It's practically an accepted notion that people without health insurance are well taken care of by public hospitals, and thus many believe there's no need for a national health care plan.
Not so, according to a new study of uninsured Americans nearing retirement.
A major illness such as cancer, stroke, diabetes or a psychiatric disorder will suck up one-third to one-half of the total accumulated assets of uninsured people between the ages of 51 and 64, according to Northwestern University researchers who looked at 14 years of data.<br /> <br /> And they may be underestimating.
Researchers looked at checking and savings accounts, CDs, and stocks and bonds but didn't figure in job or wage losses. They found that uninsured adults paid $4,176 more for treatment than insured adults in their age bracket with similar illnesses did, according to the study.
More than four million Americans between 51 and 64 are uninsured. That period of life is a prime time for retirement savings. Many people depend on being able to stockpile retirement money once children are educated and gone. With working years limited, people 51-64 have little chance of recouping their losses.
So let's add one more social cost to our lack of a public health care plan: increased poverty and dependency among the elderly.
There is some truth in the idea that public hospitals can take good care of the uninsured. But public hospitals don't care for everyone for free. They bill people. The bills can be enormous, and patients who have any resources at all are expected to pay.
Even if they're unemployed.
Employed people without insurance don't fare well either, even if their wages are so low that they qualify for services. For them public hospital emergency rooms, where patients often must wait many hours, may be the only available care. Who cares if these freeloaders wait?
We all should. Because long, unpredictable hours waiting for the medicine you or your children need can make keeping a job very difficult. That's especially true because the uninsured often work for individuals or small companies that can't afford to have absent workers.
Poverty and dependency among the elderly. Job loss among the working poor. Such problems tax a society, literally and figuratively. Americans who have health insurance and think they've got nothing to gain from a public health plan couldn't be more wrong.
Christine Wicker is the author of five books and a former reporter for the "Dallas Morning News." Her life as an author began when she and a Dallas cop wrote... more
One more pitch for a government health care system, and this one has the audacity to promise that those who are already insured and satisfied with what they have will BENEFIT? Have you seen what those in the government health care systems in Canada and Great Britain have to contend with? Long waits, inferior care and RATIONING? NO THANKS!
I am so sick of pro-government medicine folks trying to sell the false promise that we can have MORE health care with LESS money. THAT IS A LIE--STOP IT! We can fix health care and keep costs down without the government running health care. There are other intentions at work here--stop the dishonesty.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (15)
Somber
10:17AM Oct 20th 2009
The long wait is illusionary. You might wait if you go see your doctor on a Sunday. The reality is that in countries like Britain and France you are more likely to see your doctor at the earliest stages of an illness. Many such doctors keep swing shift hours. Going to a doctor at eight at night? Unimaginable. I have a doctor that doesn't work Fridays or weekends so if I get sick Thursday night then I have to wait till Monday and HOPE I can get in to see him. By that time my bronchitis turns into pneumonia (something I get very easily). Oh, and if you wonder why I wait, it's because the other doctor charges sixty dollars more per visit.
So I'm sick, using up my sick pay, my students get a generally substandard substitute, and the children I teach will need time to review what the sub did or didn't go over. All of which could have been prevented had I been able to get a prescription for anti-biotics Friday afternoon. In england I wouldn't have even HAD to go to the doctor if I needed anti-biotics. The pharmacist would be able to prescribe them rather than simply distribute them.
We can do better. We're Americans and we can do better, damn it!
RATE THIS COMMENT: (-9)
sandsnnydz
10:43AM Oct 20th 2009
During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama said several times that he intended to negotiate health care reform publicly. In fact, he said, he'd televise the negotiations on C-SPAN, with all the parties sitting at a big table. That way, Americans would be more engaged in the process and insist on real change.
"That's what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are, because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process," Obama said at a debate in Los Angeles on Jan. 31, 2008.
we want the ObamaCare televised live on CSPAN
RATE THIS COMMENT: (12)
Frank
12:16PM Oct 20th 2009
Somber
Why not move to England then? Or "shop" around and change doctors?
