Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobot
Ridiculous nonsense. It makes little business sense for an HMO to take on the risk of this teenagers health, which is likely to fail and to fix it will be enormously expensive.
|
Then have the kid sign a contract saying he yields any special claims to further medical care following the procedure.
Quote:
|
Govmnt's aged biased prohibitions are irrelevant. The age of consent is done to protect the young. The government, with its hands on healthcare, must still abide by its own anti-discrimination legislation.
|
First of all, it's not irrelevant. All one needs to see to figure that out are the baseless variations on the laws. Why do they vary by sex? Why do they vary by state? Are people dumber for a longer time in some states?
Of course not. The real reason (or at least one of them) for age-based discrimination is winning votes from American idiots who think it protects their kids. "I want to raise the age of consent from 16 to 17 to protect your daughter from being raped, and the guy that opposes me obviously wants her to die a painful death." Do you really think most Americans would figure out that it is bullshit?
Quote:
|
Theres no such thing as free health care, in any case they can compete with publicly provided health cover.
|
No, but there is health care for which you are forced to pay through taxes REGARDLESS of your use of it. The taxed amount is a sunk cost, and thus must not be considered in a rational decision. As a result, the choice is between getting health care from someone who will do it at no cost to you, vs getting it from someone who will charge you full price. The difference between getting one or the other is the full price of care.
In this case, it really wouldn't matter for most people how much government care sucks or how inefficient it is since they won't even be able to afford private health care after having their money taken from them to fund the government care. And for those who do have the money, it would be like choosing between free care and full price care.
Think about it. How can a business reasonably compete when the other side is allowed to break into the homes of its patients and take their money even before (and even if they don't) they say they need any health care, while giving people care at no additional cost?