Hacker News Reader

Comment by noidesto | Hacker News Reader

Care to explain why?

Probably because that’s what an ambulance is for but taking one will bankrupt the average citizen.

No, going to a doctor's appointment isn't what an ambulance is for. The comment specifically said "non-urgent". But when patients miss appointments because they can't get there or afford $20 for an Uber, the health system loses a lot more than $20, so it's worth it financially for them to partner with Uber/Lyft to get patients to appointments.

Ah yes, I guess the specific Uber program mentioned is for non-urgent cases, I apologize. But anecdotally I know of many cases where Uber is being used instead of ambulances.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/upshot/uber-lyft-and-the-...

https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/when-should-you-uber-to...

The comment[1]'s only line was indicating that this was for non-urgent cases.

But yes, it was disturbing when Tesla was using Ubers for people who had exposed bone.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19400560

I understand the economic principle of increasing revenue, and I agree that this partnership is worth it financially; but honestly, who the fuck cares about the health care system not getting revenue?

Providing transportation for patients is so that __people can get healthcare__! A hospital/HCSP not making a few hundred/thousand is completely insignificant when compared to the real problem: People can't get healthcare or can't get to it.

I just take issue with this viewpoint where the concern for the dollar is placed before people's needs.

Ambulances are absolutely not for non-urgent, non-critical situations and being able to auto-schedule a ride at time of appointment creation is a positive addition.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com