Red states that already have inadequate healthcare

[procon]

systems, pose a significant threat to the rest of the country. These Republican controlled states tend to be poor and subscribe to the premise that healthcare is a right limited to those who can afford it, everyone else if free to die.

The Republican method of governing was to mimic Trump and pretend there was no worries about this contagious disease sweeping across the country. They've taken few if any measures to limit the spread of disease in their states. Tourists are still allowed to stroll around, spring break is in full swing, the beaches are open, the bars, restaurants and hotels are all open for business.

Red states have a long history of sketchy social welfare assistance and poor public health programs and even limit what medical care is available to people without good medical insurance. For the most part, these diehard red states denied their impoverished and most vulnerable citizens both the Medicaid expansion program and Obamacare, so there is no infrastructure to handle the growing wave of corona virus patients.

So what do patients who might already be infected do? They can't get tested, can't get seen by t the for-profit hospitals, can't afford to stay home and not work, so the keep spreading the virus. Think about the millions of people living in Republican held states, Trump cultists who deny the corona virus is even real, and everyone them a potential carrier of that very contagious disease.

Trump thinks the southern border poses a threat to Americans, but maybe he should blockade every red state instead.

[Efilroft Sul]

1. Consider rural hospital closures in those red states.

"According to Chartis, being in a Medicaid expansion state decreases by 62 percent the likelihood of a rural hospital closing. Conversely, being in a non-expansion state makes it more likely a rural hospital will close.

"The states that have experienced the most rural hospital closures over the last 10 years (Texas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, and Missouri) have all refused to expand Medicaid through the 2010 health care law. It seems their rural hospitals are paying the price. Of the 216 hospitals that Chartis says are most vulnerable to closure, 75 percent are in non-expansion states."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/18/21142650/rural-hospitals-closing-medicaid-expansion-states

I think we're going to see bad things happen in red, rural communities.

[Glorfindel]

3. I live in a county (in Georgia) in which the hospital closed a few years ago

There is still an emergency room, but no hospital within 20 miles. Ain't capitalism grand?

[procon]

11. Yeah, that was criminally dumb because it was preventable

If they had opted into Obamacare and expanded Medicaid those hospitals might still be open and treating insured patients.

[machoneman]

12. "I think we're going to see bad things happen in red, rural communities."

Oh yes and it'll be bad. I'm supressing my good will except for the Democratic voters in those states, few as they are. I do believe the virus will wipe out thousands of those who voted for Trump. Hopefully, it will take out a broad swath of the young and the old. No mercy for the wicked, I say.

[FBaggins]

2. Probably unwise to try that spin

Areas where people live close together are likely to see higher infection rates than areas where they are spread out. The areas where were most likely to see crisis levels of infection are pretty likely to lean heavily blue. Do you really want to draw attention to the politics if the hardest hit areas?

[eyeofnewt]

4. I thought

of this too. WV for example. Last one to report the virus (lack of testing), but other than a few small cities, very rural population, spread out. Plus losing population due to lack of opportunity and the dying coal industry. Lack of internet access is a huge problem there. It might take 10 yrs before the news of the virus hits there - j/k of course. Then again, the flip side to that idea is that they are the ones denying the severity and taking less precautions due to their blind devotion, so maybe it will balance out?

[procon]

7. Nope. Two totally different issues.

Population stats are about numbers. These blue states have quantifiable numbers in tracking patients, tests, infected, hospitalized, and dead people because they are actively engaged in bolstering their response to the corona virus threat. This is about healthcare, and there is nothing political in tracking the victims of this disease by state.

In contrast, I'm looking at an obvious political problem created in Republican states that, by long standing practice, have been denying healthcare to large swaths of their populations as a matter of POLICY. They have failed to develop even a minimal public health infrastructure because they chose to adhere to the politics of their irresponsible party polices. These states place every other state at risk.

[FBaggins]

15. Not really

The hotspots right now are all blue... and there's little reason to think that that will change substantially. It isn't just that they're the ones testing... it's that it's where large numbers of people live.

