• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Real ‘Norma Rae’ dead of cancer after battle with health insurer

StandUpChuck

Tart with a Heart
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
10,177
Reaction score
3,715
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Paying fpr chemo and surgeries as long as they are not experimental is what we are supposed to do and that is what the person or organization who pays for the premium has agreed to with the insurance company. I didn't see why her meds were temporarily denied but were they not generic or maybe they were not part of the company's grug formulary. She needs to know that she should not get a disease that requires a drug that is not in the formulary.

She obviously did not plan this out too well.


Well you can debate emotionally and sarcastically all you want, but that doesn't change the facts here. The only issue with the ins co cited in this article is a 2 month denial of a drug that might have helped a little. They did not deny chemotherapy or 2 surgeries. During those 2 months without approval of the meds, there is no way a woman like Norma Rae is just going to say, oh never mind. If it were me, I would beg, borrow or steal the money to pay for the meds and deal with (or have someone else deal with) the insurance company during those months. She obviously was able to get them to reverse the decision. READ THE ARTICLE. Where was this woman's family, friends and union to help her pay for those meds while waiting for the ins co?

Your emotions are being played upon (and preyed upon) by Daniel Tencer and Danarhea. And while the knee-jerkers are ignoring the facts and crying murder, you're exploiting a woman's death to further your own agenda.
 

Alex Libman

Banned
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
219
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
[...] Unions do not steal from any one, which is one of their few positive points.

Unions only exist through government force.

In a free society, joining a union that is against your employer's rules would naturally get you fired, escorted off the employer's property, blacklisted, and you'll have a very hard time finding work ever again. By using the guns of state to "protect" them, unions violate the employer's natural rights! (And the "employer" could in fact be millions of stockholders of very diverse backgrounds and income levels.)

Furthermore, by unfairly raising the wages and other employment costs of unionized workers, unions hurt the consumers as well. By making it more difficult to fire unionized employees, unions hurt unemployed individuals all over the world who would gladly compete for the unionized worker's place. Etc.

The irony here is that since unionization hurts economic growth, and since faster economic growth leads to faster medical advances and lower cost, her life's work actually contributed to her own death just a bit! And everyone else's too!


[...] If you cannot affford to live then die and get out of the way of the living. [...]

Human beings evolved over millions of years. The human life expectancy used to be around 20 a few thousand years ago. Living to the age of 68 would be rare even a few hundred years ago. It is materialistic advances that make ever-expanding life-spans (and someday perhaps even immortality) possible.

Those material advances don't just fall from the sky because you want them to, they must be created first. In order for them to be created, people must work to create them. In order for people to work, they must be incentivized to do so. Those incentives have to come from somewhere. The most fair and efficient way of paying all those costs is to require individuals to pull their own economic weight: you want a cookie, you pay for a cookie. In absence of that, the incentive to make cookies crumbles!
 
Last edited:

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well you can debate emotionally and sarcastically all you want, but that doesn't change the facts here. The only issue with the ins co cited in this article is a 2 month denial of a drug that might have helped a little. They did not deny chemotherapy or 2 surgeries. During those 2 months without approval of the meds, there is no way a woman like Norma Rae is just going to say, oh never mind. If it were me, I would beg, borrow or steal the money to pay for the meds and deal with (or have someone else deal with) the insurance company during those months. She obviously was able to get them to reverse the decision. READ THE ARTICLE. Where was this woman's family, friends and union to help her pay for those meds while waiting for the ins co?

Your emotions are being played upon (and preyed upon) by Daniel Tencer and Danarhea. And while the knee-jerkers are ignoring the facts and crying murder, you're exploiting a woman's death to further your own agenda.

:applaud

Seriously, you gave an excellent presentation of reality.

If your life is in such serious jeopardy, is money even a consideration for yourself at all?
I'd take out a loan, mortgage my house, anything to preserve my life.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
80,951
Reaction score
49,061
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Insurance company death panel strikes again. It is notable that insurance company death panels routinely sentence people to death each and every day. It is also notable that, under either the Democratic or Republican health plans in Congress, this would be a criminal act. If the Republicans get what they want, that is, no Obama Care, Liberals should still be happy that insurance company death panels would be illegal. Liberals and Conservatives can argue all they want about the rest, but don't you think this would be a decent first step? IMHO, this provision, under the plans from BOTH sides, would be the American thing to do. Whatever we argue about on the rest of either plan, this provision needs to be passed NOW.