RATE THIS COMMENT: (2)
cushing1
12:17PM Oct 20th 2009
Why can't our government learn from past mistakes rather than continuing its efforts to take greater control over our lives? Americans still enjoy the world's best health care, but many of us have been threatened by loss of coverage resulting from increasing unemployment. The ONLY permanent solution is to rebuild our economy, create new jobs and strengthen small businesses which have traditionally contributed to the cost of health insurance. Health care costs could be reduced if the administration focused on eliminating waste due to fraud, excessive lawyer fees and cost of malpractice insurance and lack of interstate competition among insurance companies. Loss of employment has stolen insurance coverage from millions of deserving Americans. But what caused our economy to nose dive? Dating back to the Carter administration, our government has forced banks to grant mortgages to many with questionable ability to repay. Corruption and self-serving lack of oversight by Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac added further fuel to the housing bubble and subsequent collapse. Increased commitment to socialism can at best produce short term benefits. But government spending should be directed toward lending a helping hand to those who want to work and care from themselves and their families.The Obama administration and our Congress seem determined to encourage dependence on welfare at the expense of those who want to contribute to a stronger America.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (10)
libslie0066
9:54PM Oct 20th 2009
If you are like me and can’t travel, but want to make a difference and be heard, email YOUR elected and appointed local, state, and Federal officials for FREE and as often as you want. Don't waste your time with the left wing garbage you see on these boards, they are people who don't have a clue, refuse to acknowledge facts, and are totally selective about what they want to hear, see, and discuss. Go to http://www.votesmart.org/index.htm Let them know in no uncertain terms, NO to Obamacare, Thoroughly Investigate Acorn, No Amnesty for Illegals, No Cap and Tax, STOP the attacks on our own CIA, investigate the socialist and communist CZARS, support our troops and win this damn war in Afghanistan and quit making it a political issue, and STOP the incredible string of lies. If you like the site, pass it on.
If you want to get the truth about what is going on in Government with all of the illegal immigration issues from a website that publishes well researched facts, go to http://www.numbersusa.com/content/ This website also allows you to send FREE emails to YOUR state, and federal elected and appointed officials, including the President. If you like the website, use it and pass it on to your friends.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (2)
GARY
3:08AM Oct 21st 2009
Cross state lines and open the markets so Insurance companies can compete and the cost will fall in half just because it is freed to compete for market shares. The stock holders will make sure that there companies create products to compete. Then use a few federal dollars where needed most to help state run programs, the states no there people better than the feds anyway. Game over.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (4)
Hi Beautiful
8:17AM Oct 20th 2009
This story is sufficiently inaccurate and may be one of the poorest journalism specimens I have ever read. Drugmakers, hospitals, pharmacies and and physicians tax society - NOT older uninsured Americans. In this time of unfortunate events suffered by millions of American families, it's indignant to use a false headline just to attract readers. The offense is sorely matched in using the term 'freeloader' in any context.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (9)
Somber
10:24AM Oct 20th 2009
Obviously you need some explaination of how they 'tax' us.
Let's say you get sick, don't have insurance, and go to the hospital. The hospital will run tests, many of which are very expensive, because they don't know you from Eve and so will do all they can to find out what's wrong with you and save your life. That's what they do. But those tests cost money. If you don't pay for it then someone has to... sometimes the city... sometimes the state... sometimes the country... sometimes other patients... and sometimes its the shareholders. But someone always pays.
Let's say that that pay is... say... the patient's retirement? Well now that elderly person is unemployed, no longer has a retirement fund, and still has cost of living expenses. Who pays for his cost of living? If he's lucky his loved ones will give him a hand. If not... well he'd better hope his social security checks keep up. But can he pay for his health care the next time he goes into the hospital? Mmmm... no.
But some one always pays.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (0)
Frank
12:19PM Oct 20th 2009
somber
Your right, someone does pay for it. If the healthcare plan goes through, everyone will pay for it with higher taxes. Why should I help pay for YOUR healthcare?
