You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #14: Yes they are required to provide emergency care - by LAW [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-25-10 06:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Yes they are required to provide emergency care - by LAW
and that is the reason so many are closing their Emergency room care
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Can Congress Make You Buy Broccoli? And Why That?s a Hard Question eridani  Dec-25-10 02:37 AM   #0 
  - at least i could afford to buy broccoli. n/t  orleans   Dec-25-10 03:03 AM   #1 
  - for now...  ixion   Dec-25-10 05:43 AM   #9 
  - can congress require a business to provide services free?  greymattermom   Dec-25-10 03:42 AM   #2 
  - The money for hospitals has to go through insurance companies because why? n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 03:48 AM   #3 
  - Yes they are required to provide emergency care - by LAW  FreakinDJ   Dec-25-10 06:54 AM   #14 
  - Mentioning yet another flaw in our society---private hospitals for profit---does not diminish the  WinkyDink   Dec-25-10 07:45 AM   #16 
  - The government can't make you buy broccoli because ...  iamtechus   Dec-25-10 03:57 AM   #4 
  - Insurance companies are intermediaries between patients and hospitals because why? n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 04:23 AM   #6 
  - If that is so obvious then why did Barack Obama campaign against mandatory health insurance  Gravel Democrat   Dec-25-10 04:25 AM   #7 
  - And furthermore...  Gravel Democrat   Dec-25-10 05:01 AM   #8 
  - You still don't "have to" buy insurance after 2014  Recursion   Dec-25-10 09:05 AM   #20 
  - health insurance is NOT health care  ixion   Dec-25-10 05:44 AM   #10 
  - Incredibly flawed argument. There is no constitutional right for private health-insurance companies  WinkyDink   Dec-25-10 07:47 AM   #17 
  - If what you are saying is true, why didn't the rates go down?  Taitertots   Dec-25-10 08:09 AM   #19 
  - The whole idea is that rates will go down.  JDPriestly   Dec-25-10 03:24 PM   #45 
  - Too bad insurance doesn't actually give us health CARE n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 07:49 PM   #52 
  - It's the liberal version of "Welfare Queen" and it's disgusting.  Hello_Kitty   Dec-25-10 03:38 PM   #46 
  - One could say that eating crappy food instead of healthy food does result in someone else paying.  Statistical   Dec-25-10 09:13 AM   #23 
  - Before the government mandates private healthcare insurance  lepus   Dec-25-10 09:49 AM   #24 
  - Freeloader? I don't think so.  MedicalAdmin   Dec-25-10 10:09 AM   #25 
  - And Congress can subsidize and promote certain uses of land,  JDPriestly   Dec-25-10 12:05 PM   #34 
  - You touch my broccoli I'll have you arrested. n/t  jtuck004   Dec-25-10 04:09 AM   #5 
  - No, because broccoli is not necessary  quaker bill   Dec-25-10 05:58 AM   #11 
  - Neither is having a person purchase healthcare insurance.  MadHound   Dec-25-10 06:02 AM   #12 
  - Actually it is  quaker bill   Dec-26-10 07:28 AM   #60 
  - A mandate isn't necessary to banning discrimination but rather supposedly to prevent  TheKentuckian   Dec-25-10 06:38 AM   #13 
     - Are you joking?  Recursion   Dec-25-10 09:09 AM   #22 
        - Nope. Certainly health care nor the Constitution require the criminal insurance cartel  TheKentuckian   Dec-25-10 11:17 AM   #29 
        - "criminal insurance cartel"  Recursion   Dec-25-10 03:10 PM   #42 
           - LOL!  Hello_Kitty   Dec-25-10 04:07 PM   #49 
        - No it isn't. Private companies push pencils only (for traditional Medicare) n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 08:08 PM   #53 
  - There really isn't a need for a mandate, but there was a need for spine.  Vinca   Dec-25-10 07:00 AM   #15 
  - Your introductory dependent clause is where the true Democratic argument should lie: IF.  WinkyDink   Dec-25-10 07:51 AM   #18 
  - That's what developed countries providing universal care through private insuance do  eridani   Dec-26-10 02:53 AM   #58 
  - Congress isn't making you buy health insurance  Recursion   Dec-25-10 09:08 AM   #21 
  - Don't use your so called 'facts' and 'logic' here...  Davis_X_Machina   Dec-25-10 10:52 AM   #26 
  - So if you can't afford insurance, they take extra money from you to give to the insurance corps  Taitertots   Dec-25-10 11:01 AM   #27 
  - That is not what Recursion said n/t  emulatorloo   Dec-25-10 11:05 AM   #28 
  - If you don't buy it, they take your money. It is exactly what he said  Taitertots   Dec-25-10 11:27 AM   #30 
     - What happens if you don't pay the tax?  Fumesucker   Dec-25-10 11:59 AM   #32 
        - You end up without health care and lots more problems n/t  Taitertots   Dec-25-10 02:48 PM   #37 
        - No, what are the *penalties* for not paying the tax?  Fumesucker   Dec-25-10 02:51 PM   #38 
        - Well your wages could get garnished  Recursion   Dec-25-10 03:11 PM   #43 
           - Not if we reach the efficiency of delivery of a number of other nations..  Fumesucker   Dec-25-10 03:23 PM   #44 
  - Um. No  Recursion   Dec-25-10 03:08 PM   #41 
     - The govenrment will only buy you SHITTY insurance that you can't afford to use n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 08:10 PM   #54 
  - That sounds like Socialism  BlackHoleSon   Dec-25-10 11:40 AM   #31 
  - That's dogma  Recursion   Dec-25-10 03:06 PM   #40 
     - When liberals talk about "freeloaders" they sound like conservatives too.  Hello_Kitty   Dec-25-10 04:03 PM   #48 
     - Now your argument has moved from demonstrating constitutionality to efficiency?  TheKentuckian   Dec-25-10 04:40 PM   #50 
     - Intent is not dogma  BlackHoleSon   Dec-25-10 06:12 PM   #51 
     - It's fact. Otherwise, how do you explain per capital costs in other countries  eridani   Dec-25-10 08:12 PM   #55 
  - It's not a "tax". It's a "fine". The only people who are not going to purchase health insurance  Exilednight   Dec-25-10 12:07 PM   #35 
  - Seriously?  Recursion   Dec-25-10 03:00 PM   #39 
     - They don't receive a subsidy, they receive a tax credit to purchase health insurance .............  Exilednight   Dec-25-10 03:59 PM   #47 
     - Nothing is more useless than a tax credit to people who don't pay much in income tax n/t  eridani   Dec-25-10 08:13 PM   #56 
  - For the supporters of this abomination...  Gravel Democrat   Dec-26-10 07:10 AM   #59 
  - They aren't really making people buy insurance.  JDPriestly   Dec-25-10 12:02 PM   #33 
  - Forcible Broccolli -- Everything Not Prohibited is Mandatory n /t  Paranoid Pessimist   Dec-25-10 12:08 PM   #36 
  - Are we talking state or federal government?  Ter   Dec-26-10 12:05 AM   #57 
  - And just because: I LOVE BROCCOLI! I must've eaten a pound of it yesterday. So mandate away! ;-)  WinkyDink   Dec-26-10 08:53 AM   #61 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC