Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
Eddie Bennett

Why Is Georgia Lacking In Health Insurance Policyies For Its People?

Recommended Posts

It seems to me that Georgia is not a top quality state to live in. Statistics show this state to be among the worst to live in, and health insurance is one of the things that give it that ranking.

 

 

Here is the story:

 

Due to the high poverty rate and relatively low life expectancy, Georgia ranks among the worst states to live in. The 17.0% share of state residents living in poverty is well above the 14.7% national poverty rate. Additionally, 13.9% of the Peach State’s population lack health insurance, nearly the highest uninsured rate of any state. Difficult financial circumstances and inadequate health care coverage likely make it difficult for large segments of the population to lead healthy lives. Partially as a result, life expectancy in the Georgia is only 76.9 years, 1.6 years below the average life expectancy nationwide.

 

Click here to see how all 50 states compare in quality of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of posts here were split off to the political forum. Constant interjection of politics into every thread in the Cafe won't be tolerated. There is a political forum for that. Being snarky toward members won't be tolerated either. Have a good evening everybody! Keep Mayberry free with liberty and justice for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wish people would talk about doing something to make Georgia a better state to live in.

 

Anybody can blame politics, but I think we can do something with these facts beside blaming it on Georgia's people.

 

We are better than this.

Edited by The Postman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When people are poor, insurance is one of the first things to go from the budget. The highest cost of care is emergency services and it is the most inefficient. Sadly that is where the poorest get most of their care but it doesn't solve their problem or prevent the issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody can blame politics

This topic reeks of politics and should be moved; not just the responders who merely took the bait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When people are poor, insurance is one of the first things to go from the budget. The highest cost of care is emergency services and it is the most inefficient. Sadly that is where the poorest get most of their care but it doesn't solve their problem or prevent the issues.

 

Healthcare facilities get paid from somewhere, stercus tauri, but putting a bandade on a poor person's wound and being sent away is not much for someone to pay so much for. If that is just politics, as Ed Head said; how is that possible? I think it's about health and decency in the medical profession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Healthcare facilities get paid from somewhere, stercus tauri, but putting a bandade on a poor person's wound and being sent away is not much for someone to pay so much for. If that is just politics, as Ed Head said; how is that possible? I think it's about health and decency in the medical profession.

Do you really expect doctors and hospitals to work for a financial loss? If so, what incentive is there for people to become doctors or for hospitals to remain open? One of the problems facing health care today is the intrusion of politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can anyone addresss the "high poverty rate" (btw, not sure if I trust the statistics from that spam-riddled site you linked), without having a (very likely heated) socio-POLITICAL discussion? IF you really are looking for nuts & bolts cause/effect HONEST replies to your topic question from a diversely opinionated and knowledgeable group here? Not that I want to get sucked in because I don't. But I find it weird that a socio-political topic can be started but socio-political replies get thrown out because they're "political."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issues can be discussed without making the discussion political. It happens every day in classrooms and boardrooms across the country. If you want to discuss the politics of poverty, there is a political forum that is open for you to start a thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issues can be discussed without making the discussion political. It happens every day in classrooms and boardrooms across the country. If you want to discuss the politics of poverty, there is a political forum that is open for you to start a thread.

 

Very interesting pov. But at the risk of an uneven hand kicking this post out, I will disagree that this topic ever gets discussed (in a meaningful way) without addressing the socio-political aspects. Academia? Boardrooms? How relevant are they to this forum? This forum is neither a classroom nor a boardroom.

 

Maybe it would help if you could define "political," at least for this thread. For example, if some well-thought out replies to this thread topic that you allowed (which by the way, once again - by its very nature is political due to being divided into states since states are run by government politicians; and who on earth talks about state poverty and poor healthcare without discussing socio-political events that, by nature, involve politicians and those they govern?), many of the replies regarding poverty lie in the socio-political traumas being heaped upon our communities such as crack moms & babies, deadbeat dads, welfare abuse, babies having babies, meth labs and much more. Is that allowed to be touched upon? Maybe you should outline exactly what can and cannot be touched upon to have a meaningful discussion, at least for this thread, which you seem to be taking the stance that it is not political by its very nature. Are socio-politics different than 'actual' politics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When people are poor, insurance is one of the first things to go from the budget.

Are you talking about the family budget here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting pov. But at the risk of an uneven hand kicking this post out, I will disagree that this topic ever gets discussed (in a meaningful way) without addressing the socio-political aspects. Academia? Boardrooms? How relevant are they to this forum? This forum is neither a classroom nor a boardroom.

 

Maybe it would help if you could define "political," at least for this thread. For example, if some well-thought out replies to this thread topic that you allowed (which by the way, once again - by its very nature is political due to being divided into states since states are run by government politicians; and who on earth talks about state poverty and poor healthcare without discussing socio-political events that, by nature, involve politicians and those they govern?), many of the replies regarding poverty lie in the socio-political traumas being heaped upon our communities such as crack moms & babies, deadbeat dads, welfare abuse, babies having babies, meth labs and much more. Is that allowed to be touched upon? Maybe you should outline exactly what can and cannot be touched upon to have a meaningful discussion, at least for this thread, which you seem to be taking the stance that it is not political by its very nature. Are socio-politics different than 'actual' politics?

 

Great point.

 

The short, truthful answer is that comments only become "political" when they come from a point of view that is not shared by a certain liberal female poster who is also a mod.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point.

 

The short, truthful answer is that comments only become "political" when they come from a point of view that is not shared by a certain liberal female poster who is also a mod.

 

Please share!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would I bother to tell you something you already know?

Are you saying I'm a mod? If so, you would be incorrect. In fact, I've never been a mod. Like many, just because I support this site and lean left does not make me a mod.

 

You're the third poster to say this, and you are all wrong. What you are not including is the fact that I would never commit to being a mod. No way, no how.

 

However, think whatever you like, I know the truth and the truth is I'm not and never have been a mod. But you guys know everything, so think what you'd like. I could care less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying I'm a mod? If so, you would be incorrect. In fact, I've never been a mod. Like many, just because I support this site and lean left does not make me a mod.

 

You're the third poster to say this, and you are all wrong. What you are not including is the fact that I would never commit to being a mod. No way, no how.

 

However, think whatever you like, I know the truth and the truth is I'm not and never have been a mod. But you guys know everything, so think what you'd like. I could care less.

 

 

Lots of denial going on there. :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should really try to think for yourself without depending on gossip.

 

Does that mean that you'll follow your own suggestion and stop reading the Huffington Post? :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean that you'll follow your own suggestion and stop reading the Huffington Post? :rofl:

Not an issue but in return you'd have to quit those alt right sites AND Fox News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<snip> If that is just politics, as Ed Head said </snip>

Please don't misrepresent what I said, which was that your OP topic "reeks of politics."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...