On Feb 14, 9:26*pm, "CalifBill" wrote:
"Sure,Not" wrote in message

...
On Feb 11, 11:51 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"BAR" wrote in message

...

Calif Bill wrote:
Actually is probably a good thing. 80% of a persons medical costs are
gotten in the last 2 years of life. My mom's good friend with
congestive
heart failure went into the hospital a couple years ago at 94 years of
age. The medical billing was $68,000 for an extra week of life. My mom,
who was 92 at the time was upset about the amount of money wasted. Both
Betty and my mom were RN's, and most likely have seen a lot of this. My
wife's aunt with brain tumor got 3 months of a coma and left absolutely
nothing to her son, because the doctor decided the inoperable brain
tumor
could be operated on. Put some thought into who we are lavishing
expensive healthcare on. If you have a terminal disease, do not decide
that a few hundred thousand dollars of other peoples money is well
spent
to extend your life for a month or two.

If it is my money I should be able to spend it anyway I want. But, I
shouldn't expect you, the taxpayers, to spend hundreds of thousands of
dollars to extend my life by a month or two.

The problem is you demand or sue the insurance company for the hundreds of
K
$. It is not your money, it is the insurance pool. Spending your own is
not a problem with me. It is shifting your costs to hundreds of other
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So, tell me. *What qualifies for coverage?

By your logic, if your coverage exceeds what you have paid in, you are
toast. *Fine. *Apply that to Social Security.

Nope, different things. *SS is lifetime annuity, where insurance is to cover
illness. *Dieing of old age is not necessarily an illness. *Spend $3-400k to
keep a terminal patient alive for another-3 weeks is criminal and totally
unnecessary.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Absolutely. But SS is not an annuity.