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: combjelly who wrote (515956)	9/24/2009 11:42:37 AM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1578283

But not all hospitals are county funded. Or even most. A substantial proportion are, but I don't know the number. It is the rare county that has more than one Or NEEDS more than one. Just as Parkland serves surrounding counties -- unfair though it may be to Dallas County taxpayers -- so do others where they need to. Many counties are just too small to support EVEN ONE hospital, let alone two or more. The point is that for the most part the needs of the indigent are reasonably well cared for with this system (and related taxpayer and charity funded services). That's not to say it is perfect or couldn't stand improvement. But the simple truth is there are county hospitals numbered in the thousands in this country which will treat any patient who walks in the door, will NOT simply patch them up and ship them, but will give them the same level of care they would give a well-insured patient. This is not what you said. Texas has a county with fewer than 100 people in it, and several with fewer than 1000. These counties won't support ANY health care facility at all, or at best a rural health facility. Certainly not a hospital. You just can't solve everyone's problems. But you can do a reasonably good job and the county hospital system does in most areas.