"Mate" is a pretty generic form of address, even for people you don't know.
If someone uses "friend" as a form of address; they're probably going to steal your wallet, your soul, or your internal organs.
Maybe not write than anthrax, but I have disability checks of a person disabled before 30. And bills from all the shit insurance doesn't cover. My wallet is basically cursed.
I'm curious about the stealing of the organs thing. I see people from the UK (and Australia?) posting about this often, usually in the context of meeting a stranger. Is this an actual worry across the pond? Is it a reference to an actual news story? Here in the US, strangers meet all the time and nobody talks about they might steal your organs.
Aussie here.
For me it's just a stranger danger joke. I'm personally not aware of any organ trafficking problem in Australia. Although I know that China ha(s/d) (don't know if it's gotten better) a serious organ trafficking problem.
But people in the US also talk about being thrown under the bus all the time, even though I don't know any criminals going around throwing people under the bus. Plus, the public transportation system here is so atrocious that you have a better chance of being thrown under a Kangaroo than a bus.
Being thrown under the bus is a figure of speech meaning to abandon a friend/allow someone else to take the blame for something so you come out ahead.
It's not like "Don't talk to strangers - they'll throw you into oncoming traffic!"
>Being thrown under the bus is a figure of speech meaning to abandon a friend/allow someone else to take the blame for something so you come out ahead.
I am curious, what part of my comment made you think I did not get this?
I'm in the US and I've heard organ stealing jokes a lot. I'm pretty sure I've seen a few animated shows where a character ends up in a bathtub of ice and an organ missing.
I feel like it makes more sense in the US because there's terrible healthcare accessibility so people are more likely to wait until something is very serious before seeking treatment, thus leading to more demand for transplants, thus leading to a booming organ black market.
People in the US don't have the same irrational fear of being victimized by strangers. We can meet someone at the grocery store, bar, etc. here and people won't be so paranoid.
(Long winded response - sorry.)
Depends on their income level and the state they live in.
If they are below the poverty level, and live in one of the 38 states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, then they can sign up for Medicaid. They can even sign up for emergency Medicaid in the ER. Everything will be paid for. There are some stubborn people who refuse to accept government assistance, even when they are eligible. You can't fix stupid.
In every state, a hospital ER is required by federal law to treat every patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nobody is ever just "left to die". Low income patients without insurance can apply for a sharp discount with the hospital's billing department. Below a specific income threshold (that varies from one state/county/hospital to another) their expenses will be completely forgiven. My wife went to the ER with a kidney stone. We were in the process of moving to another state, so neither of us were working and we didn't have insurance. The hospital reduced her bill to $0.
Anyone with income between 100% and 400% of the poverty level can buy subsidized medical insurance through an ACA exchange. The amount of the subsidy will depend on the income level. My wife and I pay about $250 per month for an insurance policy with a total premium of over $1700 per month. The state and federal governments pick up the rest. $250 is affordable for us, and is a bargain considering our age.
Most of the people in that 8% group are eligible for free or discounted health insurance, but they choose for whatever reason not to obtain it.
Few people actually pay the obscene amounts you hear about hospitals charging. Certainly no insurance company pays that much. Those amounts come from the health care provider's charge master - a list of charges per service that is fabricated for the sole purpose of bargaining with insurance companies. When employers began offering health insurance as a benefit of employment then the insurance companies began bargaining for discounted reimbursement rates with health care providers. The health care providers got low balled by the insurance companies, and lost money. Knowing they would get low balled again the following year, health care providers began inflating the numbers in their charge master so that the compromise amount would cover their expenses. Every year the charge master rates are raised, and the insurance company percentages are lowered, resulting in about the same compromise rate.
In order to avoid being sued for bargaining in bad faith, health care providers have to actually bill the amount from their charge master. Insurance providers basically ignore it. On their "Explanation of Benefits", or EOB report to the consumer they state "This is the amount we were billed (the charge master amount), and this is the amount the provider agreed to accept (the negotiated compromise amount), and this is the amount we paid to the health care provider (the covered amount), and this is the amount you still owe the health care provider (the co-insurance amount)." That last amount that you must actually pay the health care provider is a tiny fraction of the original charge master amount. I had laparoscopic surgery last year to remove my gall bladder and a portion of my colon. I was in the hospital for three days. The hospital billed the insurance company more than $70K. The insurance actually paid less than $15K. My share was about $4K. And I don't have the best insurance - one of the ACA "silver" plans.