Article is here.

That's one thing I find funny about this whole "death panel" thing. There does exist one already, it's through the insurance companies. They want you to pay in and then die suddenly and inexpensively. They'll fight all the while to keep from paying out, even going so far as dropping people for unrelated, minor issues.

I don't think what Obama wants is the proper direction or would help alleviate this problem. But there is a problem and we need some intelligent discussion and legislation on this subject. Fat chance though.
 

formerroadie

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
2,014
Reaction score
590
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You do not have the right to steal from others, no matter how badly you may want it.

This is the mentality that will bring down US Citizens' livelihood and hand it to the insurance companies and medical suppliers in the future. Thanks, but no thanks. Why you want more expensive health care and not more money in your pocket is beyond me. This proves the naysayers wrong about UHC. People with UHC live longer and pay less for their health care, not more.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=110997469

Do your homework and back UHC!
 
Last edited:

formerroadie

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
2,014
Reaction score
590
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Then why does anyone hire unionized workers, thereby paying more money without getting more value in return?

Sorry, but union workers are held to certain standards that non-union workers are not. Union work is far more efficient and of higher quality because the union demands their workers pass specific trade standards to be included. Sorry, but you would be wrong. I have no idea why conservatives side with huge corporations rather than with citizens. It seems to be getting worse as the days go by. That's not freedom folks, that's slavery to a greedy, monolithic corporation.
 

Middleground

Dam Epidamic
Bartender
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
26,482
Reaction score
12,569
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Really prove it then, I'm from Maine have family in New Hampshire and Upper State New York who work in Hospitals and health Providers and they have since the mid 80s seen more and more Canadians come down t the US for all sort of treatment do to the fact they can't get coverage.

There are cases where Canadians go to the US for certain procedures, but at the expense of our healthcare plan. It involves mainly those who live in border cities where instead of building new facilities (or if the wait time is too great for a patient who needs quick treatment), the patient is sent to the US, where the Canadian government has reached an agreement with certain hospitals. I can assure you that it has been only a rare occasion where a Canadian has paid themselves... it would be one of those "fall through" the crack stories, unlike what happens under ANY system.

Canadians visit U.S. to get health care | Detroit Free Press | Freep.com
 

Coolguy

Banned
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
846
Reaction score
182
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Insurance company death panel strikes again. It is notable that insurance company death panels routinely sentence people to death each and every day.
Totally ridiculous.
Determining if a treatment is contractually covered does not equate to a 'Death Panel'.
Government representatives deciding what treatment would be authorized to extend life would be.




It is also notable that, under either the Democratic or Republican health plans in Congress, this would be a criminal act. If the Republicans get what they want, that is, no Obama Care, Liberals should still be happy that insurance company death panels would be illegal. Liberals and Conservatives can argue all they want about the rest, but don't you think this would be a decent first step? IMHO, this provision, under the plans from BOTH sides, would be the American thing to do.
Whatever we argue about on the rest of either plan, this provision needs to be passed NOW.
No it is not a good idea, nor does it need to be passed at all.
Forcing a 'for profit' business to take on additional risk such as above, or forcing them to cover pre-existing conditions, is unacceptable.

People who want coverage but currently can not afford it should band together and form their own non-profit insurer.



As for the article.
The title is misleading.
As for her so-called 'battle' :doh with the insurer.
It had nothing to do with her death and occurred over a year ago.


After initially being denied coverage by her insurance company for life saving treatment, Sutton is now on drug and chemo therapies and has undergone two surgeries.
North Carolina’s Union Movement Crystal Lee ‘Norma Rae’ Sutton is Battling Cancer

That article was posted online 11 July, 2008, over a year ago and she was currently receiving the treatment.
So whatever actually happened with the insurer, happened before that date also.
 

Alex Libman

Banned
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
219
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This is the mentality that will bring down US Citizens' livelihood and hand it to the insurance companies and medical suppliers in the future. Thanks, but no thanks.

