Jump to content

NPR opens new $201,000,000 headquarters


Recommended Posts

You sound like one of those !@#$s I heard arguing during the health care debate that we need socialized medicine because the "right to not die" is a fundamental one.

 

Everyone dies. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a dying person alive for an extra week is not only wasteful but cruel.

 

 

No, you dumbass. In the case of one of my parents, his quality of life was going to be very poor without the operation. The operation was necessary to give him back a quality life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No I won't.

 

Happy for your parents--I am glad that they are living an active and independent life. Even if they were not, I'd be happy for them.

 

But if you think we should continue to pay for every last medical procedure for everyone who wants it until they die, then don't B word about the medical costs of socialized medicine Comrade. Who do you think pays for all this medical coverage?

 

Vive le Parti Socialiste. Even so-called Conservatives on this board don't get it.

 

Where do you get that I believe that "we" should pay for every last medical procedure for everyone who wants it until they die? I know exactly who pays for it. Do you know and understand the principles of "The Law of Large Numbers"? What is your criteria for determining whether or not someone gets an operation? Is it based on chronological age? Effective age? What about the contract that they may have had for decades with a health insurance company? Does the fact that they may have paid premiums all their life so that in case of a major health problem they would be covered mean anything? Also, show me anywhere where I was bitching about the cost of medicine.

 

Both you and Tom are using the example of a person basically on their deathbed having hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on them to keep the breathing tube attached as a reason to toss all elderly people aside. There is a distinct difference between the two. There are a lot of cases where the elderly are leading productive and meaningful lives and an operation might let them continue to do so for another decade or two. Some grannys just aren't quite ready to be thrown off the cliff. You're gonna have to wait for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't afford to spend 25% of medicare dollars on the last year of people's lives. That's insane and is the result of our inability to help people die with dignity. Instead we fight it tooth and nail. That's not a sustainable model. We need to cut back medicare benefits on other things too--but when we spend 1 in 4 dollars on end of life care, would you agree that's something that we should look at? Do you think we spend too much money on end of life care? Do you see that as part of the problem with how we spend public funds on healthcare?

 

By the way, the fact that you're advocating paying for all the healthcare bills of the elderly is wonderful. PastaJoe welcomes you to his club.

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mom was 80 (almost 81) in 2007 and got appendicitis. The doctors said she was the oldest person they ever saw getting it. If she had waited a day, it would have burst and she would have died. Were they not supposed to operate on her because she is old? She got a clean bill of health 2 weeks later. By the way, she still takes care of the house I grew up in by herself (my dad died in 1990) and will be 87 in 2 months.

Edited by Wacka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mom was 80 (almost 81) in 2007 and got appendicitis. The doctors said she was the oldest person they ever saw getting it. If she had waited a day, it would have burst and she would have died. Were they not supposed to operate on her because she is old? She got a clean bill of health 2 weeks later. By the way, she still takes care of the house I grew up in by herself (my dad died in 1990) and will be 87 in 2 months.

 

You're an idiot. Tom will let me use his mark here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't afford to spend 25% of medicare dollars on the last year of people's lives. That's insane and is the result of our inability to help people die with dignity. Instead we fight it tooth and nail. That's not a sustainable model. We need to cut back medicare benefits on other things too--but when we spend 1 in 4 dollars on end of life care, would you agree that's something that we should look at? Do you think we spend too much money on end of life care? Do you see that as part of the problem with how we spend public funds on healthcare?

 

By the way, the fact that you're advocating paying for all the healthcare bills of the elderly is wonderful. PastaJoe welcomes you to his club.

 

You didn't answer one question that I asked you. You keep trying to frame a position on this for me so that you can argue with it. I will tell you that I am against spending a fortune to extend someone's life who is destined to be bedridden and lie in their own waste without realizing it. I can also tell you that I am for providing medical care in the case of people like Wacka's mom and my parents. The question is: who becomes The Decider?

 

Now, quit misrepresenting what I have posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you dumbass. In the case of one of my parents, his quality of life was going to be very poor without the operation. The operation was necessary to give him back a quality life.

 

But I responded to...

 

So, my elderly parents should just die because you think it might be expensive to keep them alive?

 

 

Which subject do you want to talk about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I responded to...

 

 

 

 

Which subject do you want to talk about?

 

Since we agree that a person truly on their deathbed shouldn't be kept alive by heroic measures then I guess we can talk about surgery for elderly people. So comments like this are now off the table, right? "Everyone dies. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a dying person alive for an extra week is not only wasteful but cruel."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since we agree that a person truly on their deathbed shouldn't be kept alive by heroic measures then I guess we can talk about surgery for elderly people. So comments like this are now off the table, right? "Everyone dies. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a dying person alive for an extra week is not only wasteful but cruel."

 

No one was talking about denying surgery to the elderly, you nitwit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one was talking about denying surgery to the elderly, you nitwit.

 

This from JA (post #8) could certainly be interpreted that way:

 

 

snapback.pngJohn Adams, on 22 June 2013 - 03:12 AM, said:

 

Basically it means that if Americans got off their asses and stopped eating the foods in the center aisles of their grocery stores, we'd be healthier and have less of a healthcare problem. So it's anything that helps contribute to healthy life. And it's the only way to make us healthier. Gastric bypass is not healthcare.

 

Hopefully at some point, we let old people and fatasses die without spending bazillions of dollars on them.

 

 

So then you came up with this:

 

"Everyone dies. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a dying person alive for an extra week is not only wasteful but cruel.", which is a statement I agree with

 

 

The thing about it is that there's probably not a great deal of difference in our opinions. JA on the other hand says he wouldn't bother to get a new heart valve in his 80's. I'd want to have an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about it is that there's probably not a great deal of difference in our opinions. JA on the other hand says he wouldn't bother to get a new heart valve in his 80's. I'd want to have an option.

 

I won't even bother getting an angio in my 40's. because I think it's a wasteful procedure on a fatass like me. Everybody dies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if they can afford the treatment. That would be unfair to those who can't.

 

Please clarify. If this was sarcasm you left something out, and if it wasn't, you left something out too.

 

I won't even bother getting an angio in my 40's. because I think it's a wasteful procedure on a fatass like me. Everybody dies.

 

 

If I remember correctly, your retirement plan was fatalistic too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if I get that valve replacement, I have a chance in the next decade of surpassing your post count? Now that's really messin with you mind.

 

Probably not. If I kick, I've got a Raspberry Pi set up as a "DC Tom-bot" that'll post "your an idiot" four times a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably not. If I kick, I've got a Raspberry Pi set up as a "DC Tom-bot" that'll post "your an idiot" four times a day.

 

Do you really want your legacy to be based "your" an idiot, four times a day for like forever? Did you notice I didn't even say, "gotcha"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...