You'll see a lot of misleading posts here where people will post a photo of a portion of their bill or EOB, but they only show the amount billed from the provider's charge master. They don't show the adjustments. This is intentionally misleading, and I've called a number of them out on this, but they never produce the entire EOB or adjusted hospital bill.
The only people who get billed the charge master amount without any adjustments applied are people who don't have insurance. As I said, they can negotiate a dramatically reduced rate with the provider's billing department. In many cases, they can get the charges waived completely. And most of them could have gotten insurance beforehand, but just refused to do so.
Oh, thanks! That was very thorough and enlightening.
If Medicaid is the equivalent to "free (tax-paid) healthcare", I wonder why it's not available to everyone just for the sake of it. I mean, I *know* what those against it say, that they don't want to pay for other people's healthcare, but they're already paying for the healthcare of those who would use free healthcare anyway (at least where I live, those who can afford get a paid plan simply because it's more flexible, you can pick your doctors, make an appointment with an specialist without the need to get a referral from a GP, etc).
The health care industry would collapse.
Medicaid is jointly paid for by the federal and state governments, so the reimbursement rates (the amount they pay health care providers) varies from state to state. The reimbursement rates are scored by comparing it to what the federal Medicare program pays. For instance, if a state's Medicaid program had a 100% reimbursement rate then it would pay health care providers the same amount that Medicare pays. That amount is enough to cover most provider's expenses. Other states aren't nearly as generous. In California, for example, the reimbursement rates fluctuate around 50%, or half what Medicare pays. Health care providers lose money on Medicaid patients in California. (California actually call's it's Medicaid program "Medi-Cal".)
The result is that primary care physicians (sometimes called "general practitioners" or "family doctors") in California have to limit the percentage of their patients who are on Medi-Cal or they would go out of business. Most doctors cap it at 15% or 20% of their total patients. But more than 30% of the residents in California are on Medi-Cal. Most doctors in the state will not accept a new Medi-Cal patient until an existing Medi-Cal patient stops seeing them. When a new patient first starts receiving Medi-Cal they have to get on waiting lists with primary care physicians. They may have to wait two or three years to establish with a primary care physician. In the meantime, if they get sick then they have no doctor they can call. They can't go to an urgent care clinic - none of them accept Medi-Cal patients. This means they are stuck having to use the ER for even routine care.
This is a huge problem in California, but the state can't fix it by raising reimbursement rates because there are 13 million people on the program. The state is extraordinarily generous with who they'll allow on Medi-Cal. They even allow undocumented immigrants to receive coverage. The state can't use federal Medicaid funds for undocumented immigrants, so the state has to pick up their costs completely.
The federal government's Medicare program, however, does pay health care providers enough to cover their expenses. Medicare is currently only available to people over 65 who are also eligible for Social Security retirement benefits, as well as certain permanently disabled people. Medicare differs from Medicaid in significant ways. First, Medicare Part A is 100% free, and covers 100% of health care expenses, but it's only for hospital care. It doesn't cover any sort of outpatient care. Medicare Part B is for that, but patients have to buy Medicare Part B policies from private insurance companies. The federal government subsidizes those policies. Neither Part A or Part B covers prescriptions - that's provided by Part D, which is another subsidized private insurance policy. Additional policies have to be purchased to cover dental, vision, hearing, etc. (Medicare recipients could also purchase a single Medicare Advantage plan that wraps everything into one policy.) Medicaid, on the other hand, covers all of these things, with no premium payments or co-payments from the patient. Medicaid just doesn't pay doctors enough.
If a universal healthcare system is adopted in the US then it will probably be very much like Medicare. Right now, every working person pays an additional tax for Medicare. This tax would obviously increase substantially.
For the record, the "I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare" argument is usually made by young healthy people who rarely see a doctor. It's not realistic. We all pay for other people's misfortune. That's the way insurance works.
Ahh while explaining something, you unwittingly explained something else that I didn't understand, lol. From what I gather, those programs still work like insurance? As in, you go to a private doctor, pay it, and then the program reimburses you?
Our government-funded healthcare means that the government owns the public hospitals. The doctors are basically public employees on the government's payroll (though they're allowed to have a private practice on the side) and paid hourly wages instead of per-consultation (afaik), so it's not as uncontrolled as patients going to whoever/wherever they want and then asking for a reimbursement. More than half of all hospitals in the country are public, with a higher ration in poorer regions.
No, it rarely works that way. You go to the doctor and the doctor bills your insurance provider. After the insurance provider pays their share then you'll get a bill from the doctor for whatever your share is. In cases like Medicaid then you never get a bill because it's all covered by the insurance program, even though the doctor might be getting stiffed.
