Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are poor in the US your healthcare costs will mostly or entirely be covered. This includes major surgery.
Not really, or there wouldn't be so many medical bankruptcies
The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
101–110 of 234 posts
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#102And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.
To be fair, this person would likely qualify for Medicaid in the U.S. Also, in Ontario there's a healthcare-specific tax which is not eligible for credits like normal income tax, but instead uses a standard deduction like the U.S. Federal income tax.
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#103And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.
To be fair, this person would likely qualify for Medicaid in the U.S. Also, in Ontario there's a healthcare-specific tax which is not eligible for credits like normal income tax, but instead uses a standard deduction like the U.S. Federal income tax.
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which I never understood. USA provides free healthcare for people who are poor because they don't work and healthcare for people who are retired and don't work. But the USA does not provide healthcare for people who work and keep machine turning. Hmm... I wonder if it's a political lobbying by healthcare industry to get more money for people who wouldn't provide it on their own by extracting it from the tax payers wh…
The US provides acute treatment for the destitute (i.e. we'll fix your broken bone), but I don't think we'll provide chronic treatment for the destitute. I've never heard of a destitute person getting free chemo or hospice for example.
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#105I have noticed there's been some progress on reducing the stigma when you're poor and are surrounded by those that aren't. When I was young, free and/or reduced school lunch paper punch cards were a different color than normal paid ones. Similar for food stamps, WIC, etc. Now they are all plastic cards that don't look obviously different from the cards the people with money use.
EBT moved to discreet debit cards more for ease of accounting and disbursement than recipient dignity, but WIC still uses stacks of paper checks that have to be run as a series of discrete transactions. They're embarrassing to use, almost more trouble than they're worth. It's obvious when people are paying with it-- the conveyor belt is lined with bunched groceries and paper slips while the line behind the customer b…
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#106Broke is a a synonym for bankrupt or being in bad debt. If someone says they can't afford something which is what was being expressed when someone says "I'm too poor" that doesn't mean they are broke.
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#107I have noticed there's been some progress on reducing the stigma when you're poor and are surrounded by those that aren't. When I was young, free and/or reduced school lunch paper punch cards were a different color than normal paid ones. Similar for food stamps, WIC, etc. Now they are all plastic cards that don't look obviously different from the cards the people with money use.
EBT moved to discreet debit cards more for ease of accounting and disbursement than recipient dignity, but WIC still uses stacks of paper checks that have to be run as a series of discrete transactions. They're embarrassing to use, almost more trouble than they're worth. It's obvious when people are paying with it-- the conveyor belt is lined with bunched groceries and paper slips while the line behind the customer b…
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#108And this is in Canada, where the author's surgery and other medical care was covered in full by universal health care. Without that, her situation likely would have been far worse, and yet we can still do so much better.
If you are poor in the US your healthcare costs will mostly or entirely be covered. This includes major surgery.
When you show up with an emergent condition, you get treated and kicked out. We probably spend more money on Medicaid for babies addicted to opioids than it would cost to privately insure mothers.
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which I never understood. USA provides free healthcare for people who are poor because they don't work and healthcare for people who are retired and don't work. But the USA does not provide healthcare for people who work and keep machine turning. Hmm... I wonder if it's a political lobbying by healthcare industry to get more money for people who wouldn't provide it on their own by extracting it from the tax payers wh…
This is definitely one of the most ridiculous points about the American system. Medicare for all already exists, it just requires that you quit your job (forever if you have a chronic medical issue) sell your house and assets and stop paying taxes, or having productive input into the economy entirely. What kind of sense does that make?
Re: The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
#110Poverty especially sucks when you're all alone like it seems this person was. Where I grew up, most of the people were poor, but we had rich lives for the most part. Lots of family dinners and outings. The people with more would let you take the leftovers home. You can't really train this and we all definitely need a social safety net, but I do think our closed off society prevents us from helping each other too.