

Bank robber demands $1 from teller in order to get free healthcare in prison - acangiano
http://www.gastongazette.com/news/bank-58397-richard-hailed.html

======
motters
Don't let anyone tell you that universal health care is "not viable",
especially in one of the world's wealthiest countries. Such statements are
really just political manoeuvrings of a disreputable kind.

In the UK universal health care has been viable since the NHS was founded over
half a century ago. There is always controversy over exactly what services are
available where, but at least everyone has access to it.

~~~
randallsquared
_There is always controversy over exactly what services are available where,
but at least everyone has access to it._

This is a pretty confusing statement. What does it mean for everyone to have
access to a service that isn't available?

~~~
yequalsx
In rich countries, for the most part, everyone has access to food. Most don't
have the means to buy expensive caviar though. In countries with national
health care systems everyone has access to basic care. Not all high tech
services are available to everyone though.

------
grannyg00se
Another interpretation: Prison inmates have an easier life than the poor and
free.

Of course, the potential for violence from other inmates is always there, but
I suspect that is not a serious problem in most prisons. And the potential for
violence from a random citizen in the street is relatively high in poorer
areas.

Overall, prison may be a better alternative to severe urban poverty. This may
be another reason why the poor are much more likely to face incarceration. Not
only does their plight cause them to suffer a lack of alternatives, but the
punishment for crime doesn't look so bad to them.

~~~
thirdusername
Funny you should say that. Marginal revolution cited a paper
([http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/demography/summary/v047/47.3.pa...](http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/demography/summary/v047/47.3.patterson.html))
the other day, that supports your point, from the abstract:

 _Using data from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics and Census Bureau, I
estimate death rates of working-age prisoners and nonprisoners by sex and
race. Incarceration was more detrimental to females in comparison to their
male counterparts in the period covered by this study. White male prisoners
had higher death rates than white males who were not in prison. Black male
prisoners, however, consistently exhibited lower death rates than black male
nonprisoners did._

------
ck2
Except he won't get medical attention in a city/county jail until he is near
comatose.

Maybe in federal prison he would only get the bare necessities and certainly
not anything serious to deal with pain.

Plus as a felon you just gave up a whole bunch of rights you took for granted.

It's far from ideal but if he was willing to go this far he should have sought
a city with a medical college and teaching hospital. There would still be a
bunch of hassle and compromise but it has to be better than being at the mercy
of the city/state's apathy while you are locked in a 6x8 cell.

I cannot believe we are nearly three years into the big insurance reform
(remember when it was going to be healthcare reform?) and yet the changes are
meaningless for most people. I think we need to keep changing "leadership"
every election year until the politicians get the point.

------
acabal
What I find almost more scary is that instead of anybody in the system using a
little common sense and human decency when processing this guy, they right
away threw him in jail. Couldn't the police have, when they found him in the
bank, seen his situation and tried to resolve things on a human level instead
immediately calling down the full force of the system and throwing him in jail
and before a judge for what is clearly more of a desperate cry for help than a
crime?

A crime is a crime, but we're all people too. Sometimes doing everything
precisely by the book isn't what's appropriate, and a little common sense and
understanding is called for instead.

I hate the criminalization of everything in America almost as much as I hate
our backwards healthcare system.

Edit: unless even the police thought they were doing the humane and common-
sense thing by putting him in jail to get health care--in which case I don't
know what to do but hang my head.

~~~
phxrsng
What you are suggesting is exactly the circumvention of a system designed to
take into account mitigating factors (this is why there is a mitigation
section of sentencing).

You suggest that the responding officers at the scene of a crime (no matter
that yes, this was not a violent crime or one committed with malice) become
the judge.

That's an incredibly slippery slope.

And in this case, whats the officer to do? He can't just magically arrange
free or reduced cost medical treatment for the man he was just called to
arrest for attempting to rob a bank.

------
Mizza
This isn't a particularly new idea - the term 'three hots and a cot' goes back
a long time. I've heard that a lot of the homeless people here in Boston
commit petty crimes to deliberately get caught to escape the cold outdoors
during the winter, or to receive dental care (although I should mention that I
have not personally confirmed this). This is also mentioned, though without
citation, in the Wikipedia article on homelessness:
[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Homelessness#...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Homelessness#Income_sources)

~~~
rdtsc
I have heard of that as well. Many have gotten "good" and they know based on
their prior convictions, just the type of crime to commit to get into prison
for a the winter then get released.

------
ianterrell
I wonder what would happen if a few dozen (few hundred?) health care advocates
coordinated a series of "heists" like this in a single city.

If nothing else, the police dispatchers would have quite the WTF moment.

~~~
pepsi_can
I'd like to believe that this would be a great protest gesture for the
increasingly strained middle and working classes. It would garner a great deal
of attention and the narrative is powerful: It is easier to receive medical
attention as a prisoner than as a honest hard working blue-collar/service
industry worker.