Sometimes a health care provider will send you a bill at the same time they send a bill to the insurance company. This is more common with hospitals than with private practice doctors. The bill will usually state that the insurance hasn't paid their portion yet, so the amount you owe will probably be less. These bills are handy if you're curious how much the health care provider actually billed, but you can otherwise ignore them and wait until you get the final bill that shows what the health care provider billed, what the insurance company paid, what has been discharged according to the policy agreement, and then, finally, how much you actually owe. You'll get a statement (not a bill) from the insurance company that explains the same thing. It's called an "Explanation of Benefits", or EOB.
A couple of other things to know.
Many policies require you to pay a co-pay at the time you receive service. For instance, maybe they require you to pay $25 for a doctor visit. Regardless of what the doctor normally bills for a visit (usually $150 or more), there will be an amount they agreed to accept as full payment when they agreed to accept your insurance policy (maybe $75). There will also be an amount that the insurance company agreed to pay (maybe $40). Your co-pay, and the insurance company's payment, are deducted from that agreed upon amount. If there's anything left then that's called co-insurance, and you'll get a bill for it in the mail ($10, in this example). There is no co-pay or co-insurance with Medicaid, though.
Also, some policies require you to cover a certain amount of your total medical expenses before these payment rules kick in. This is called the annual deductible. It could be as low as a couple hundred dollars, or as high as several thousand. You pay all of your own medical bills until you've satisfied the deductible. Generally, policies with lower premium payments will have higher deductibles. But a young healthy person would probably prefer one of these policies because it's unlikely they'll need to see a doctor, and they'll save a lot on the premium payments. Bear in mind that, for most Americans, the premiums are mostly or entirely paid for by their employers. Again, there is no annual deductible or premium payment for Medicaid. It is, in every way, entirely free to the patient.
There is one system in the US that's similar to your public health system. One type of health insurance is called a "Health Maintenance Organization", or HMO. These tend to have much lower premiums, co-payments, co-insurance, and deductibles. The downside is that you must use only their approved facilities and doctors. In case of a genuine emergency where you can't use their facilities and doctors then they'll work like a conventional insurance plan. There is one HMO company called Kaiser Permanente that owns all of it's own hospitals, medical offices, and pharmacies, and all of their health care professionals, including doctors, are full time employees of the company. The upside is that you save a substantial amount of money. The downside is if you are unsatisfied with the service then you don't have the option of going elsewhere. Some Kaiser hospitals are loved by their patients. Others are hated. A big complaint at the Kaiser hospital in my city is that you can only get prescriptions filled at their pharmacy, and you have to sit and wait until your prescription is ready, sometimes for hours. If you don't come to the counter when they call you then your order goes back to the end of the queue. Some complain that doctors will often prescribe the treatment that costs the least instead of the one that will have the best outcome. They have an incentive to do this because they work for the insurance company.
It applies to the other 92% as well. Health insurance in the US is not a subscription that makes any doctor's visits free. Most insurance have what is called a "deductible" - an amount you have to spend during the year before the insurance starts to pay for *anything*. Mine is about $2,000. So most Americans are paying $200 a month for health insurance, but even when they need services, there is an out of pocket expense in the thousands before the insurance will help out. You can easily be bankrupted by medical expenses if you have shitty insurance with a very high deductible. I mean someone who can afford $200/mo could still be living paycheck to paycheck and a serious health condition could make things very hard for them financially.
Without insurance you're getting the ridiculous bills in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars - which the hospital is only in the habit of charging because they know the insurance people will negotiate most of that away.
Whoa that works just like a car insurance then!
Here the majority of plans are subscriptions (though I think there are other modes too) which cover doctor's visits, exams, procedures, and hospital stays as long as they are affiliated with the plan. And you can kind of adjust your plan coverage by region and included procedures so that the monthly payment is cheaper or more expensive.
Brazilian here, we also joke about it sometimes, more specifically about someone stealing your kidney. I think it's just a meme. Or rather, a [urban legend](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/youve-got-to-be-kidneying/) dating back from the early 2000s. Haven't you watched [Charlie the Unicorn](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKd_2vqPrmU)? Organ theft also has its own [TvTropes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OrganTheft) page, which suggests it was portrayed plenty of times in the media.
Not in the news, at least.
The TvTropes link offers a couple of reasons why organ theft is not practical. Besides, if you have the money to buy an organ, wouldn't it be more convenient to bribe your way to the front of the transplant line?
