Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (196104)	7/28/2004 10:20:53 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575637

A person without medical insurance goes to an emergency room. In most cases they will get treated, but in some cases they will get turned away. Nonsense. There isn't an ER in the country who turn away a person needing immediate medical help. The liability potential would be staggering. So when you find those free hospitals, let me know. I'll pass on the info. Nobody said there are free hospitals, and there certainly shouldn't be ("free hospitals" would be a total disaster for our healthcare system). The point is that we have the best healthcare in the world, and you want to throw it away to deal with 14% of the population who don't have insurance. It is patently stupid to even CONSIDER such a thing. Which was the reason the American people would not stand for it when Clinton tried it. So they don't pay it, and the hospital takes it as a loss, right? No way. They set their collection department after the person. They are relentless. Which county hospital are you dealing with? Once county/charity hospitals are on notice they are dealing with an indigent, collection action normally stops immediately. If you're dealing with privately owned hospitals it is a different thing. I think you're basically confused.