If you want to use coronavirus statistics as a proxy for which areas have better healthcare... that's a mistake that we'll likely regret. No amounts of confirmation bias is going to make that work out.

[procon]

16. Of course the numbers are higher in blue states because

there's a huge push to do more testing. Red states just aren't that focused on the virus yet, instead they're clinging to the accepted propaganda that its all a hoax.

Republicans share the same outlook as Trump when he refused to let that cruise ship dock because the number of confirmed corona virus patients onboard would spike his stats. If they are slow to start testing that keeps their numbers low and they can stick with the denial a few days longer.

It most definitely is a matter of healthcare from bed availability to staffing. Blue states ramped up healthcare services when we started using Obamacare and brought more new patients into the expanded Medicaid coverage. Red states opted out, and chose the for profit model that shuttered many hospitals. They are not prepared to cope with the onslaught of patients who will be predictable sicker because they lack medical insurance and don't seek a doctor until they are very ill. It's a deadly combination.

[FBaggins]

17. Quality of healthcare comes into play AFTER you get sick

It doesn't predict the likelihood of a virus spreading through the community. That's determined more by population density, behaviors, and the likely exposure outside the community (e.g., from travel).

You're suffering from confirmation bias here. The numbers do not bear out your assumptions.

As an example, New York has done more testing. But of those 61k tests, they have over 15k positive results. Here in NC, it appears that we've done 13% as many tests (8,438), but only have 297 cases. You can't interpret that as higher numbers for New York because they're doing more testing... it's because people in NY are far more likely to be exposed. That doesn't have anything to do with the relative quality of health care in the two states. Compare TX to NJ. The former has done far more testing, but the later has almost a 100% positive rate on the limited testing that they've done (resulting in many times as many cases).

Once again... making this a "red state/blue state" thing is likely to blow up in our faces... because the hardest-hit states are likely to lean heavily blue. And the hardest-hit areas within each state are also more likely to be blue areas.

[crickets]

5. Should anyone really be thinking in terms of divide and conquer right now?

What's the difference between red state governments letting their constituents down and people from other states thinking that the federal government should let them down? ...because red states just deserve it, ya know.

Just in case it matters, and morally it really doesn't: there are thousands and even hundreds of thousands of Democrats living in those states. People are people. Right now, making up little dividing lines of who is on the good team and who is on the bad team only applies to those running the game. There's plenty of justified anger and frustration we can be aiming at trump* and his cronies without turning on our fellow citizens.

When we are all going down in the Titanic together, is labeling the deck chairs 'Us' and 'Them' such a useful way to pass time?

[Strelnikov_]

6. Fully agree

We can sort out who was responsible later. Right now, we need to come together and hold the line.

[forthemiddle]

8. Thank you! n/t

[procon]

9. The problem is getting Republican politicians to change

their political mindset to deal with this virus. Republicans in Congress are finally working with Dems to pass new legislation with a lot of good policies we've been trying to get to years. That's a good thing. So Republicans can change and do the right thing when conditions get bad enough that their own survival instincts kick in.

Pretending that the typical Republican political policies are not contributing to the spread of the corona virus, only makes it worse for everyone. If they can change at the federal level, then there's no reason the state politicians cant do the right thing too.

[crickets]

10. No one is arguing with your opinion of Republican policy.

But you won't get Republican politicians to change by deliberately punishing their constituents, both Democrats and Republicans alike, during a pandemic. Diseases are not partisan.

Trump thinks the southern border poses a threat to Americans, but maybe he should blockade every red state instead.

This is not the way.

[procon]

13. Republicans are already "punishing their constituents".

They've been in no hurry to improve the lot of their citizens. Now, with the onslaught of this corona virus, they are under increasing public pressure to change their standard policies.

Too little, too late... I dunno. When, and if these red state politicians can finally. be convinced that it is in their own best self interests to act, many people will have died unnecessarily.

[crickets]

14. Your statement is still wrong.

Trump thinks the southern border poses a threat to Americans, but maybe he should blockade every red state instead.

This is wrong. It's wrong today, it will be wrong tomorrow. I see no reason to continue this discussion.