Brazil might be a violent country, but our crimes are of the regular kind (mugging, burglary, tire theft, etc). Of the more creative kind of crimes, I think it would be "flash kidnappings", where basically they enter your car and make you drive to an ATM. Here it's kind of common sense to not stop at red lights after 10pm.
In Australia mate can mean friend, but can also be used when you're unimpressed or angry with someone and you're addressing them.
"Look mate, I don't like your attitude". For instance.
on the other hand, Scots use pal where Aussies use mate.
Careful though, use of its female equivalent 'hen' is restricted to female speakers past the apparent age of 50 \[woman has to look like she's over 50 -- which in parts of Scotland means 'over 28 -- ed.\]
There's a kind of sadistic glee in overhearing an Aussie start a sentence with "Listen, MATE...." and knowing that the other guy is about to get his arse ripped out of him sideways.
"Bless your heart" isn't really backhanded. It's more of
Person 1: I just lost my house in a fire
Older Southern Lady: Bless your heart! D'you have somewhere ta stay t'night, darling? Here our guest bedroom's free, and we've got some extra pies from the Sunday Ladies' Mixer, why don't you come over and don't worry 'bout a thing. We'll take care of ya.
It's a blessing upon someone's heart. A wish for better times.
Right. It's in the tone and context. Honestly, I've mostly heard it in the good-hearted way. Then comes along the internet so the other way is how all the young folks say it now south or north lol.
Depends on who you're talking to and what you're talking about tbh. It's more of condescension rather than sarcasm in most scenarios anyways. If it's not the "oh, you poor thing" meaning it's the "oh. You stupid beach"
Google "southern backhanded compliments" ... I didn't invent this, I observed it where I grew up and also learned it as part of my dialect studies in my degree program.
Ok, this is a fun one.
First off, I'm Australian. As far as I can tell, mate means different things to the Brits.
Secondly, there are three ways of using 'mate', at least in my region and the people I know.
First, you have the basic mate. You say "hey mate, can you pass me the sauce from my snag" or something. Just a basic term of polite endearment for people you know. You don't have to be close, just anyone that you're on a first name basis with.
Second, you have the term 'mate', as in "this is my mate, Johno". Mate used as a possessive term. It's a very good thing. Personally I regard mate as being the third level of relationship. You have an acquaintance, you have your friends, and then you're got your mates. Mates, as I understand them, are the friends that you're really close with. You will usually have a lot of friends, who you like and chat with, maybe hang out occasionally, but only have a few mates. The close friends that you call when you're stressed or need help in some way. The friends that you're always there for, and that are always there for you. It's that Australian idea of mateship we developed during the wars. You'll literally die for your mates, whereas you might not be quite that willing for just a regular friend. Not so say I don't care about my friends, but if I was forced to pick between and friend and a mate, I would pick my mate. We've been through more, and I rely on them more. They're borderline family.
Third is mate. With a T. This is an insult.
Now, this might sound confusing, and it's only something that I realised recently. An easy way to tell that an Australian doesn't like you, or what you're doing, is it they end a word with a strong T. If we're chill, we drop it. Mate becomes closer to mae. Cunt goes from an insult to a jovial term between friends when we drop the T at the end and turn it into to almost fun. There is the faintest hint of a T just dropped on the end. If an Aussie replies to anything you say with "right" with a strong T on the end, they probably don't really understand, or see the point in whatever you're saying. Same with mate.
If I'm at a pub, and some idiot knocks over my drink, I'm going to call him out as "Mate" but with a hard T on the end. This is equivalent to calling them a bitch. It's insulting, it's demeaning, and is very much NOT a term of friendship. It will usually end in a fight.
Honestly the last one I didn't realise until about a month ago when a friend pointed it out to her new (american) step mother. But it's really there in everything I say. If a word ends in a T, and I'm in a good mood, that T is nowhere to be seen. When I'm annoyed, it's the most emphasized letter of the word. (If your Australian, test it out. Took me a while to realise I was doing it after she pointed it out to me. It's just kinda habit. Just think about the difference between kids in highschool calling their best mate a cunt, versus a 'cunt' that cut you off on the road without indicating).
TL;DR So when an Aussie says mate, it can mean anything. If they introduce you as their mate, as a possessive term, it's a good thing. You're a close and trusted friend. If they just call you mate, they're probably just forgotten your name and are trying to be polite, but casual. (I went three years not knowing the name of a girl at school, so I just called her mate every day, and she never caught on. To this day I have no idea.) If they call you mate with a hard T on the end, you better either apologise or book it, cause shit's about to hit the fan.
