Timeline for answer to COVID-19 in US healthcare: who pays for testing? by Bryan Krause
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:20 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Mar 4, 2020 at 21:51 | history | edited | Bryan Krause | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Updated with changing current events
|
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:54 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | and the reason I was asking about acceptance is that SE puts a number of "freezes" on things, unless the answer or question changes. say you vote to close, then realize you didn't like the reason given. you try to change it, can't. so you withdraw vote, then vote to close again with the new reason. can't => question hasn't changed. not sure this is the case or not with an acceptance. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:44 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | I know what you mean about ongoing events. recently a question became active about what Bernie Sanders's path to nomination after Super Tuesday's defeat(?). I was puzzled about the wording and context until I realized it was the 2016 campaign. if things change sufficiently i could also edit the title to say As of "March 2, 2020"... | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:37 | comment | added | Bryan Krause | @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica You don't need my permission to accept another answer if a better one comes along. Unfortunately, the SE model isn't great for dynamic situations - I'll surely edit if I can but also don't want to change an answer too much that has already been voted on. I agree with you that this is an important thing; for many, their insurance should cover their care, but others will have co-pays, have to pay out of a health savings acct, or are simply not insured. US healthcare is a bit of a mess - be glad you're north of the border. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:34 | vote | accept | Italian Philosopher | ||
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:34 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | Your answer seems to pretty much cover the current state of affairs. I'll accept it, but do you mind either modifying it, or letting me accept another, if and when more definitive arrangements are made at the federal level? or in most states? I hope that the govt realizes they really need to take $ worries out of the testing mechanism and fix it too, ASAP. Living in Vancouver, we're 2 hours drive away from what seems like a new hotspot in Seattle, hardly reassuring. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:30 | comment | added | Viktor | @Chronocidal they were convicted of a crime. The judicial system cares little about actual innocence unless you can prove it by preponderance of the evidence or better. Once convicted of a crime the ideas of due process no longer apply. A person in quarantine has committed no crime. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 16:29 | comment | added | Viktor | @Damon by the US Constitution the federal government is generally prohibited from imposing a direct tax other than income tax. Since this quarantine in the scope this question seems to stem from federal action to defend this money being taken from you under the federal government’s power would generally at the minimum require passage of a taxing statute by congress and also apportionment of this tax duty among the states. Also the act (Public Health Service Act) allowing quarantines seems to have several amendments that violate the origination clause under this interpretation... | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 13:28 | comment | added | Chronocidal | @Viktor I very much doubt that everyone in prison "agreed" to be there either (especially, but not limited to, those who will later be shown innocent or wrongly convicted) | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 12:01 | comment | added | Damon | @Viktor: This is not uncommon. Do you pay tax? I'm willing to bet you didn't agree to do that. It's a principle in many states that if you have property (or assets) you are out of luck. Only if you have debt, you're pretty safe. For example, when your mayor (whose brother owns a construction company) decides that the pavement in the street you live in is going to be renewed, you will be paying around 50-60k, whether you agree with that pavement being renewed or not. You may have to sell your house, and guess what, nobody cares. It's 100% legal, and being done. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 11:03 | comment | added | Stian | It is well known that US hospitals have an "invoice first, ask questions later" kind of attitude to their patients... | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 10:55 | comment | added | dan-klasson | Stories like these that will make people hesitant to get tested. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 7:17 | comment | added | vsz | "the bill was sent in error" - this usually means "we hope that some people will not contest it and so we'll get easy money from them." | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 4:14 | comment | added | Bryan Krause | @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica Yes the date is clear in their individual letters, I've added it here. This sort of thing is probably not best for the SE format - I've answered as well as I can for this moment in time but of course everything is dynamic in a situation like this. It's hard to balance information with definitive answers. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 4:12 | history | edited | Bryan Krause | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Mar 3, 2020 at 2:33 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | could you add the date when the AHAANA... first made that request? it is not dated on their site, but if you Google for the quoted full title, it looks as if it first shows up Feb 27th. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:43 | comment | added | what number you wanted | There's already outrage that the CDC released someone who then tested positive. So I wound't put it beyond the plausible that the "default quarantine" is going to be in a place farther away from now on. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:37 | comment | added | what number you wanted | @Viktor: isn't the same choice with home detention (fees)? | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:34 | comment | added | Viktor | @Fizz sounds like one can plausibly argue duress in that circumstance. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:33 | history | edited | Bryan Krause | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 176 characters in body
|
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:33 | comment | added | what number you wanted | @Viktor: I'm sure agreement can be obtained along the lines of "sign here and we quarantine you in a nice hospital or don't and we take you to Gitmo (or some other remote US military base)" | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:30 | comment | added | Viktor | @Fizz because if someone is sued in court they can argue there was never any agreement to pay. A person involuntarily detained has not signed any contract or otherwise consented to their treatment. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 1:23 | comment | added | what number you wanted | Americans can be made to pay for their prison-related expenses, especially huge fees for home detention supervision. I can't see why the capitalistic principles would not be applied here, i.e. pay for their own quarantine. | |
| Mar 3, 2020 at 0:02 | history | edited | Bryan Krause | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Missing end of a sentence
|
| Mar 2, 2020 at 22:17 | history | answered | Bryan Krause | CC BY-SA 4.0 |