Comments | hipgnosis6: I'd Rather See The Witch Doctor

hipgnosis6

I'd Rather See The Witch Doctor

Jul 18, 2007 09:46

First, let me say that I think some forms of therapy are useful, if for no other reason than they are comforting to the recipient. And that psychiatric medication has its place - it's just often used inappropriately, and that's driven in large part by marketing and the way our current health care system works. This is also primarily based on ( Read more... )

angst

Comments 12

fuerve July 18 2007, 19:17:48 UTC

I basically agree. So, when I was a young one, and I had my issues to deal with, I got fed pills to keep me level. This is right as I was entering puberty. And one might then wonder why I turned to drugs the way that others turn to sex.

Yeah, the whole thing is a mess. I'm not saying that listening to a person's problems isn't something that should come with a fee attached. I hate sitting and listening to people drone on and on about their various problems, all the time, with no other facet to the relationship. I got my fill of that sort of thing in high school. Now, you'd have to pay me money to have a relationship like that, and that's what therapists do.

Or rather, what they don't do. They're qualified to do it. It's just cheaper and more practical in the short term to suppress these problems by way of medication. Bad form, I say.

hipgnosis6 July 18 2007, 19:43:38 UTC

It took them ten years to admit that prozac contributes to suicidal thoughts in children. I'm waiting for them to bust out with "SSRIs cause strokes in lab rats" or "anti-anxiety drugs cause abnormal late-stage brain development in children and teens ( ... )

unkadwayne July 19 2007, 14:27:19 UTC

I have no insurance. So, last week, when I was crapping out the blood laced mucus into the toilet I had to tough it out. I guess it worked out all right because I'm still here ( ... )

hipgnosis6 July 19 2007, 16:53:21 UTC

Hey wait, don't you work for a security company/agency type place? And they don't offer an insurance package as a benefit for FT employees? What scumbags.

It's REQUIRED in (liberal, progressive) WA if you have more than eight employees. The company I work for gets away with not giving me health care because I am technically a contractor. I guess that might be true for you, as well.

unkadwayne July 19 2007, 17:05:59 UTC

Company's based in NH and I work in MA. They have about 950 employees and NH does not require them to give you health ins. They are required to offer it but the deal is so bad that it's not worth it. Because I work in MA and MA now requires all residents to have health ins, I MIGHT get some, but that ins is just as bad as the one offered.

*shrug*

My health and the maintenance there of is my responsibility, not anyone else's and for me to expect otherwise is ridiculous. I am responsible for me. No one else.

[boy, that'll open up a giant can of wyrms!]

hipgnosis6 July 19 2007, 17:54:51 UTC

The idea that your health and maintenance thereof is solely your responsibility is a little bit faulty. Since you're NOT seeing doctors for preventative care or for smaller issues, the burden will fall on the state when you need to go to emergency care when your health issues get out of hand. It's cheaper to provide you care before you're disabled or in the ER ( ... )

unkadwayne July 20 2007, 01:59:59 UTC

there, y'see, that's what I don't like. The idea that I, as a 'free' individual in the 'free' USofA am REQUIRED to purch a certain product simply because of the fact that I am breathing. In this case Health Insurance. I am either free to do whatever I want with my money that I earned or I am not. If I am not then this is not America. In MA, you MUST purchase Health Insurance or you will be fined ~$250 when you file your state income tax return. That is wrong in my book. Why not just tax everyone that $250 and let them deduct their Ins payments up to that limit. I'll tell you why, because there are a great many here (about 2,000,000) who do not file an income tax return at the end of the year. Can you guess who they are? That's right: Illegal Aliens. Not "Undocumented Workers." Criminals who have invaded and, get this, get Welfare, Medicare/Medicaid, Education FREE healthcare (because it is illegal for an ER to turn anyone away), WIC, and a bunch of other anagrams. An now some dumbass wants to give them Amnesty after they took ( ... )

hipgnosis6 July 20 2007, 17:32:03 UTC

How 'bout we tax everybody $250 and you don't have to buy a damned thing - you won't see a significant increase in your taxes, either, because like WA state found, providing preventative care pretty much pays for itself by reducing burden on the heavily-subsidized emergency care and welfare-care systems. And I can't say that I like the "force you to buy insurance" model, either - while it's required here for companies to offer it to employees, you CAN opt out. Not 100% sure why you would, though. Even a "bad deal" on a policy that's not very comprehensive is probably better than a bankruptcy from repeated forced visits to the ER.

I won't get into my feelings about illegal immigration - that's not what this rant is about. But unlike most of the bleeding heart liberals you know, as a socialist I actually take a pretty hardline stance on it. We can rant about that later, K?

unkadwayne July 20 2007, 23:33:06 UTC

Here is a really good reason to opt out of the insurance my employer offers: $2080.

That's what it would cost me. $40 a week. As you know I don't make a bunch of money so $40 a week really does matter.

And do you know how many times I wished I had the $3000 deductable crapola 'insurance' they offer ove the past three years?

Zero.

So I guess I'm ahead the $6240. But, of course I spent it ata a rate of about $40/week on stuff that makes me fat and unhealthy....

*shrug*

hipgnosis6 July 21 2007, 01:52:43 UTC

Based on some comments and things said in conversations, I'd like to remind you that my bill for the ER visit after my car accident was over $2000. There goes your yearly savings ( ... )

Thread 6