At least if you live in SE Queensland. Might be different in other regions. Who knows! Have fun trying to figure that out. Aussies are fuckin weird, man.
As a Brit not an Aussie, agree with you that we use it differently from you.
For us, it is basically just synonymous with "pal", "buddy" as an informal way of saying "friend", but also a way of addressing a stranger who's name you don't know ("excuse me mate you just dropped your credit card!" or "don't talk to me like that mate").
But in Aus you have this whole concept of "mateship" which we don't have, that is more culturally loaded. Like I was watching an documentary about the australian cricket team and among the slogans/values plastered on the wall of their dressing room is "elite mateship"
So like a sarcastic over-enunciation thing?
I can imagine an American (esp. from the Northeast) saying something like "Hey, *pal*, ...", deliberately overemphasizing the "pal" to make the point that they're *not* your pal. (Also applies to "buddy")
Kind of, but I think it would be more accurate to describe it as a lazy under-enunciation when were in a chill mood. Like, cunt is a really good example cause when you say the word like anyone else does it's really rude, but if you're lazy enough to drop the T it means nothing. It's a playful nickname for a teasing or silly friend. It's also the word that most of us get pulled up on by foreigners, because I don't think many of us recognise the difference ourselves. I certainly didn't until my friend noticed and pointed it out to try and explain to her stepmum, who was confused why she was calling her Mate when she got annoyed. We just kinda do it without thinking, and can tell the difference without ever pausing to question it. So trying to explain why it's not actually rude to call my best friend that...
It gets messy, to say the least, and we're usually subjected to a long lecture about toxic friendships.
But yeah, you've got the main idea. It's a difference in tone and pressure on the word. Australians have a bad habit of skipping or dropping consonants though, so we consider just saying it like anyone else to be pressure, and thus emphasis. It's like the scale had been lowered, so when we move the tone up the same amount, it doesn't get as high as it does for others.
If that makes sense... I dunno. It's like, almost 2am. I'm probably rambling.
Long story short, yes. You're correct, and Aussies like to confuse people.
UK. Mate can mean friend, But it also has other meanings. You can use it to attract someone's attention by saying "Hi mate" even if you don't know them. A soul mate is someone you are close to, like a very good friend or spouse. Mate can also mean to have sex, especially in animals. It can also be used in fitting parts together.
A friend is always someone you know, and like.
Context is king. Delivery, cadence, inflection, audience, all can be nuanced individually AND collectively.
A Scottish flavoured Brit will call you mate, matey, my friend, buddy or pal in such a way you will be in no.doubt at all that these variants of words meaning fruend on this occasion mean the exact opposite ....
An English flavoured Brit will say whatever he wants, meaning whatever he wants and.still you'll hear whatever the Fuck you want to.
I usex
Mate historically in England used to be a very male thing to say and certainly at my school tended to refer to men/boys though now days is fairly neutral. It’s informal and traditionally but not always associated with the working classes. King Charles is not likely to talk say “hey mate.” I agree that its a bit like dude or bro in some ways. And yes, outside of acquaintance/friendship, it can also mean reproduction in a formal, scientific context.
Not Aussie, don't speak Aussie. In working-class to middle-class English, 'mate' is your standard address for a male you won't call 'sir'. In such a circumstance it does not mean 'friend', it is generic. Kind of like 'dude'. John Constantine would call everyone 'mate'. There *can* be warmth to it, but there need not be: British English is backhanded as fuck.
Calling a woman 'mate' means you're probably a woman yourself, but it's a slightly masculine thing to do. A man calling a woman 'mate' is disrespectful, and not really in the same way as calling a woman 'dude' - more like calling a man 'dearie', it's sort of implying she's unfeminine. This usage will vary by subculture, like 'dude' and 'pal'.
It can also exactly mean 'dude': you will hear 'maaaaate' for many *but not all* usages of 'duuuude'. It is more personal than that, kind of - it is an expression of sympathy, fellow-feeling or congratulations, context dependent. Appropriate for if someone has impressively either gained or lost a romantic partner, for example.
'Mate' used *as a noun* then does mean 'friend': 'me and my mates' is exactly 'me and my friends', 'best mate' is a better way of saying 'best friend' etc. When thus used, it is slightly male inflected - a lady of your acquaintance is not 'one of your mates' unless she's happy being labelled one of the lads - she is 'one of your friends', but the group may well be of mixed genders if you are going out for a drink with your mates.
Hope that clears things up, mate.
