knockatize t1_j9ozl05 wrote
Reply to comment by cakeversuspie in FDNY wants to up the cost of ambulance rides by more than 50% by NYY657545
Wherever they are “free” (going forward, use “taxpayer funded” if you prize honesty and accuracy) such services are abused.
Sorry the ambulance crew couldn’t deal with your heart attack because they were busy tending to a drunk.
Criminalizing emergency services abuse would go a long way toward shutting down “frequent flyers” who call emergency services with minor complaints.
Ryuuken1127 t1_j9p0tsa wrote
>they were busy tending to a drunk
Ah yes, someone overindulged, so therefore they shouldn't receive free emergency treatment because they're a shit stain on society. Let's continue the course of obliterating people into debt asking for emergency (or any kind of) healthcare.
I really don't understand why Americans' first thought of any sort of free healthcare is "iTs gUnNa bE aBuSeD bY tHoSe wHo DoNt dEsErVe iT" (when in fact, they're the ones who probably need it the most)
cakeversuspie t1_j9p2s9k wrote
>>they were busy tending to a drunk > >Ah yes, someone overindulged, so therefore they shouldn't receive free emergency treatment because they're a shit stain on society. Let's continue the course of obliterating people into debt asking for emergency (or any kind of) healthcare.
This is the part that kills me. Because A SMALL MINORITY of people may abuse the system, that means we need to keep the current system of people potentially using taxis to get to the hospital to avoid being financially crushed by a $1k bill from an ambulance ride.
GnomeChomski t1_j9ptl5y wrote
Racist assholes are convinced by carlson tucker that 'some people' are leeches on the system...and are gonna take their donut.
knockatize t1_j9r5tyd wrote
It is nowhere near a small minority of the total responses - and that's the problem.
That "small minority" is responsible for a big mess.
While many 911 calls do merit an emergency police response, unnecessarily dispatching armed officers to calls where their presence is unnecessary is more than just an ineffective use of safety resources; it can also create substantially adverse outcomes for communities of color, individuals with behavioral health disorders and disabilities, and other groups who have been disproportionately affected by the American criminal justice system.
Did anybody in this thread ever think that maybe there was a progressive reason for not being a damn fool about people who abuse the system?
ELONGATEDSNAIL t1_j9p36vs wrote
I used to be an EMT . There are frequent flyers with non emergency issues very often and they deff take up resources. Most of the time it's just elderly people who are on medicare. These people are usually poor and they use it as a way to get free medication. There are also people with mental illness who have some episode. Bringing them to a hospital does not really solve the issue but we have no other way to deal with these kinds of people besides the police. But the worst kind of people are the ones who are just trying to score narcotics. I didn't see that happen to often but i imagine it does in worse areas.
knockatize t1_j9ra186 wrote
Being drunk is rarely a 911-level emergency requiring ambulance response. Not unless somebody is driving drunk or aspirating on their own vomit.
And nobody needs EMT response multiple times daily.
cakeversuspie t1_j9p3f28 wrote
>Wherever they are “free” (going forward, use “taxpayer funded” if you prize honesty and accuracy) such services are abused. > >Sorry the ambulance crew couldn’t deal with your heart attack because they were busy tending to a drunk. > >Criminalizing emergency services abuse would go a long way toward shutting down “frequent flyers” who call emergency services with minor complaints.
So your solution is...do nothing...because some people MIGHT abuse the system? So we should keep using the same system where people would rather take the risk on a cab ride than be saddled with potentially crippling debt for a medical emergency?
People abuse the welfare system too, but that still exists. And imo, if the welfare system prevents just ONE person/family from starving or being on the street, I am more than happy with my taxes going to that, even if there is abuse.
knockatize t1_j9pem7v wrote
Might, my ass.
People DO abuse the system. A lot. And taxpayers pay for it all.
This is classic tragedy of the commons: a small but significant part of the population monopolizing and misusing services that are for the -entire- population, and going unpunished even in extreme cases.
First responders can let the frequent flyer know about the existing non-emergency programs for the caller, and either they get with the program or face fines and charges. These are existing programs in many jurisdictions.
But not New York City, it would appear.
Google “312 Riverside Drive” in Manhattan. It won’t show up on a map because it doesn’t exist, but it is the reported address for thousands of fake 911 calls.
