Rep. Carroll calls the legislation a starting point to hold unvaccinated responsible.
Read the whole story
Read the whole story
Willfully unvaccinated should pay 100% of COVID hospital bills, lawmaker says
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
This is such a bad idea. Being unvaxxed is bad and going after them in this way is cathartic. Gotcha. But refusing to pay the medical bills of seriously ill people is the opposite of what we've been working for. Do we have a good reason to drop them? Sure, you can look at it like that, but this good reason goes against an even better one, taking care of those in need. Their fault they're in need? Yes. But they're still in need.
Upvote
35
(59
/
-24)
There is a very easy, and FREE way for them to prevent from being bankrupted. Available at nearly any pharmacy.
Upvote
60
(71
/
-11)
Weak logic, as none of these things are likely to kill the person standing next to you due to your "personal choice"
If you harm or kill someone while intoxicated you certainly are held responsible.
Upvote
65
(75
/
-10)
Upvote
7
(10
/
-3)
It is within families.
When I as a kid, around 15 years old, I had a fat friend. One day I got invited to have dinner with him and his mom and dad.
Wow. Just, wow. I didn't think it was possible for that quantity of food to be consumed by three people.
Upvote
14
(27
/
-13)
Upvote
59
(61
/
-2)
Upvote
84
(84
/
0)
I have a family member that's a mental health clinician that's had a lot of medical providers come to them for care. After watching the stress put on that family member trying to take care of people on the front lines of COVID care, I am entirely for allowing complete refusal of services to people who refuse the vaccine.
You don't just pay someone for their time. All time is a gift and we're currently abusing the ever loving hell out of our healthcare providers. Paying someone doesn't give you the right to dehumanize them. The amount of trauma they're going through right now is going to echo through our healthcare system for multiple generations of care providers.
We are changing the collective attitude, empathy, and quality of care we're getting by pushing these people to the breaking point. We are selecting for doctors that do not care, because the ones who do are the ones who'll be crushed by this.
People who refuse the vaccine without good reason and who get sick should fend for themselves and stop leeching off the system. It isn't just a cost issue, it's a human resource one.
You don't just pay someone for their time. All time is a gift and we're currently abusing the ever loving hell out of our healthcare providers. Paying someone doesn't give you the right to dehumanize them. The amount of trauma they're going through right now is going to echo through our healthcare system for multiple generations of care providers.
We are changing the collective attitude, empathy, and quality of care we're getting by pushing these people to the breaking point. We are selecting for doctors that do not care, because the ones who do are the ones who'll be crushed by this.
People who refuse the vaccine without good reason and who get sick should fend for themselves and stop leeching off the system. It isn't just a cost issue, it's a human resource one.
Upvote
96
(99
/
-3)
They might not see the irony because if they haven't seen it by now all bets are off. And as smug as it would feel to see them get karma that wouldn't stop them from spreading the virus or giving ICU workers PTSD. Just detain them, jab them, and let them complain about it because they'll complain no matter what. They'll have no idea how much headache forced vaccination would save the world.
Upvote
24
(27
/
-3)
I mean I feel like that's a fantastic idea, same with people riding motorcycles without a helmet. It's almost as if actions have consequences?
Upvote
21
(23
/
-2)
Seat belts allow greater control of the vehicle by the driver in more minor accidents hence offering greater protections to those in or around the vehicle in question...its not just about the driver causing the accident.
[edit for spelling typo]
Upvote
1
(8
/
-7)
Upvote
9
(13
/
-4)
I am 100% for this however I would prefer than they not be admitted to the hospital at all.
If you actively reject what medical science has determined you need to do to protect yourself and others, you should be required to stick with your decision and reject any life saving treatments that medical science has created.
If you actively reject what medical science has determined you need to do to protect yourself and others, you should be required to stick with your decision and reject any life saving treatments that medical science has created.
Upvote
22
(33
/
-11)
I get the frustration, but this is an incredibly stupid bill that could only be written by someone whose understanding of medicine stops at "the knee bones's connected to the thigh bone" song.
Removing insurance coverage doesn't mean the patient will pay. It doesn't benefit anyone. The patient isn't going to pay the full cost of the hospital bill. The facility and providers will eat the cost and pass it on to the rest of the patients and the insurers by increasing their rates to match.
If the goal is to make sure that hospitals have a harder time affording higher staffing levels, if the goal is to bankrupt and close rural hospitals, if the goal is to ensure that unvaccinated people are even less likely to seek medical help when they get sick (and thus spread the virus to more people), then this is an excellent bill.
Otherwise no, this is a stinking heap of Dunning-Kruger mixed with bile and shat out all over actual healthcare professionals who have better things to deal with. And aside from the snark and profanity this is the exact same advice I would give to the governor himself if asked.
Removing insurance coverage doesn't mean the patient will pay. It doesn't benefit anyone. The patient isn't going to pay the full cost of the hospital bill. The facility and providers will eat the cost and pass it on to the rest of the patients and the insurers by increasing their rates to match.
