[Kenneth] Hoagland had refinanced his Nashville home to pay off the $25,000 tab for his weeklong diabetes-related stay at Southern Hills Medical Center. The new mortgage left Hoagland out of medical debt but afraid to get sick again. Unfortunately, he did. In 2004, Hoagland was in a health insurance waiting period on a new job when a cold turned into two days at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. This time, the bill was just over $1,200.
When a collection attorney working for Vanderbilt filed suit in 2005, Hoagland was afraid to take time off from work to show up in court. After a series of hearings, attempts to collect the debt and what Hoagland says were genuine efforts to pay it, an attorney working for Vanderbilt asked a judge to issue what’s known as a body attachment.
One Friday in late 2008, a sheriff’s deputy went to Hoagland’s home. Because he was at work, Hoagland was allowed to turn himself in the following Monday.
“They fingerprinted me, took my picture and asked some questions about my medical history,” he said. “When the guy who tested (my blood sugar) asked me why I was there and I told him … he said, ‘I didn’t know we did that in this country.’ I told him, ‘Until now, I didn’t either.’ “
#72–NoSolutions, No Analysis===so your alternative, not followed in ANY society, is that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want to, not respond to court papers, and any enforcement of societies laws is unwarrented and overly oppressive?
Is THAT your position? If not, please parse. If so, read this post again. No other society acts the way you recommend==for very good reasons as stated.
#72 – Bobbo,
Interesting choice, rather than insult you went with Reductio ad absurdum.
This article shows how the government made a bad problem much worse for this fellow. And so we can learn from that fact about the capacity of government to make bad problems worse rather than to solve them.
To argue this point, you argue against anarchy. Good try.
Let’s try this again …
Man has big problems.
Government makes problems much, much worse.
Let’s give government more power.
#74–NoSolution:
Man has big problems. /// Yes, lack of government provided/sponsored health care.
Government makes problems much, much worse. /// No. Government did what all governments MUST do. Now you are firmly where your own common sense doesn’t want to go. See Post #73. As I have acceded to your challenge in this post, so should you to mine.
Let’s give government more power. /// I agree. Power to provide the real solution leading to greater freedom for all involved except those engaged in the fraud known as “for profit medicine.” That solution being single payer.
Bonus–what do you think should happen to sick people in America who do not have insurance and who are not in an emergency condition other than beg for charity care or suffer?
#74 Solutions
Man has big problems.
Government makes problems much, much worse.
Let’s give government more power.
Pray tell, what “powers” are we giving the government?
Isn’t this about a man that lands jail for not paying his bills? Why is it different becuase it is for health care? If he didn’t pay Best Buy for his big screen tv, this article wouldn’t be written. It would be theft. We wouldn’t be ready about “Propblems with Electronic care.”
Members of Congress and the Cabinet get far more than they should.
#78: Why is so hard for you and many others here to not recognize that yes, the court case is about paying his bills, BUT the reason he couldn’t is related to how health care and insurance is handled in this country? If we had a better system, he never would have gotten into this fix.
And buying a TV is 100% discretionary. In many cases, not getting health care is not, unless you consider death a reasonable alternative. And yes, I realize that some, like our resident nutcase, Alf, believe that people who can’t afford health care should die rather than be helped by the community as a civic responsibility in a supposedly advanced society. Sort of like paying for firemen which, I assume, Alf is also against since it requires ‘stealing’ via taxes some of his precious money for use by other people.
#63, YOU are not “free” to do what ever the hell you want in OUR society.
I agree. However, the non-aggression principal states that I CAN do whatever I want as long as it doesn’t violate YOURS or anybody else’s rights. And vice versa.
As I have an UNALIENABLE RIGHT to my life, my liberty, and pursuit of my happiness, tell me how I can have those if you and your majority decide that I make too much money and take them from me at the point of a gun?
Rights are something that can only be taken away, never given. And the best way to take those rights is with aggression.
If these people had that right, it would be no problem. They would simply have it. As they don’t have them by default, they must be given (in which case, they are not rights but privileges). And the only way to give them is to take from someone else.
