Woman dies in Florida due to State's refusal to expand medicaid

[Boshembechle]

http://orlandoweekly.com/news/the-pe...1665144?pgno=1

How many more people will die due to the lack of access to medical care due to the supreme court's decision that states can opt out? This woman wasn't a welfare mooch. She was a working impoverished lady, doing odd jobs, that was priced out of the market for private healthcare.

[James Madison]

Actually, I have no idea what she died of because the article you posted spends five pages talking about nonsense. It would be nice to know what caused her death, what she was taking, and if not taking the medicine contributed to her death.

[kcchiefs6465]

http://orlandoweekly.com/news/the-pe...1665144?pgno=1

How many more people will die due to the lack of access to medical care due to the supreme court's decision that states can opt out? This woman wasn't a welfare mooch. She was a working impoverished lady, doing odd jobs, that was priced out of the market for private healthcare.

What is the problem with healthcare in this country, in your opinion?

What priced her out of the market, as well?

[Boshembechle]

Actually, I have no idea what she died of because the article you posted spends five pages talking about nonsense. It would be nice to know what caused her death, what she was taking, and if not taking the medicine contributed to her death.

It doesn't matter what illness killed her, since her lack of care wouldn't change depending on what sickness she had. The price system locked her out of private insurance, the legislature locked her out of public care, so she was helpless and died when it was preventable.

[Boshembechle]

What is the problem with healthcare in this country, in your opinion?

What priced her out of the market, as well?

The problem with healthcare in this country is that it allows for the establishment of equilibrium prices. When equilibrium is reached, the supply of a certain good (in this case insurance or medical care), is equal to demand. However, the reason why this equilibrium is reached is because people who are only able to afford BELOW the equilibrium price will not be involved in the market at all. In this particular example, Ms. Dill was not able to afford private insurance because of the equilibrium price, and was not eligible for medicaid.

[oyarde]

Well , no state should necessarily have or expand Medicaid . There would need to be a way to pay for it . Raising taxes of any kind is out of the question .The amount of Medicare tax already levied on people and employers is already too large of a burden .That money is taken , but it is not there , already spent . She was 32 I see and making 9 K a year. What was she deceased from ? If I had been making 9K a yr when I was 32 , myself and all of my children would have been in risk of death as well I imagine .That does not buy a whole helluva lot across 12 months .

[James Madison]

It doesn't matter what illness killed her, since her lack of care wouldn't change depending on what sickness she had. The price system locked her out of private insurance, the legislature locked her out of public care, so she was helpless and died when it was preventable.

No, it does matter because it could be the difference between a $30 prescription and a $30,000 surgery. It also matters because her medication may not have prevented her death in the first place. That's why these things are nice to know before offering an opinion.

[Boshembechle]

Well , no state should necessarily have or expand Medicaid . There would need to be a way to pay for it . Raising taxes of any kind is out of the question .The amount of Medicare tax already levied on people and employers is already too large of a burden .That money is taken , but it is not there , already spent . She was 32 I see and making 9 K a year. What was she deceased from ? If I had been making 9K a yr when I was 32 , myself and all of my children would have been in risk of death as well I imagine .That does not buy a whole helluva lot across 12 months .

I think there is something wrong with a system that determines whether you live a good or bad life depending on your income.

[Danke]

I think there is something wrong with a system that determines whether you live a good or bad life depending on your income.

Do you think heath care is a right? Meaning it should be paid for by the taxpayers and any procedure should be paid for by the collective for one's hospital's bills?

[juleswin]

I think there is something wrong with a system that determines whether you live a good or bad life depending on your income.

And also that system that determines u live and die depending on where u live. So when you are done expanding medicare to all americans, lets go ahead and expand it to the whole world. It sucks that the woman has to die but govts have made it in such a way that medical care is no longer affordable to most americans. You gonna have to tackle the inflated price if you ever want to help people. Breakdown the monopolies, the regulations and even at that the people that still need help can be helped out by the community.

The people most responsible for her death are the people that stole the wealth of the nation to make war, the people who made healthcare so expensive that she couldn't pay for it. Those are the people I would be blaming if I were u.