If the goal is to make sure that hospitals have a harder time affording higher staffing levels, if the goal is to bankrupt and close rural hospitals, if the goal is to ensure that unvaccinated people are even less likely to seek medical help when they get sick (and thus spread the virus to more people), then this is an excellent bill.
Otherwise no, this is a stinking heap of Dunning-Kruger mixed with bile and shat out all over actual healthcare professionals who have better things to deal with. And aside from the snark and profanity this is the exact same advice I would give to the governor himself if asked.
Upvote
66
(71
/
-5)
No, they wouldn't see the irony at all. They may not be immune to covid, but they are utterly and completely immune to irony
Upvote
37
(40
/
-3)
Government mandates will never pass this Supreme Court. However, insurance companies might get tired of paying thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars in claims for something that could could have been prevented with a free shot.
Upvote
16
(18
/
-2)
It'll be the thing that finally pushes red state politicians to overhaul our medical system. Maybe offer some sort of non-profit medical coverage to anyone who wants it, but only if they want it. Some sort of.... plan.... that they can, as an individual (one could say, a single payer) sign up for.
If only there was something like that, where a single payer healthcare plan that anyone could sign up for.... If only there wasn't some big national conversation that happened regarding that in recent times...
If only....
Upvote
16
(20
/
-4)
Also, I need to call this out when it comes from the left as well as from the right,
This shit pisses me off. How about you introduce legislation that represents something that has an actual chance of becoming practiced law, rather than lookatme posturing for your next primary?
Upvote
75
(75
/
0)
Americans are marching to the tune of the Gulag Archipelago and smiling the whole way. We are a nation of hate now.
Upvote
4
(15
/
-11)
Upvote
-13
(5
/
-18)
Upvote
47
(47
/
0)
Again, this is an excellent suggestion for anyone who feels that healthcare costs are not rising fast enough, and too many people are alive and healthy.
Upvote
12
(13
/
-1)
Upvote
18
(19
/
-1)
As much as I would relish this, we need more healthcare not less. That said, I wonder how long will it take insurance companies to start funneling covid patients to separate covid facilities, much like we currently have cancer centers, etc, and start charging separate rates for those.
Upvote
16
(17
/
-1)
This move is more about punishing idiocy rather than trying to change underlying behavior. What would be more beneficial for everyone is to force triage so that they are at the bottom of the list when it comes to receiving care in the overwhelmed system.
Upvote
18
(21
/
-3)
I recovered from COVID two weeks ago, and I am double vaccinated. The person who I picked it up from was also double vaccinated.
For both of us, it was a non event, and recovery was quick and full.
Upvote
55
(55
/
0)
(nvm, coming off of a 12 hour overnight, I sometimes post things)
as an apology I present pure electronic joy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDBzeM6KLlQ
as an apology I present pure electronic joy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDBzeM6KLlQ
Upvote
-6
(1
/
-7)
It's about fucking time.
This sort of thing could be useful for so many other problems. It's too bad you can't legislate away stupidity.
This sort of thing could be useful for so many other problems. It's too bad you can't legislate away stupidity.
Upvote
-3
(5
/
-8)
AmanoJyaku
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
We're talking about the kind transmitted by coughing, sneezing, etc... Don't legitimize trolls.
Upvote
17
(21
/
-4)
If they "trust their immune system" that much in the face of pandemic, they shouldn't even go to the hospital. Just suck down some livestock de-wormer and bleach and call it a day.
Upvote
18
(23
/
-5)
They should also be civillay liable for costs incurred by people they infect.
If your negligence while doing something else (driving) hurts someone, you are liable.
If your negligence while doing something else (driving) hurts someone, you are liable.
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
With inflation and everything else it's now about tree fiddy. And be careful you don't get scammed by that goddamn loch ness monster.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
Except this isn't a good way to get people vaccinated, which one assumes is the goal. I'm assuming the representative is not intending to just bankrupt people out of spite.
The reason why this isn't great is that it relies on people to correctly address the risk of a financially catastrophic stay at a hospital. If people were evaluating that properly they'd probably already be vaccinated.
What would be better is a cost that is up front and ongoing, which they will have to suffer while they're still healthy. I'd suggest requiring a surcharge on their insurance premiums would be far more effective and would serve the same purpose.
It would also avoid financially crippling people for years or decades with medical debt.
The reason why this isn't great is that it relies on people to correctly address the risk of a financially catastrophic stay at a hospital. If people were evaluating that properly they'd probably already be vaccinated.
What would be better is a cost that is up front and ongoing, which they will have to suffer while they're still healthy. I'd suggest requiring a surcharge on their insurance premiums would be far more effective and would serve the same purpose.
It would also avoid financially crippling people for years or decades with medical debt.
Upvote
39
(41
/
-2)
Reminds me of a certain mayoral race where the options were between a do nothing centrist and a new face that made a name for herself being confrontational on social media. The election should have been a slam dunk, but she got caught up trying to confuse people over her PhD in progress. I'd expect better from the left but it seems like politics attracts the worst in people so we get the most arrogant and publicity seeking folk instead.
Upvote
1
(6
/
-5)
Upvote
27
(29
/
-2)