I can think of no other industry that operates the same way:
Doesn’t he know that food is a basic right? I can’t go on if these meals become too expensive. Why does he keep raising the rates? There needs to be some kind of intervention. A system where food can be given to the good citizens of this nation so that we can eat and know that our bellies will not starve. On top of that, I need everything on the menu, right now, and for free.
Related posts:
- What if restaurants were paid like doctors?
- Lack of sleep versus the patient handoff
- Health care and health insurance are not the same
- A right to private health care
- Bravo: "Health care is NOT an entitlement"
- Silence while eating
- Free health care in Hawaii
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
Eating at a restaurant is analogous to receiving cosmetic surgery. It’s a nice frill, if you can afford it, but not essential for survival.
Access to food is, and should be, a fundamental human right. Allowing people to starve because they can’t afford to buy groceries is simply unconscionable. That’s why we have food stamps, WIC, and faith- and community-supported food pantries — to ensure that even the poor can get their basic nutritional needs met.
The right-wing idea that healthcare should only be provided to those who can afford it is frightening, disgusting, and frankly, only a step away from endorsing eugenics. When did we, as a nation, decide that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” means entitlement to wealth for some at the expense of life for others?
anon. Right now. Today. There are federally funded sliding scale clinics that charge patients based on their ability to pay. There are also county health departments that are funded by tax payers. To insinuate that services do not exist for those without insurance is false. I equate these health care services to the food stamps and federal housing programs. Here is your safety net.
If the government wishes to make health care available to all, they should fully fund their federal health clinics and add access to all available services. I don’t believe for a second that the right wing believes health care should only be provided to those who can afford it. That’s just plain false. But to make everyone receive their service at the level of food stamps and federal housing is not right either.
Happy: “I don’t believe for a second that the right wing believes health care should only be provided to those who can afford it. That’s just plain false.”
Which party wanted to cut Medicare reimbursement by 10% this year? What effect would that have had on the few remaining doctors willing to accept Medicare? Sure, I realize the piddly 1.5% increase isn’t adequate, but it beats the Bush administration’s intent.
The reality is, state and federal funding for healthcare has been cut repeatedly over the last few decades, and not by the Dems, either. Isn’t that one of the reasons we’ve gone from having approximately 6,000 operating EDs to only about 3,800 over the past 8 or 10 years?
I’ve read a lot of medical blogs where doctors complain about patients expecting to receive free services (seems I read something to that effect on your blog today), yet they don’t want their tax dollars used for patient subsidies, either. I’m not saying that’s your opinion, but it’s one I’ve heard echoed by a number of your colleagues.
If you don’t want to fund it, and you don’t want to provide it for free, but a large number of people can’t afford pay for it, where does that leave you? The de facto result would be that only those who could afford to pay out of pocket, or pay high insurance premiums, would receive medical care.
I agree with most of the rest of what you said.
Incidentally, I wrote the first post after reading the blog entry out of context. The linked essay is actually pretty funny.
Comments on this entry are closed.