[Boshembechle]

Do you think heath care is a right? Meaning it should be paid for by the taxpayers and any procedure should be paid for by the collective for one's hospital's bills?

I don't think the government should be paying for the healthcare of middle class folks (either old or young) (we should means test medicare). However, I absolutely believe the government has a duty to provide healthcare for poor people, who are cast aside so that the invisible hand can match supply and demand.

[oyarde]

I think there is something wrong with a system that determines whether you live a good or bad life depending on your income.

You think people would work hard to achieve if they did not benefit from it ? I doubt it .

[oyarde]

I don't think the government should be paying for the healthcare of middle class folks (either old or young) (we should means test medicare). However, I absolutely believe the government has a duty to provide healthcare for poor people, who are cast aside so that the invisible hand can match supply and demand.

I believe in private charity . There is no role for govt . With govt , it costs more and you get worse care .

[Boshembechle]

I believe in private charity . There is no role for govt . With govt , it costs more and you get worse care .

Where was charity for Ms. Dill?

[Suzanimal]

Where was charity for Ms. Dill?

And charity also gave $4,000 for Ms. Dill's funeral expenses.

As recently as last October, Woolrich used online crowd-funding sources to help Dill get the medication she needed.

[Boshembechle]

That is not a sufficient mechanism to save poor people.

[Danke]

I don't think the government should be paying for the healthcare of middle class folks (either old or young) (we should means test medicare). However, I absolutely believe the government has a duty to provide healthcare for poor people, who are cast aside so that the invisible hand can match supply and demand.

So the people that paid the most into the system should receive the least? Means testing steals from those that lived frugally and save for the future. Punished the productive class, reward the very wealthy and give hand outs to the unproductive classes and everyone loses in the long run, which is what we are seeing now. Except the very rich,

[VIDEODROME]

I am not opposed to government safety nets. This also has a common security element. I really wonder if neglected health can lead to many poor people becoming disease incubators.

With that, I will say that ObamaCare does seem like a weird solution and a convoluted mess. I'd suggest starting in a more simple way with government clinic systems to patch up low income people. I mean really, suppose a McBurger flipper just keeps coming into work with an untreated illness? Do we really want a ton of sick service people coming into work untreated and risking contamination and increasing the risk of getting the rest of us sick?

I think it's in all our interest to have a public healthcare option. IMO Canada's system makes more sense than ObamaCare. I do have a lot of doubts about the Canadian system's ability to treat catastrophic things like Cancer, but maybe it could catch a lot of minor things early. I suppose the only people who know this with certainty are Canadians themselves.

I'm not sure Canada necessarily has the best model to follow anyway, but I'm in agreement with Judge Jim Gray that maybe socialized medicine even just offering modest services could help a lot of people.

[Boshembechle]

Good post. Too many people perish because of lack of insurance. This is precisely because of the invisible hand forming an equilibrium price. Those like Dill who cannot afford the equilibrium price are $#@! out of luck.

[amy31416]

I'm fortunate enough to have an in-law cousin who made a conscious decision to have yet another kid (four total now) after her husband barely recuperated from a pretty hardcore case of cancer. All are on Medicaid, 2 of the four kids are relatively sickly and they have section 8 housing while receiving over $1,000/month in food stamps. She practically brags about it, yet whines that they can't afford a house and they couldn't afford a van to cart all of them around either, so they borrowed money from grandma & grandpa.

They are semi-libertarian, believe it or not.

Are they or are they not dragging down other people who pay for these things, who will be taxed at a higher rate to sustain them? Are they or are they not making it far more difficult for people who truly need help? Would they have had so many children if they actually had to pay for them? If Medicaid and other safety nets weren't abused by people like them, perhaps Florida would have been able to help her.

She's thinking about having another kid, for the record.

[oyarde]

Where was charity for Ms. Dill?

I am a pretty charitable person . The Nation is as a whole as well . I could be more charitable if govt.'s did not get over $4 of every $10 I make.

[oyarde]

Where was charity for Ms. Dill?

Well , the govt sure as hell was not going to be able to save her. I charitable walk in clinic may have . Maybe she could not be saved .

