psyck0 wrote:Despite the religious label, these so-called religious hospitals are more public than public hospitals. Religious hospitals get 36% of all their revenue from Medicare; public hospitals get only 27%. In addition to that 36% of public funding they get 12% of their funding from Medicaid. Of the remaining 44% of funding, 31% comes from county appropriations, 30% comes from investments, and only 5% comes from charitable contributions (not necessarily religious). The percentage of Church funding for Church-run hospitals comes to a grand total of 0.0015 percent.
Um these numbers are meaningless, and you might argue they are pro-catholic hospitals.
Medicare is an automatic service provided to those over 65. The fact Catholic hospitals receive a lot of medicare money, just means they serve a lot of old people.
So these numbers could just as easily mean that Religious hospitals are less likely to turn away old people, because they are higher risk patients.
Medicaid is an automatic service provided to the poor. So it just means that 12% of Religious hospitals patients are so poor as to qualify for it.
As for county dispersments, it is most likely a state or local automatic payment for the poor.
You see poor people don't have medical insurance, so the government is subsidizing them. The fact that lots of them choose to go to Religious hospitals could easily mean that for-profit hospitals are turning them away.
As far as the rest of the numbers, did anyone believe that these hospitals were paid for with just donations?
The initial cost of building these is paid for by the church, but after that they are self sufficient. The fact that they still receive some charitable donations just demonstrates that they go above and beyond building the facility with religious funds in the first place.
If you want to find something to criticize Catholics over... this isn't it. They provide a nessesary service, at no profit to themselves, for those most in need.
For those who didn't catch on: If you start a private for profit ice-cream shop and a welfare recipient comes in and buys icecream using funds from their welfare check, does that make you a public, tax payer subsidized business? Obviously the answer is no.
Belial wrote:He's saying that they're perfectly willing to abandon all those poor folks they profess to care about just because they want to throw a temper tantrum about gays being icky.
Therefore, they must not have cared too much about those poor folks.
Regardless of how much I abhor their stance on gay issues, they dont' see it as bigoted.
If you decided to go to Saudi Arabia to help allievate the suffering of the poor, and the government told you "you need to tell us if you encounter any single females so we can behead them"... and you decided to pack up shop does it mean you dont' care about the poor very much?
Hence I think you offered a false conclusion.