If we were sustaining six deaths every day on the battlefield, it'd
cause us all pain. Why doesn't this?

According to a study released by the Harvard Medical School, 2,266
veterans under the age of 65 died last year as a result of not having
health insurance. Researchers emphasize that "that figure is more than
14 times the number of deaths (155) suffered by U.S. troops in
Afghanistan in 2008, and more than twice as many as have died (911 as
of Oct. 31) since the war began in 2001."

The 1.46 million working-age veterans that did not have health
insurance last year all experienced reduced access to care as a
consequence, leading to "six preventable deaths a day."

Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people
-- too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify
for Medicaid or means-tested VA care," said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a
professor at Harvard Medical School. [...]

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the report and associate
professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, "On this Veterans Day we
should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year
in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who
were killed by our broken health insurance system. That's six
preventable deaths a day."

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:53:18 -0800, jps wrote:


If we were sustaining six deaths every day on the battlefield, it'd
cause us all pain. Why doesn't this?

According to a study released by the Harvard Medical School, 2,266
veterans under the age of 65 died last year as a result of not having
health insurance. Researchers emphasize that "that figure is more than
14 times the number of deaths (155) suffered by U.S. troops in
Afghanistan in 2008, and more than twice as many as have died (911 as
of Oct. 31) since the war began in 2001."

The 1.46 million working-age veterans that did not have health
insurance last year all experienced reduced access to care as a
consequence, leading to "six preventable deaths a day."

Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people
-- too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify
for Medicaid or means-tested VA care," said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a
professor at Harvard Medical School. [...]

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the report and associate
professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, "On this Veterans Day we
should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year
in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who
were killed by our broken health insurance system. That's six
preventable deaths a day."

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

....in response to a specious argument, btw.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.




And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the Air
Force. They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise medical
for those not retiring from the service And they do take care of those with
service connected problems. My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets his
care via the VA. Good care also.

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:19:51 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.

And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the Air
Force. They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise medical
for those not retiring from the service And they do take care of those with
service connected problems. My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets his
care via the VA. Good care also.

I think vets deserve better. I'm sure you disagree.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 01:55:35 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:36:21 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:19:51 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.

And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the Air
Force. They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise medical
for those not retiring from the service And they do take care of those with
service connected problems. My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets his
care via the VA. Good care also.

I think vets deserve better. I'm sure you disagree.


I think it depends on what you did in the military. I bounced around
in the North Atlantic, kept the godless communists out of the
Chesapeake bay and I don't think the VA owes me anything.

My father had a European theater medal with 2 battle stars, CIB, a
couple other campaign medals, 2 purple hearts and he was a POW. He
deserved the care he got.

And yet, unless you were injured somewhere along the line, it matters
not what you faced.

What happens, like in the case of Agent Orange and a hundred other
chemicals vets were exposed to, symptoms don't show up for years and
aren't directly attributable to the exposure, the trauma, the ugliness
that is war.

Are those vets any less entitled?

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:36:21 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:19:51 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.

And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the
Air
Force. They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise
medical
for those not retiring from the service And they do take care of those
with
service connected problems. My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets
his
care via the VA. Good care also.

I think vets deserve better. I'm sure you disagree.


I think it depends on what you did in the military. I bounced around
in the North Atlantic, kept the godless communists out of the
Chesapeake bay and I don't think the VA owes me anything.

My father had a European theater medal with 2 battle stars, CIB, a
couple other campaign medals, 2 purple hearts and he was a POW. He
deserved the care he got.



Very true. I sat in an air conditioned electronics shop and fixed transport
airplane radars. My brother spent 2 tours in Nam as a Seabee. Lots of
agent Orange streams that he got in to build bridges, etc. He has several
health problems. He deserves the medical care. Me, the closest I got to
injury was a ricochet at the range one year during annual qualifying and
getting a major zap by a radar power supply. Bad test lead, and I flew
about 20' backwards. Could have been bad, just hurt for a couple days. If
I gotten a major injury, I would expect them to take care of me. I am a
Viet Nam era vet and I think those who got injured or served 20 years
deserve fine medical care. The rest of us are not owed lifetime medical.

On Nov 11, 12:19*am, "Bill McKee" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.

And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the Air
Force. *They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise medical
for those not retiring from the service *And they do take care of those with
service connected problems. *My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets his
care via the VA. *Good care also.

My dad had his hip replaced and through the VA. he had a marvelous job
none and the whole bill came out to less than $600.00. Surgery and 4
days in the Hospital.

jps wrote:
If we were sustaining six deaths every day on the battlefield, it'd
cause us all pain. Why doesn't this?

According to a study released by the Harvard Medical School, 2,266
veterans under the age of 65 died last year as a result of not having
health insurance. Researchers emphasize that "that figure is more than
14 times the number of deaths (155) suffered by U.S. troops in
Afghanistan in 2008, and more than twice as many as have died (911 as
of Oct. 31) since the war began in 2001."

The 1.46 million working-age veterans that did not have health
insurance last year all experienced reduced access to care as a
consequence, leading to "six preventable deaths a day."

Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people
-- too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify
for Medicaid or means-tested VA care," said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a
professor at Harvard Medical School. [...]

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the report and associate
professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, "On this Veterans Day we
should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year
in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who
were killed by our broken health insurance system. That's six
preventable deaths a day."

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

I am tired of hear that people have died because they are not recieving
health care. In every city in this country, a person in need of health
care can recieve health equal to anyone else. If they don't receive the
attention they needed they have not sought out the treatment.

Since this country was founded, Indigents automatically became the ward
of the government and were provided for. Over the years the concept of
how to provide this care has changed, but today ANYONE can go to a
hospital and recieve the best care available whether they pay for it or
not. I have never seen a patients hospital chart that said "indigent
provide reduced care".

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:19:51 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:27:41 -0600, wrote:

genuine drivel redacted by some dead poet

The study's authors warn that the health care legislation "would do
virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013" and would "leave at
least 17 million uninsured over the long run when reform kicks in,"
leaving many veterans still without care.

Why not simply adjust the means-testing favorably for veterans (ref.
"Spinal Tap")?

...in response to a specious argument, btw.




And I do not remember being promised lifetime medical when I joined the Air
Force. They cover service connected injuries, but did not promise medical
for those not retiring from the service And they do take care of those with
service connected problems. My brother is an Agent Orange vet, and gets his
care via the VA. Good care also.


You'll notice that JPS did not respond to the point that the
means-testing merely needs to be adjusted to accomodate veterans of
lesser means (those that are "unable" to afford health insurance).

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access