[Unregistered]

How many more people will die due to the lack of access to medical care due to the supreme court's decision that states can opt out? This woman wasn't a welfare mooch. She was a working impoverished lady, doing odd jobs, that was priced out of the market for private healthcare.

I stopped at

"Dill had been bumped off Medicaid because she was making too much money – an estimated $9,000 a year – and had yet to be able to afford a divorce, which might have bettered her chances."

Isn't this why most Libertarians, Ancaps, etc. OPPOSE state sanctioned marriage to begin with?????

[Boshembechle]

I think this situation is a good example of one of the problems of capitalism and free markets in general. The allocation of goods is based strictly on ability to pay. That is, you will not be able to buy a TV if you can't afford it at the market price. You can't afford a car if you can't afford it at market price. This market price mechanism completely locks out an entire group of people from owning goods. With all of its faults, at least other economic systems sought to abolish this market mechanism and provide people with goods no matter how much money they have.

[Unregistered]

I think this situation is a good example of one of the problems of capitalism and free markets in general. The allocation of goods is based strictly on ability to pay. That is, you will not be able to buy a TV if you can't afford it at the market price. You can't afford a car if you can't afford it at market price. This market price mechanism completely locks out an entire group of people from owning goods. With all of its faults, at least other economic systems sought to abolish this market mechanism and provide people with goods no matter how much money they have.

"The allocation of goods is based strictly on ability to pay."

BY WHOM??

[Boshembechle]

"The allocation of goods is based strictly on ability to pay."

BY WHOM??

The producers of the good, along with competition and consumer willingness to pay.

[James Madison]

I think this situation is a good example of one of the problems of capitalism and free markets in general. The allocation of goods is based strictly on ability to pay.

No, it isn't. Having a free market simply means people are able to enter into contracts voluntarily with whomever they please, under terms that both parties agree to. A financial transaction is such an agreement, but does not require monetary payment, nor does it require payment at all. You're telling me that not a single corner pharmacy would be willing to provide her with medication at no or reduced cost? That no one is willing to get off their lazy ass and do something about it themselves? Not if they believe government will do the work for them. Let's also think about why medications are so expensive in the first place. Is it because government labels them a 'controlled substance' and prevents OTC sales as part of the ever-failing War on Drugs? Why is Tylenol so much cheaper than prescription painkillers?

[Unregistered]

The producers of the good, along with competition and consumer willingness to pay.

You'll notice the reply from James Madison. He has more patience than me, that is for sure. I have ZERO TOLERANCE for "mandates", and your inability to distinguish crony capitalism the free market is no "consolation prize", it is downright LAZINESS on your part. C'mon, you're surely "better than that"?????

[Boshembechle]

No, it isn't. Having a free market simply means people are able to enter into contracts voluntarily with whomever they please, under terms that both parties agree to. A financial transaction is such an agreement, but does not require monetary payment, nor does it require payment at all. You're telling me that not a single corner pharmacy would be willing to provide her with medication at no or reduced cost? That no one is willing to get off their lazy ass and do something about it themselves? Not if they believe government will do the work for them. Let's also think about why medications are so expensive in the first place. Is it because government labels them a 'controlled substance' and prevents OTC sales as part of the ever-failing War on Drugs? Why is Tylenol so much cheaper than prescription painkillers?

That's certainly an idealistic way to look at it. The contracts are voluntary for ACTUAL transactions. But what about the people who are not making any transactions because they have no money or not enough money for a certain good. What should be done about the people who are forced out of the market for houses, cars, healthcare, and big appliances? How is them not having access to those any different than the rampant shortages experienced in other systems?

[James Madison]

That's certainly an idealistic way to look at it. The contracts are voluntary for ACTUAL transactions. But what about the people who are not making any transactions because they have no money or not enough money for a certain good. What should be done about the people who are forced out of the market for houses, cars, healthcare, and big appliances? How is them not having access to those any different than the rampant shortages experienced in other systems?

I just told you. Not all transaction have to be monetary, nor do they require payment. Work out a deal with the supplier, and if he won't then go on to the next one. Don't be afraid to ask others for help or assistance. Charity is easy when you keep all that you earn. Losing half your income, not greed, is the problem, and that is created by government involvement in the market, not the market itself.