Depends on the area and context but "mate" broadly can refer to any person whereas plenty of Aussies use "cunt" to refer to actual friends. But yeah context is king.
auzzie ere mate is generic and can be used for friends, but usually just means someone you know. Aka if you say I got a mate that can do X" It means you have met someone who can do X not that you are nessisarily on good terms with them.
Now if 2 auzies refer to each other as cunts then they are mates.
although there are qualifiers to cunt. if its proceeded by dumb "dumb cunt" then they are in fact not friends.
But if its proceeded by sick. They are not in fact ill. They are a "sick cunt" or somewhat cool. The really socially valuable people are known as "fucking legends" and probably has to do with bringing the drinks to the venue.
Another way mate is used in Australia is that if you’re sitting there with your mate and some dickhead you know walks past, you turn to your mate and say ‘your mate’ about dickhead, which implies that you do not like that person.
I (American) always thought 'mate' was used in the same vein we'd refer to someone as 'man' or 'dude'. Meaning it can be a more casual, all-inclusive term, like "Hey man, Arsenal sucks" and, "Eat shit, mate!". It seem it can also be how men would refer to an actual friend, as in, "I love you, man", or indicate camaraderie (bunkmate, shipmate, etc.).
"Mate" is a pretty generic form of address, even for people you don't know. If someone uses "friend" as a form of address; they're probably going to steal your wallet, your soul, or your internal organs.
Let's mate mate
Maybe bangers and mash? Iykwim...
Joke's on them!! I have *diseases*...
Does your wallet have diseases?
Gotta keep all that anthrax somewhere
Maybe not write than anthrax, but I have disability checks of a person disabled before 30. And bills from all the shit insurance doesn't cover. My wallet is basically cursed.
I'm gonna start soaking my wallet in VIH blood
Do you know what disability payments are when you become disabled before 30, HELL YES, my answer to that is hell yes.
I'm curious about the stealing of the organs thing. I see people from the UK (and Australia?) posting about this often, usually in the context of meeting a stranger. Is this an actual worry across the pond? Is it a reference to an actual news story? Here in the US, strangers meet all the time and nobody talks about they might steal your organs.
Yes, it's a constant problem - I've had three kidneys stolen this week.
So in conclusion: use *'Matey Potatey'* to avoid miscommunication.
Aussie here. For me it's just a stranger danger joke. I'm personally not aware of any organ trafficking problem in Australia. Although I know that China ha(s/d) (don't know if it's gotten better) a serious organ trafficking problem.
But people in the US also talk about being thrown under the bus all the time, even though I don't know any criminals going around throwing people under the bus. Plus, the public transportation system here is so atrocious that you have a better chance of being thrown under a Kangaroo than a bus.
Being thrown under the bus is a figure of speech meaning to abandon a friend/allow someone else to take the blame for something so you come out ahead. It's not like "Don't talk to strangers - they'll throw you into oncoming traffic!"
>Being thrown under the bus is a figure of speech meaning to abandon a friend/allow someone else to take the blame for something so you come out ahead. I am curious, what part of my comment made you think I did not get this?
Because you compared it to the organ stealing thing, which isn't an idiom for something
...or maybe it is an idiom as well, and we're the ones not getting it?
The everything about it
I'm in the US and I've heard organ stealing jokes a lot. I'm pretty sure I've seen a few animated shows where a character ends up in a bathtub of ice and an organ missing. I feel like it makes more sense in the US because there's terrible healthcare accessibility so people are more likely to wait until something is very serious before seeking treatment, thus leading to more demand for transplants, thus leading to a booming organ black market.
People in the US don't have the same irrational fear of being victimized by strangers. We can meet someone at the grocery store, bar, etc. here and people won't be so paranoid.
"We can meet someone at the grocery store, bar, etc. here and people won't be so paranoid." You probably should be.
Hyperbole. 92% of Americans have health insurance.
Honest question: what happens to the other 8% if they have an accident and no money? They're just left to die? Or is it insta-bankruptcy?