So the question is: Is my freedom worth less because I don’t agree with you? That’s what it sounds like.
YOU may cry all you want, but WE are a free people with a RIGHT to health care
Actually, you are correct. You have a right TO that and cars and houses and pets and TVs and . . . You have a right TO pursue. That doesn’t mean you are GIVEN it.
And the government’s job is to ensure you can have those things (which it really hasn’t done in quite a while).
It is NOT the government’s job to GIVE them to you.
And I personally, would like to see those that are against the American way and the Constitution expelled from this country.
Here is an interesting quote. This was by Thomas Jefferson (the man who wrote about the lines you seem to think so little of). He said this during his 2nd Inaugural Address:
“[Our wish is to ensure]…equality of rights maintained, and that state of property, equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry, or that of his fathers.” [bold added by me]
Thomas Jefferson KNEW everybody would be at different levels. Some would have more, some less. That is freedom.
You are preaching Equality of Outcome and the Constitution is all about Equality of Opportunity.
So, before you start schooling someone on something, it might be best if you learned a few things yourself first. Just some advice.
#75, You almost brought a tear to my eye. Almost.
Now try using logic instead of emotions.
#67, Bobbo said:”In America “freedom” is being defined by what a rich entrenched connected minority want thru the corruption of our elected politicians.”
Sadly all too true. And the greater the power wielded by the government the more money these politicians stand to make by selling out their control of that power. And of course, selling us out at the same time.
Just one more reason to get government as small as possible.
#75, Ralph said: “In a society as large as ours no one expects complete agreement from everyone. We do expect those who didn’t win the argument though to shut the eff up.”
It’s fine to disagree with Ralphie, but keep your mouth shut.
I’m assuming, that when you’ve lost these arguments (last administration for instance, as a guess) you of course where nicely silent.
Or does the rule only apply to those with the temerity to disagree with you?
Never mind, everyone reading your rants knows the answer.
#84 Phydeau said a lot of stuff, unrelated to anything I posted.
Take a deep breath … now go back over anything I’ve posted and tell me where you get all that. I’m not a birther, and I didn’t post any of those slanders about Obama you argue against.
Your response to me (you used the number for one of my posts) had nothing to do with anything I’ve said.
Stop arguing against a parody of what you dislike, and start actually reading and responding to what people are saying. I know that’s harder, perhaps you aren’t capable of it.
Now, as to the assertion that the looser in an election should shut up thereafter … did you keep your mouth shut for 8 years when Bush was stripping us of our rights, putting people in Gitmo without charges, spying on us and waterboarding?
Did you object when people called Bush a Nazi?
Ralphie boy still hasn’t answered that question. Will you show more backbone?
#85 Bush got the benefit of the doubt after 9-11; his popularity was sky high. Even though he ignored the warnings that Bin Laden would attack, the American people stood behind him.
Obama, like Clinton before him, was attacked right from the start, before he’d even had time to do anything.
I don’t have any problem with thoughtful criticism. Dubya had plenty of time to do things before people started criticizing him. Sliming Obama before he’s really done anything yet is not thoughtful criticism, it’s sore loserism.
#83 and 85, Number 6
You complain about my post then you turn around and complain about Phydeau’s post. Try reading My #75 then your complaint in #85. Phydeau got it right.
If you want to suggest you did read #75, then you are either an idiot, a liar, a hypocrite, a fool, a troll, or any combination of the above.
Grow up and quit being a pedro or Alphie
#87 Ralphie boy babbled
And yet, with all the insults, I still don’t actually see an answer from you to the question I asked in #83 to you, and then asked Phydeau in #85. Phydeau at least had a response. You, no such backbone apparently. I mean, you could at least take his answer and copy and past. Pretend you have a mind.
Interesting. No response to substance, just more invective. Of course Ralphie, anyone who reads what you write and yet still disagrees, or even asks a question as I did, must be an idiot, liar a hypocrite or a fool. No other possible explanation.
Is that what you mean by growing up? Interesting definition of maturity you have there.
#88, Number 5 1/2,
There wasn’t any question worthy of answering.