What do people think about income inequality?

[maui_hawaii]

Obviously I agree with you. What seems to 'suck' doesn't really suck.

The problem with income inequality is when personal rights don't exist. You end up with a Saddam Hussien type of BS, or people who are just stuck.

[Ethrane]

"It is complicated. The reimbursement might be less --- but then again it is the Medicaid/Medicare patients who go to doctors and hospitals the most. Partly because the healthy working types are less likely to need doctors or lab tests or nursing care, doctors are lucky to see them once a year or so. You see the children and infants of the Medicaid class actually admitted to the hospital more often --- doctors will assume the educated parents can care for a child with a fever or a premature infant but keep the children of the Medicaid hospitalized longer just because the parent is less capable."

But being that caring for these individuals is a MONEY LOSER for me and my practice, I wouldn't mind them seeing me less. NO business is better than business that LOSES MONEY.

And, I would definitely say that the CHIEF reason Medicaid patients (and to a lesser degree Medicare patients) seek more medical care than those with private insurance is that there is NO DIRECT COSTS to them (or very little with medicare) to do so.

We used to see this in the military health system all the time, as at the time, the was NO co-pay....people would go to the ER and wait for 4 hours to have their child seen with a runny nose and a slight fever jsut to get free OTC meds, rather than go to the drugstore and pay $10 for some tylenol and sudafed.

And, you are correct in noting that these patients are treated differently after they arrive at the health care facility...if you have doubts as to the parents ability and/or willingness to follow through with a treatment plan, they might get admitted whereas someone with more intelligence/ability to care for a youngster would get sent home. While the hospital might make money on this transaction, the Doctor sure does not.

[aquila48]

As a political science student with deep admiration for the european model, and left leaning, this is a must read.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1078080/posts

...and contrast it with the inanity of this blowhard fool,

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1078184/posts

[nopardons]

Everyone's lifestyle changes, without a paycheck and that includes the likes of Donald Trump !

Condescending? Read your own posts, dear. :-)

[FITZ]

Oh please ---- Trump and Gates would have to have been fools with their money if they couldn't pretty much maintain their same lifestyles without a paycheck. Some people enjoy working --- they are used to working and will go on working long after they need to work. You and I might depend on a paycheck, our lifestyles would become drastically different without one --- but those guys --- no way.

[FITZ]

True --- they may not be a benefit to the doctors --- but all the government (taxpayer) money pouring in from these people as patients keeps hospitals happy. There would not be as many jobs for nurses and ancillary health care personnel without the third to half or more in some areas of patients without private insurance. It's a lot like education --- government money is now what keeps things propped up.

[stig]

I disagree. People who become wealthy tend to understand a few things about money that the rest of us miss. I bet if you took the richest 100 people, took away all their possessions and gave them $10,000 cash, 90 of them would be millionaires within a decade.

Some millionaires maybe. Back into the top 100? I doubt it. For every guy in the top 100 there were 1000 just as smart with just as much opportunity that didn't make it. And it wasn't that they didn't work hard. Also look at the top 100 how many really made it there from scratch? Very few. Many had a leg up from family wealth. There are exceptions of course but I would say a majority had a start the average Joe never had.

[smadurski]

Dont be fooled by this guy he is from DU he refers to reading FR as swimming in sewage and calls us repukes.

[fightu4it]

You are responsible for your own 'Income Inequality.'

[Minuteman23]

I don't agree. You act as though it's a single idea that causes wealth. In most cases I think It's a mind set and a work ethic. I think the "myth", although too specific, would prove true in most cases.

[oldcomputerguy]

"What in the hell does unions have to do with who becomes successful? Did you drive a new car when you were 25?"

Well I guess you completely missed the point of my post.
My point was that opportunity in this country for the majority of the people is strongly tied to unions. This is because unions were responsible for ability of high school graduates to obtain well paying jobs. That then built the middle class. That now is in steep decline.

Everyone is simply not cut out for college...period.
The people who are not and even many who are are now being pushed into an underclass due directry to the decline in unions in this country. Workers will continue to lose ground as the drive for profits will always be foremost and the counterbalance to that is now missing.

And yes I actually did drive a new car when I was 25. My parents bought it for me but they were hardly wealthy, I guess it was just something they wanted to do for me that that never did for themselves.

[Cacique]

btt