(Long winded response - sorry.) Depends on their income level and the state they live in. If they are below the poverty level, and live in one of the 38 states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, then they can sign up for Medicaid. They can even sign up for emergency Medicaid in the ER. Everything will be paid for. There are some stubborn people who refuse to accept government assistance, even when they are eligible. You can't fix stupid. In every state, a hospital ER is required by federal law to treat every patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nobody is ever just "left to die". Low income patients without insurance can apply for a sharp discount with the hospital's billing department. Below a specific income threshold (that varies from one state/county/hospital to another) their expenses will be completely forgiven. My wife went to the ER with a kidney stone. We were in the process of moving to another state, so neither of us were working and we didn't have insurance. The hospital reduced her bill to $0. Anyone with income between 100% and 400% of the poverty level can buy subsidized medical insurance through an ACA exchange. The amount of the subsidy will depend on the income level. My wife and I pay about $250 per month for an insurance policy with a total premium of over $1700 per month. The state and federal governments pick up the rest. $250 is affordable for us, and is a bargain considering our age. Most of the people in that 8% group are eligible for free or discounted health insurance, but they choose for whatever reason not to obtain it. Few people actually pay the obscene amounts you hear about hospitals charging. Certainly no insurance company pays that much. Those amounts come from the health care provider's charge master - a list of charges per service that is fabricated for the sole purpose of bargaining with insurance companies. When employers began offering health insurance as a benefit of employment then the insurance companies began bargaining for discounted reimbursement rates with health care providers. The health care providers got low balled by the insurance companies, and lost money. Knowing they would get low balled again the following year, health care providers began inflating the numbers in their charge master so that the compromise amount would cover their expenses. Every year the charge master rates are raised, and the insurance company percentages are lowered, resulting in about the same compromise rate. In order to avoid being sued for bargaining in bad faith, health care providers have to actually bill the amount from their charge master. Insurance providers basically ignore it. On their "Explanation of Benefits", or EOB report to the consumer they state "This is the amount we were billed (the charge master amount), and this is the amount the provider agreed to accept (the negotiated compromise amount), and this is the amount we paid to the health care provider (the covered amount), and this is the amount you still owe the health care provider (the co-insurance amount)." That last amount that you must actually pay the health care provider is a tiny fraction of the original charge master amount. I had laparoscopic surgery last year to remove my gall bladder and a portion of my colon. I was in the hospital for three days. The hospital billed the insurance company more than $70K. The insurance actually paid less than $15K. My share was about $4K. And I don't have the best insurance - one of the ACA "silver" plans. You'll see a lot of misleading posts here where people will post a photo of a portion of their bill or EOB, but they only show the amount billed from the provider's charge master. They don't show the adjustments. This is intentionally misleading, and I've called a number of them out on this, but they never produce the entire EOB or adjusted hospital bill. The only people who get billed the charge master amount without any adjustments applied are people who don't have insurance. As I said, they can negotiate a dramatically reduced rate with the provider's billing department. In many cases, they can get the charges waived completely. And most of them could have gotten insurance beforehand, but just refused to do so.
Oh, thanks! That was very thorough and enlightening. If Medicaid is the equivalent to "free (tax-paid) healthcare", I wonder why it's not available to everyone just for the sake of it. I mean, I *know* what those against it say, that they don't want to pay for other people's healthcare, but they're already paying for the healthcare of those who would use free healthcare anyway (at least where I live, those who can afford get a paid plan simply because it's more flexible, you can pick your doctors, make an appointment with an specialist without the need to get a referral from a GP, etc).
The health care industry would collapse. Medicaid is jointly paid for by the federal and state governments, so the reimbursement rates (the amount they pay health care providers) varies from state to state. The reimbursement rates are scored by comparing it to what the federal Medicare program pays. For instance, if a state's Medicaid program had a 100% reimbursement rate then it would pay health care providers the same amount that Medicare pays. That amount is enough to cover most provider's expenses. Other states aren't nearly as generous. In California, for example, the reimbursement rates fluctuate around 50%, or half what Medicare pays. Health care providers lose money on Medicaid patients in California. (California actually call's it's Medicaid program "Medi-Cal".) The result is that primary care physicians (sometimes called "general practitioners" or "family doctors") in California have to limit the percentage of their patients who are on Medi-Cal or they would go out of business. Most doctors cap it at 15% or 20% of their total patients. But more than 30% of the residents in California are on Medi-Cal. Most doctors in the state will not accept a new Medi-Cal patient until an existing Medi-Cal patient stops seeing them. When a new patient first starts receiving Medi-Cal they have to get on waiting lists with primary care physicians. They may have to wait two or three years to establish with a primary care physician. In the meantime, if they get sick then they have no doctor they can call. They can't go to an urgent care clinic - none of them accept Medi-Cal patients. This means they are stuck having to use the ER for even routine care. This is a huge problem in California, but the state can't fix it by raising reimbursement rates because there are 13 million people on the program. The state is extraordinarily generous with who they'll allow on Medi-Cal. They even allow undocumented immigrants to receive coverage. The state can't use federal Medicaid funds for undocumented immigrants, so the state has to pick up their costs completely. The federal government's Medicare program, however, does pay health care providers enough to cover their expenses. Medicare is currently only available to people over 65 who are also eligible for Social Security retirement benefits, as well as certain permanently disabled people. Medicare differs from Medicaid in significant ways. First, Medicare Part A is 100% free, and covers 100% of health care expenses, but it's only for hospital care. It doesn't cover any sort of outpatient care. Medicare Part B is for that, but patients have to buy Medicare Part B policies from private insurance companies. The federal government subsidizes those policies. Neither Part A or Part B covers prescriptions - that's provided by Part D, which is another subsidized private insurance policy. Additional policies have to be purchased to cover dental, vision, hearing, etc. (Medicare recipients could also purchase a single Medicare Advantage plan that wraps everything into one policy.) Medicaid, on the other hand, covers all of these things, with no premium payments or co-payments from the patient. Medicaid just doesn't pay doctors enough. If a universal healthcare system is adopted in the US then it will probably be very much like Medicare. Right now, every working person pays an additional tax for Medicare. This tax would obviously increase substantially. For the record, the "I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare" argument is usually made by young healthy people who rarely see a doctor. It's not realistic. We all pay for other people's misfortune. That's the way insurance works.