It is your mentality that slows down economic growth and keeps medical innovations out of people's reach. You don't want private insurance, you're free to pray to your socialist gods to make free health-care rain from the sky, but you cannot steal!


Why you want more expensive health care and not more money in your pocket is beyond me. This proves the naysayers wrong about UHC. People with UHC live longer and pay less for their health care, not more. [...]

People who support socialist medicine are bribed and brainwashed by the government. Those stats have been debunked to pieces on other threads - socialist medicine leads to less freedom, lower quality, less medical innovations, and it isn't sustainable in the long term. The rest of the world is benefiting from medical innovations coming from America, if we go socialist their systems will go bust even faster!


Do your homework and back UHC!

Like Kunta Kinte, I will be whipped to the bone before I accept a single penny from my enemies!


Sorry, but union workers are held to certain standards that non-union workers are not. Union work is far more efficient and of higher quality because the union demands their workers pass specific trade standards to be included. Sorry, but you would be wrong. I have no idea why conservatives side with huge corporations rather than with citizens. It seems to be getting worse as the days go by. That's not freedom folks, that's slavery to a greedy, monolithic corporation.

You don't understand basic economics, and are selfishly backing government force in your (short-term) favor. The objective value of labor is determined by the objective natural laws of supply and demand. Using government to force an employer to pay more is theft!

(And I'm not a conservative.)
 
Last edited:

Cassandra

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
1,840
Reaction score
615
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Unions only exist through government force.
Oh please?!!


Human beings evolved over millions of years. The human life expectancy used to be around 20 a few thousand years ago. Living to the age of 68 would be rare even a few hundred years ago. It is materialistic advances that make ever-expanding life-spans (and someday perhaps even immortality) possible.

Those material advances don't just fall from the sky because you want them to, they must be created first.

So true. Thank the government , by way of citizen taxes, that payed for all the basic research and the public health programs / vaccinations/ potable water public works , etc. that has helped people live a long life.
 

Alex Libman

Banned
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
219
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It is economically impossible for the government to give back more than it steals from the productive economy.
 

Cassandra

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
1,840
Reaction score
615
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
It is economically impossible for the government to give back more than it steals from the productive economy.
????

Productive economy? You mean like health insurance companies? What, do tell, do these companies add to the economy?
 

Alex Libman

Banned
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
219
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Productive economy? You mean like health insurance companies? What, do tell, do these companies add to the economy?

The productive economy is all human action that is voluntary, as opposed to theft and other violence (with around 99% of violence in the world being done by governments).

In a free economy (not what we have now), a health insurance company offers voluntary risk mitigation to their consumers, smoothing out a person's lifetime medical costs into a monthly payment. The customer pays more money in total (counting interest), but he is protected from egregious expenses if/when something bad happens, in accordance to the terms of his contract. It is not a charity, nor is it cost-effective for everyone to have insurance - it's a matter of individual choice.
 
Last edited:

Cassandra

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
1,840
Reaction score
615
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The productive economy is all human action that is voluntary, as opposed to theft and other violence (with around 99% of violence in the world being done by governments).

In a free economy (not what we have now), a health insurance company offers voluntary risk mitigation to their consumers, smoothing out a person's lifetime medical costs into a monthly payment. The customer pays more money in total (counting interest), but he is protected from egregious expenses if/when something bad happens, in accordance to the terms of his contract. It is not a charity, nor is it cost-effective for everyone to have insurance - it's a matter of individual choice.

O.I.C., you are referring to fairy tales.
 

Alex Libman

Banned
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
219
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
O.I.C., you are referring to fairy tales.

No, you're the one spewing greedy socialist fairy-tales. I'm speaking in objective economic facts. Please feel free to challenge me on something specific.
 

American

Beer Lover Extraordinaire
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
90,259
Reaction score
28,873
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Bottom line is that a former union organizer got screwed on healthcare?
 

StandUpChuck

Tart with a Heart
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
10,177
Reaction score
3,715
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Bottom line is that a former union organizer got screwed on healthcare?

No, the bottom line is that a former union organizer didn't take care of getting her meds herself for the 2 months the ins co denied them. It's the take no personal responsibility thing.
 
Top Bottom