------
krschultz
Well, that was dumb. Hospitals will treat people who are unable to pay. The
hospital will arrange either lowering your bill or getting a charitable
organization to help. When you have absolutely nothing left to lose, there is
also always bankruptcy. Since he sold every last thing, that would have been a
similar fate.

The people that really get screwed are those who have enough that they don't
qualify for assistance, but still have some to lose in bankruptcy. This man
could have found many other avenues.

~~~
ck2
Hospitals will usually only treat uninsured who walk into the emergency room
with an immediate life threatening condition.

You cannot for example walk in with cancer and demand treatment.

In the USA you cannot walk into a hospital and ask to see a doctor without
insurance or some other way to pay right then, unless you find a private
doctor who is willing to negotiate with you on payments (but without credit or
being able to prove any income, good luck with that).

Even state assistance programs right now are so badly defunded that they will
usually only help people who already have a disability status, being below the
poverty level is not enough of a qualifier.

Very related: remember that unemployment numbers are a huge lie because the
government doesn't count people who no longer qualify because their time was
up. There are a massive number of people in a really bad situation right now.

In fact having SOME income puts you in a worse situation in the USA than
having no income. But even no income without a disability right now just makes
you part of the crowd and you'll rarely get help.

~~~
krschultz
The thrust of what you are saying is true, but it's not quite as bad as you
make it out to be.

Last summer my girlfriend was between jobs. She had a non-life threatening but
potentially dangerous condition. She went to the hospital and was treated.
During the period of time between jobs she had purchased a temporary health
insurance policy. That policy declined to pay for the treatment. The hospital
presented us with a couple of options, renegotiate the bill, accept some
charity, etc. We chose to fight the insurance company and ultimately had them
pay it (because it was a valid claim). But one of our options always hovering
around was bankruptcy. Do you want to do that? Of course not. We would have
rather cleaned out our savings and maxed out the credit cards before doing
that, but it was an option.

So there is an obvious path here, get a temporary policy and use the card to
get into the hospital. You will probably get denied by the insurance company
for a pre-existing condition, but you can then declare bankruptcy.

Now, that is a pretty terrible way to go about it and speaks of how screwed
our system is. But I would say bankruptcy is preferable to prison. And since
there is that path available, I would think that this guy is mostly an
activist. I think he is making a good point (about how prisoners have a right
to healthcare, but not the rest of us), but the problem is that it is too easy
to punch a hole in his story. Critics will focus on him instead of the
underlying message.

------
yequalsx
Every health care system must ration care. There are not enough doctors,
nurses, drugs, equipment, money, etc. in order to provide everyone with the
best possible care in every situation. The question becomes how to best ration
care. What is the most equitable way of providing health care to the populace?

I submit that the U.S. has one of the worst methods of rationing health care.
It is also the most expensive in terms of cost as a percent of GDP. What has
been labeled "Obamacare" in the United States was, for the most part,
insurance reform. It will turn a very bad system into a bad system.

Going to prison, despite popular belief, is not a way to get good health care.
The idea that prisoners watch cable TV, have great health care, and are well
fed in the U.S. is mostly myth. The strategy of robbing a bank to get health
care is not a good one.

------
zoowar
Moral of the story: Universal Health Care is cheaper than incarceration.

~~~
Shenglong
I don't want to debate this very much, but I felt I should share my
opinion/experience:

I'm in Canada. My dad waited 4 months to be contacted, in order to book an
appointment for a knee surgery that he drastically needs. After those four
months, I flipped and asked a friend for a favor.

I also thought I had an ear problem. I waited 6 months before someone called
me to book an appointment to get it checked out.

When I went to the emergency room with a 41 degree (C) fever, I waited 4 hours
before someone gave me acetaminophen and told me to wait longer.

Yes, with universal health care, I'm able to gain access to all of this. Yet,
how effective is it? I'm sure everyone has a different experience, but there
are many people who have had similar experiences to me.

~~~
pepsi_can
I am unsure of how your healthcare system works. Is it possible to pay for
more timely service from a private hospital or private doctor?

If it is possible but not feasible because of cost, then an American, speaking
practically, experiences the same thing. Not enough money to pay for medical
service. However there is an important difference.

An American must pay something out of pocket. The financial burden may lead to
bankruptcy and ultimately no medical care at all. I've noticed that you did
not raise concerns about bankruptcy but instead your concern was over slow
medical service.

~~~
sunir
You cannot pay to "jump the queue" in Canada if the health care procedure is
covered by public health insurance which includes most things you'd expect a
doctor to do or prescribe.

You can only pay to jump the queue by leaving the country, such as going to
the United States or India for medical treatment.

------
tomtom101
The NHS in the UK was designed to be a healthcare system free at the point of
delivery. It has become such a part of British life that I would say it is now
part of British culture. However, it has grown into something that cannot be
sustained in the long term and now people cannot imagine ever paying for
healthcare. I am now living in the US and have very good insurance and have
access to far superior facilities when I was in the UK, but if I had to choose
between the 2 systems I would choose the NHS every time. Access to basic
healthcare should not be a privilege, but a right. I know the costs may seem
prohibitive, but how can anyone justify not providing it whilst spending
billions on defense? Surely spending money to save lives is better than
spending money to take them.

