Your response: to question the integrity of the researchers.
Damn straight. If the positions had been reversed, my citation would have been shredded here for exactly that reason. There are entire populations of scientists and research organizations I can't cite because of even the most tenuous political or financial connections. These two academics have made a lifetime career out of trying to destroy private health care and raise a state monolith in its place.
You might note that the skeptical news article wasn't from Fox News, either.
That's it? I believe the research but for the sake of argument what if it's 50%? 40%? 25%? Would any of those be ACCEPTABLE numbers to you? How can anyone not be outraged by that?
What's your premise here? Is it your thesis that we should provide government support for ALL major causes of bankruptcy?
It doesn't matter anyway. Look at that summary again.
For 92% of the medically bankrupt, high medical bills directly contributed to their bankruptcy. Many families with continuous coverage found themselves under-insured, responsible for thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. Out-of-pocket medical costs averaged $17,943 for all medically bankrupt families: $26,971 for uninsured patients; $17,749 for those with private insurance at the outset; $14,633 for those with Medicaid; $12,021 for those with Medicare; and $6,545 for those with VA/military coverage. For patients who initially had private coverage but lost it, the family’s out-of-pocket expenses averaged $22,568.
Obviously the study is intended to form the idea in less-than-stringent minds that if we had government-provided health care, these bankruptcies wouldn't be happening. And yet, we see that a number of these people were on VA, Medicare, or Medicaid, and they got stuck with significant costs, too.
Again, most of these people in this study HAD health insurance. Given that the entire premise of this political argument was "insuring the uninsured," what conclusions should actually be drawn from this? That somehow Obamacare will magically avoid the problems that apparently every other form of health insurance has?