, the government simply decided that my condition was too expensive to treat and refused to pay, I was tossed out of the military with no job, no health insurance. I can easily envision that anyone who relies on government to pay for their healthcare could run into a similar problem of their own. If you rely on others for charity you put yourself at their mercy and the governments capacity for mercy extends only as far as your vote. It is already happening with medicare where the government has substantially cut its payments to providers and some are starting to refuse to treat medicare patients. 

 

Sapient wrote:

Food? We don't need free food as it is still affordable.  However there are plenty of places around the world that do need food, and we provide it to them.... so there was no line drawn at food.  $5 dinner... $300,000 major surgery.

Shelter?  We do in fact do quite a bit to keep our citizens in shelters if they are without home.  In areas where there isn't room for them in a shelter, they are often given food.  The system isn't perfect, it could use more money.    

Clothing? There is free clothing available to those who need it.  They don't get brand new gucci, but it's out there.  Humans have always been willing to donate their goods to others when in need, and we must hope for this to continue, we must lead by example.  It is good as a rule to give to those in need.  You probably have several thrift stores or churches in your areas that have low cost clothing from donations.  $1 shirts... $20,000 cancer treatment.  

Cars? Have already received government subsidies in many fashions.  And some of those have been for the purpose of keeping cars affordable... just as should be done with healthcare.  $5,000 used car you own for 3 years... $5,000 prescription meds you get in one month.

TVs? TV is not a necessity for life.  $300 TV.... random accident with no health insurance $2,000-$10,000

 

And why can't medical care be treated as similar to all of those? Allow the free market to work and offer charity solely to those who absolutely need it. There is a certain percentage of people who will need charity because of mistakes and a certain percentage who are simply incapable of taking care of themselves. The current debate over medical care is not talking about what to do with those people, for the most part they already qualify for medicaid. Most of the uninsured we talk about are people who could afford it, but choose not to be. Which is a legitimate choice. 

 

There are two very good reasons to be uninsured. First if you have a lot of accessibility to cash. Insurance is by definition more expensive than your expected average costs, so if you can afford to pay for any emergency with cash, skipping insurance will statistically be a better option. The second is if you have no assets. Insurance solely protects you on the financial side. If you owe a gigantic medical bill but have no cash and no assets you can simply declare bankruptcy and go on with your life. If you have assets, you risk losing them so you should have insurance to protect them. I think that is where the whole health care debate goes off track, health insurance is solely about the financial aspects. No American goes without healthcare, if you need vital services you can get them, the services you get without money are not as good as those you get with money, but the food you get at the food shelf doesn't include crab cakes and caviar either. 

 

Sapient wrote:
 

If we make anything happen on healthcare in the next 5 years with democratic control all we can hope for is AFFORDABLE or FREE healtcare for all.  Yes... the rich have to pay more to help support the poorest.  It makes us stronger as a society and therefore the rich get something for their money.  We don't work alone, we function as a whole, the wealthy want to give their money... stop protecting it in exchange for campaign donations.  Fucking treasonous assholes.

I think the word "affordable" really needs to be added to the conversation.

Just 12 days ago a little progress was made there.  Clinics are popping up everywhere, the need to be supported as much as possible.

That looks like a private charity right? I am a gigantic supporter of private charities. I wish more were around and I really fear that the government has a suppressing affect on private charity. All the money that is spent on political campaigns (Obama is expecting $1 billion this year) would be far better spent on private charities. I used to raise money for republican candidates, and I am sorry- I was a young stupid idealist. It was a significant waste of time on my part and a waste of money for all the people who's arms I twisted. I think that by far the best way to truly help those who need a hand is through private charities. Government is simply inefficient and most of the money will find its way into the pockets of people who don't need it instead of those who do. If you want to help local people who can't afford medical care, cut a check to the people themselves. The more middle-men in the way, the less money gets to those who really need/deserve it.

 

And back to the OP, I don't see how Walmart entering the field does anything other than make medical care more affordable for more people. No doubt, Walmart will offer the services at a significantly reduced price from your average doctor. Now I wouldn't trust Walmart with any serious medical issues as low quality generally goes along with low price, but for basic services I can see it as a convenient and cheap option. 

 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Renee Obsidianwords
High Level DonorModeratorRRS local affiliateSilver Member
Renee Obsidianwords's picture
Posts: 1388
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
I believe they should give

I believe they should give it a shot ~ they already have eye care available at many of their locations ~ it would give people a choice. 

Now of course my first thought when I read about this was ~ oh, they will be experts on treating herpes and obesity-triggered issues..of course that is just my sick sense of humor and "People of WalMart" pictures   Smiling

 

Slowly building a blog at ~

http://obsidianwords.wordpress.com/


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:And why

Beyond Saving wrote:

And why can't medical care be treated as similar to all of those? Allow the free market to work and offer charity solely to those who absolutely need it.

The difference is the significant costs associated with healthcare compared to all the others.  

What I didn't cover is my belief that through better education we can help drive those costs down.  I believe we must have affordable healthcare, that right now at this moment it could get subsidized with taxes on the 10%.  But that a significant contribution to education could drive health care costs down and over time that could tip the balance in how those programs are paid for.   

 

Quote:
That looks like a private charity right?

Actually I thought it was local government but it might be charity.

 

Quote:
I am a gigantic supporter of private charities. I wish more were around and I really fear that the government has a suppressing affect on private charity.

Probably why you support RRS. Eye-wink

 

Quote:
All the money that is spent on political campaigns (Obama is expecting $1 billion this year) would be far better spent on private charities.

Agreed.

 

Quote:
And back to the OP, I don't see how Walmart entering the field does anything other than make medical care more affordable for more people. No doubt, Walmart will offer the services at a significantly reduced price from your average doctor. Now I wouldn't trust Walmart with any serious medical issues as low quality generally goes along with low price, but for basic services I can see it as a convenient and cheap option.

I agree with that as well.  I do think health care costs need to come down.  I think businesses should be heavily rewarded for bringing part timers on just to give them access to group health insurance and benefits.  We need to change our thinking.  I work with 5 other part timers that all get 30 hours and one of those guys sucks.  He should be fired and we would have 4 full timers with benefits, but the company would never do that to avoid helping on benefits.  

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:They are out

Brian37 wrote:

They are out to do one thing and one thing only, make a profit.

Oh, so you work for free. How generous of you to be a non-profit.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 http://www.monroecountyfhc.

 

http://www.monroecountyfhc.org/index2.php

 I looked a little more into the Monroe County Family Health Center. It is a 501(c)3, I was unable to determine if the local government pitches in at all or if it is 100% paid for by private donations. They do state on their webpage that they received "generous support" from the Pocono Health System so I get the impression that it is an offshoot from them, it is apparently right across the street. Thanks for bringing it to my attention I think organizations like this should be encouraged.

 

 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
There was a sliding scale

There was a sliding scale pay clinic on the news recently and I've misplaced the link, but there are a lot of them springing up.

I love the idea.  They need to expand the care they can offer though.  Currently you'd have a hard time getting them to help you if you got cancer.  They handle smaller issues.  

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.