~~~
rmc
The NHS is the closest thing modern UK has to a religion.

------
r00fus
And the prison-industrial-complex smiles and takes our tax dollars while
actively lobbying against health insurance reform and medicare expansion.

Felons get medical security while we get "austerity". This is a twisted world
in which we live.

~~~
mattdeboard
You drastically overestimate the quality of the "medical care" inmates
receive. Just last month, for example, the SCOTUS held that California must
reduce its prison population by 33,000 inmates because of the inability to
provide them adequate medical care. In fact, in its ruling, it said the system
produced, "needless suffering and death."[1]

Americans are woefully under- or misinformed about the state of the U.S.
prison system. Going to prison is hardly, "medical security." In fact,
according to some sources, it accelerates the aging process, thereby
increasing the need for the very medical services that, by their absence, aid
along this accelerated aging process.[2]

Hyperbole such as that found in the parent post is not only totally useless,
it actually does harm to both sides of the argument.

1 <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/us/24scotus.html> 2
[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1308374...](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130837434&ft=1&f=5)

------
kschua
I was just wondering when someone would pull off something like that when I
read [http://www.news.com.au/world/indias-oldest-prisoner-free-
at-...](http://www.news.com.au/world/indias-oldest-prisoner-free-
at-108/story-e6frfkyi-1226077909027) a couple of days ago.

In a gist, the article is about India freeing her oldest prisoner because of
the authorities "who found it difficult to provide medical treatment"

------
shalmanese
It'll be more interesting to see if he goes in the second time after he's had
his idealized misconceptions about prison knocked out of his head.

~~~
ori_b
If you read the article, he already has no intention of becoming a repeat
offender, once he is treated.

------
johng
I don't believe universal health care is a viable long term solution. However,
this is a man who put 20 years of work and taxes into the system and never got
to use what he put in.

Alternatively, someone who has never had a job in his life and who doesn't
mind living off the system enjoys the full benefits that this man paid for.
Health care, food, and housing.

That is also not viable.

~~~
BasDirks
It's quite viable in my country, The Netherlands. Sure we pay high taxes, but
we aren't left on the street like dogs when life fucks us over. There are
other disadvantages to our system of course, like the parasitic behavior you
described.

~~~
eru
The problem is that the parasitic behaviour the grandparent post described,
occurs even without universal health care.

By the way, I guess for ethical reasons basic universal health care is
inevitable. (Even the US has rules that require giving emergency care.)

~~~
hugh3
Personally I think that universal health care is undesirable for ethical
reasons. How are we supposed to evolve if we don't let our species' least
capable members get weeded out by natural selection?

There's nothing "ethical" about allowing folks who can't pay for their own
health care to get it at someone else's expense.

~~~
ry0ohki
So presumably you don't take antibiotics, insulin, an inhaler, use any
reproductive aids etc... for the same logic?

~~~
burgerbrain
Not that I necessarily agree with this but...:

If an individual has otherwise flourished in a society to the point where they
can afford to have other members of a society provide them those services,
then they are (despite medical appearances) apparently fairly well adapted.

The issues arise when they are not using _their_ money to give themselves
these advantages. (Perhaps it is inherited money, or perhaps it is provided by
the society itself).

------
quinndupont
So this is what it has come to... I'm glad I live in Canada.

~~~
cheez
Canada has been borrowing money for healthcare for a few years. A 30% increase
in cost is slated for the next 5 years. I have NO idea how it's going to be
paid for.

Other than that, yeah, love it.

~~~
stan_rogers
Um, no -- Canada has been borrowing to offset a shortfall in general revenue
for years. We _were_ under an austerity program when we needed to be, but
rather than going back to normal business when the deficit crisis passed, we
inexplicably decided to lower taxes and return to a deficit condition. Health
care isn't the problem; the idea that we can get services (of any kind --
health care isn't all that the government provides) without paying for them
is.

~~~
cheez
I'm not asking for any services. They're being shoved down my throat, whether
I like it or not. I'd gladly pay for alternative providers if I had the
ability.

If people don't want higher taxes, then reduce services. It's simple, but not
politically viable.

Don't say that you should raise taxes just because there is a revenue
shortfall. That only encourages the bastards.

Edit: It's not inexplicable to lower taxes. The average tax rate in Canada is
40% including all taxes. That is insane.

------
hugh3
<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

_On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes
more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the
answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.

Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're
evidence of some interesting new phenomenon.

Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something
genuinely new to say about them._

In conclusion, flaggity flag flag flag.

~~~
rosser
Would you not describe someone willfully and knowingly committing a felony,
simply because it's the best alternative he can see to obtain the health care
he needs as an "interesting new phenomenon"? (NB: I'm not saying it _is_ the
best alternative; just that it's clearly the best one this guy thought was
available to him.)

~~~
burgerbrain
No, because it's not new, and therefore not very interesting either.