From ONE guy. In this case, an old crackhead in a shelter. (That’s “older individual experiencing crackheadedness” for the exquisitely sensitive.)
Last I knew, he’s still at the shelter and still messing with 911.
Which seems to be okay by New York. One idiot Karen makes one racist 911 call about a birdwatcher and the politicians fall over themselves to pass something on bogus 911 calls involving a protected class.
But when it comes to the other hundreds of thousands of fake calls they don’t do dick.
MyBlueBucket t1_j9pfy8n wrote
not sure why you're not more concerned about the fact that people forego medical treatment due to high medical costs. People abuse any system, but the current system punishes those who have actual medical emergencies. Ambulance rides shouldn't be a for profit business.
My mother passed out all of a sudden at home one morning and I was freaking out and called the ambulance. She didn't want to go on the ambulance because she didn't want to pay for the ride but I made her go on. Fortunately she was fine, but why should she be punished for possibly having a medical emergency? She got a bill in the mail for almost $1000.
You're more concerned about the abuse by a minority of people, but not the abuse done by corporations that want to suck the money out of people suffering from medical issues.
GnomeChomski t1_j9ps72x wrote
The person you're replying to is a 'fiscal conserv-'...I mean he's a fucking racist.
MyBlueBucket t1_j9pzedy wrote
you mean the "fuck you, I got mine" party? Yeah was pretty obvious lol
cakeversuspie t1_j9pm1ei wrote
This person gets it! Thank you!
Pool_Shark t1_j9p5szg wrote
System is abused regardless. Instead of costing citizens fine the abusers
_Maxolotl t1_j9qxmzk wrote
Tens of thousands of bureaucrats are employed by the government to do the job of determining whether or not people are "deserving" of government services, so that trash like you can be satisfied that people you disapprove of aren't getting help.
If we fired them all, we'd have a lot more money to spend on providing universal free emergency care.
knockatize t1_j9r4cip wrote
Not getting help?
First responders have to provide some kind of service to people they know full well are delusional because they've dealt with their shit thousands of times.
"One man with a cellphone has created enough havoc to be hauled over and over into court, but not enough to warrant a prison cell. He knows it’s wrong, and he apologizes to the judge, but he won’t stop*."*
...but whose cases account for countless hours in court, counseling sessions, medical appointments and other city services."
And we're on the hook for all of it. For everybody else in a city of 8 million who pulls this crap. Eventually some first responders figure out the calls are bogus but there's lots of turnover so it's a lesson that has to be repeatedly and expensively learned.
Services? There are craploads of services.
The services that work are the ones where he's put in a secure facility. With no phone.
RChickenMan t1_j9rbjao wrote
> going forward, use “taxpayer funded” if you prize honesty and accuracy
You can't truly expect the general population to integrate conservative talking points into their everyday speech. It's widely understood that "free" in the context of government services does indeed refer to taxpayer-funded. This whole "it's not free it's taxpayer-funded" thing isn't the "gotcha" that you think it is.
knockatize t1_j9rdh6r wrote
Fine, call them free if you'd like.
You still can't endlessly dump false-alarm and non-emergency calls on EMTs and expect them to sit there and take it. Not for any wage.
You also don't want cops responding to non-emergencies, do you? That's the leftist talking point, but when some eager beaver fresh out of the academy arrives on the scene because such is the insistence of the Reddit masses, don't be shocked when a mentally-ill repeat caller who should have been in an inpatient facility gets plugged.
RChickenMan t1_j9uur0i wrote
Well no, but you also can't expect people to sit there and take it when vast swaths of our society are unable to afford access to medical care?
knockatize t1_j9uykmz wrote
Tell it to the people who waste emergency response resources, and the politicians who enable them. A whole lot of access opens up then, but politicians don’t want to be in the position of saying “no” to anybody.
-wnr- t1_j9phhzv wrote
Are you arguing that they shouldn't be "tax payer funded", or that they should be "tax payer funded" but also come with more enforcement against abuse?
knockatize t1_j9ponnc wrote
It is is partly a taxpayer funded service and should remain as such, but that can’t be defined as unlimited services to everyone everywhere forever.
There has to be a “shit list” for people who misuse the service, so that it’s still available for people with legit needs.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments