According to the 2000 Census Income Information, Florida's median income for a family of 4 is around $52,000--only 1K more than Oklahoma's. I don't think one thousand is "much" higher.

I said that Florida's insurance is cheap, it's probably about the same as Oklahoma's. But not every state offers such low-cost health insurance. It was about 6 times less than what I could have paid for a less comprehensive policy from the same company here in New York. I couldn't get it because, as far as they're concerned, I'm not a Florida resident. Luckily, I'm affiliated with a very good university that offers excellent health insurance. In fact, I will be able to keep the same doctors I had under my father's health plan.

People abuse the system everywhere. ;) I was just talking with my sister who works (but not as a social worker! She does financial stuff) for the Florida Department of Children and Families. She said that if the majority of people used public assistance as a helping hand, she would be "out of a job." Yet, she believes that public assistance should remain for those people who do use it as a temporary fix to get out of a bad situation, and she probably has seen more cases of abuse than you have. :) I think the system needs to be fixed--not eliminated--so more people can be genuinely helped than enabled.

I'm not sure. I don't know where I would find that information.

I am still wondering what you meant.

Well since you're telling me that the majority of people without health insurance are unemployed I figured you would know what percentage that is right?

OK now that I'm done with the cat and mouse game, for those under 65, 30% lack health coverage due to change in employment and 53% lack coverage due to cost (CDC, 2002).

-Rudey
--Majority shmajority

I wouldnt be so sure about that. I know many wealthy people who dont have health insurance. Many people, such as my family, choose not to have health insurance and instead pay for it out of our pocket when/if we get sick. It works if you can afford to foot any sort of a spontaneous medical bill if you get sick, but for those that can't afford it...I do see a reason for health insurance. Of course, though, the situation is different the older older you get and the more dependant you are on prescription drugs.

;)

I hate to rain on your parade, but it's human nature to look out for ourselves. When it comes down to it, most people would agree, you're going to look out for the well being of your family before that of others. The degree of well being depends on the person. When you hit a point in your life where you think you've done the best you can and you're satisfied with that...then you begin to look out for other people.

Where did I say the system should be eliminated? If someone is concerned about their health insurance in their state, they should move. Free enterprise -- if the state doesn't want to provide, the taxpayers should relocate -- especially with places like median incomes like Florida and Oklahoma :D

I'm glad that your sister and you agree with me that many people abuse the system. Elimination of the services? No. Elimination of the abuse? Yes.

Hey we can all agree on the elimination of abuse :rolleyes: seen to much of it up here... welfare fraud being the favourite it seems.

I also have to believe that the services provided reduces the burden on society, more than it taxes them (pun intended). I mean if a person has now hope or chance to escape from dire straits it stands to reason they turn to crime, thereby creating a direct impact on others in society; or that a person without reasonable medical recourse becomes a bigger burden latter on... I wonder if anyone has done a study seeing if states (or countries) that have a social support network have less crime or health issues on a long-term basis?

Show me where I said that you said that the system should be eliminated. I was not referring to ANYTHING that you said--I was making a completely different point.

Of course, I'm going to put more creedence into what my sister says--actually having been employed in the field for a few years now--than your anecdotal evidence. Like I said, she's probably seen more, and more severe, cases of assistance fraud than you'll ever witness.

Off the top of my head, I know this is true in countries such as Sweden and Denmark. Yet, there are other factors. Both of those countries are in Europe and neither countries legally allows its citizens to have firearms unlike the U.S.

You can't realistically compare the U.S. to much smaller countries such as individual European countries....you'd have to compare the U.S. with Europe as a whole....western europe as well as eastern europe. And if you did that, then the answer to your question would defintiely be no.

I would agree that the wealthiest people might not have insurance. The poorest people qualify for Medicare and Medicaid and are insured through governmental means. It's probably the working poor who don't.

But, dude--you never played a sport in Florida? We always had to show proof of insurance during my medical physicals for tennis. What about studying abroad? You did that, right? There was a certain amount of evacuation and repatriation of remains insurance everyone who studied abroad when I did had to carry. True, you can get short-term insurance for both cases---but it seems to be a pain to do that every so often.

By definition, what your sister said is anecdotal evidence. If I am mistaken, please explain how.

If I misunderstood your "completely different" point, it was only due to the fact that you said this:

in a paragraph that was directly replying to something I said. So either I am having a difficult time understanding your yankee paragraph structure, or your paragraph structure just has issues ;)

Please pardon this Okie from the sticks. He knows not what he reads.

Played sports since I was 6 yrs old....never had to show proof of insurance during medical physicals for Football, Basketball, Baseball or La Crosse. The doctor never required it. And when I say I dont have health insurance...thats not entirely accurate. I do, but the policy only covers when the bill is $5,000 or more. So basically thats like not having health insurace unless something really serious happens.

I think that's called catastrophic insurance or major medical. The premiums are much lower than your standard health insurance, but the out of pocket expenses can be high. If you have a terrible illness or accident, you are covered. If you have a minor illness or injury, you pay for doctor visits, treatments, and medicine. $5,000 can add up quickly if you have an injury, accident, or illness and need to stay at the hospital and have surgery and expensive tests like a cat scan or MRI.

Some people choose not to have insurance. I actually didn't when I started my job but the nagging from my mother, friends, girls, people at work finally got to me and I went and got it. And for what? I'm still not sick. Girls always worry about that crap for no reason.

-Rudey