RATE THIS COMMENT: (4)
Old Engineer
9:26AM Oct 28th 2009
To Somber: "Someone always pays: sometimes the state, sometimes the counrty, sometimes other patients..." The state, the city, the country, and the school district are the funded by individual taxpayers. "The shareholders" of Aetna, United, or non-profits such as most Blue Cross companies cannot pay except from premiums collected from ratepayers; the companies cannot print money.
So if the taxpayer/patient is the true source of funds, how many dollars must she send to Washington to get a dollar's worth of health care in her school district?
RATE THIS COMMENT: (0)
rthompson1329
8:38AM Oct 20th 2009
according to obama's healthcare czar the bulk of the benefits will go to people 14-40 that will leave the over 40 and under 14 crowd to fend for themselves so the the only change will be more deaths in those two groups as benefits will be rationed and/or denied.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (4)
Somber
10:26AM Oct 20th 2009
Right. Ever hear of CHIP? Child Health Insurance Program? It obviously doesn't apply to people under 14 because they obviously can't be... you know... children.
Please, when you write something out of your ass, make sure there aren't things in reality that blatantly contradict you.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (1)
rthompson1329
11:17AM Oct 20th 2009
free market capitallism versus socialism and comminism what will the people choose it is OUR choice not really his.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (1)
Lizzie
11:44AM Oct 20th 2009
somber, check out CHIP's and see what the requirements are, and you will find, that most parents CAN'T get CHIPS for their children. But I do say it sounds good.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (9)
rthompson1329
8:43AM Oct 20th 2009
don't be fooled by this so called health care for all. it isn't about health care at all. it is all about control. health care will not cost those that work less. you will not get more care for less money. this is not the time america and americans need to spend more money. vote out all that vote for this ridiculous plan.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (3)
Somber
10:33AM Oct 20th 2009
Wow. You're right. That was about control. Pretty pathetic control at that. After all it was an attempt by you to control us with your less than persuasive rhetoric.
But like I said before: you are right, at least a little. It is about control. Right now, the people who have the control are insurance companies. They can raise your rates simply because they have to, claim increased costs without disclosing their profit margins, and drop you simply because they don't want to pay for your treatment. That is an awful lot of control. It's an awful lot of power.
Fortunately there is another organization with power too. A lot of it. One that we vote in support of or against every two, four, and six years. That's right; the government. The purpose of the government is to do for others what others can not do for themselves. Why would health insurance companies reform themselves? They have all the control and all of the power. It's only when faced with greater power that they change their policies. For instance, I would salivate at the terror in their board rooms if they had to contemplate facing a government insurance policy. I bet you that would cause a lot of reform just to stave off the possibility of such a thing.
RATE THIS COMMENT: (-2)
ivgotthefacts
12:09PM Oct 20th 2009
somber your a teacher ? your a sorry excuse for a teacher if you think the purpose of the govt is to do for you what you cant do for yourself you must be a socialist liberal some one who need the govt to wipe your butt blow your nose and put food on your table because your either to lazy or stupid to to it your self no wonder the US has the lowest test scores in the world we have idiots like you teaching our children to just sit back and rely on the govt to take care of you
RATE THIS COMMENT: (3)
ivgotthefacts
9:34AM Oct 20th 2009
lets see uninsured older people cause our taxes to go up but implementing a 1.5 trillion socialised health care take over that we will pay for in higher taxes starting the day it becomes law but wont take effect for at least 5 years and still will only cover 1/2 of the uninsured legal Americans and all the illegals in OUR country is fiscally sound. I now know why the dem base is the uneducated because who else could they get to believe the stupid crap and fuzzy math they come out with... chairman obama is taking pot shots at FOX news because he knows democrats independents and republicans watch them in record numbers and he cant afford for intelligent people to know exactly what his spread the wealth not the health care marxis program will do to our country in less than ten years we will be come a banana republic thanks to chairman obama and the socialists he has surrounded himself with well the dear leader can add me to his "enemies list " along with FOX news and the rest of the intelligent life in America chairman obama is Richard Nixon and jimma carter rolled into one
RATE THIS COMMENT: (7)
Somber
10:35AM Oct 20th 2009
When you have a coherent argument I'll refute it. Punctuation helps.