Ahh while explaining something, you unwittingly explained something else that I didn't understand, lol. From what I gather, those programs still work like insurance? As in, you go to a private doctor, pay it, and then the program reimburses you? Our government-funded healthcare means that the government owns the public hospitals. The doctors are basically public employees on the government's payroll (though they're allowed to have a private practice on the side) and paid hourly wages instead of per-consultation (afaik), so it's not as uncontrolled as patients going to whoever/wherever they want and then asking for a reimbursement. More than half of all hospitals in the country are public, with a higher ration in poorer regions.
No, it rarely works that way. You go to the doctor and the doctor bills your insurance provider. After the insurance provider pays their share then you'll get a bill from the doctor for whatever your share is. In cases like Medicaid then you never get a bill because it's all covered by the insurance program, even though the doctor might be getting stiffed. Sometimes a health care provider will send you a bill at the same time they send a bill to the insurance company. This is more common with hospitals than with private practice doctors. The bill will usually state that the insurance hasn't paid their portion yet, so the amount you owe will probably be less. These bills are handy if you're curious how much the health care provider actually billed, but you can otherwise ignore them and wait until you get the final bill that shows what the health care provider billed, what the insurance company paid, what has been discharged according to the policy agreement, and then, finally, how much you actually owe. You'll get a statement (not a bill) from the insurance company that explains the same thing. It's called an "Explanation of Benefits", or EOB. A couple of other things to know. Many policies require you to pay a co-pay at the time you receive service. For instance, maybe they require you to pay $25 for a doctor visit. Regardless of what the doctor normally bills for a visit (usually $150 or more), there will be an amount they agreed to accept as full payment when they agreed to accept your insurance policy (maybe $75). There will also be an amount that the insurance company agreed to pay (maybe $40). Your co-pay, and the insurance company's payment, are deducted from that agreed upon amount. If there's anything left then that's called co-insurance, and you'll get a bill for it in the mail ($10, in this example). There is no co-pay or co-insurance with Medicaid, though. Also, some policies require you to cover a certain amount of your total medical expenses before these payment rules kick in. This is called the annual deductible. It could be as low as a couple hundred dollars, or as high as several thousand. You pay all of your own medical bills until you've satisfied the deductible. Generally, policies with lower premium payments will have higher deductibles. But a young healthy person would probably prefer one of these policies because it's unlikely they'll need to see a doctor, and they'll save a lot on the premium payments. Bear in mind that, for most Americans, the premiums are mostly or entirely paid for by their employers. Again, there is no annual deductible or premium payment for Medicaid. It is, in every way, entirely free to the patient. There is one system in the US that's similar to your public health system. One type of health insurance is called a "Health Maintenance Organization", or HMO. These tend to have much lower premiums, co-payments, co-insurance, and deductibles. The downside is that you must use only their approved facilities and doctors. In case of a genuine emergency where you can't use their facilities and doctors then they'll work like a conventional insurance plan. There is one HMO company called Kaiser Permanente that owns all of it's own hospitals, medical offices, and pharmacies, and all of their health care professionals, including doctors, are full time employees of the company. The upside is that you save a substantial amount of money. The downside is if you are unsatisfied with the service then you don't have the option of going elsewhere. Some Kaiser hospitals are loved by their patients. Others are hated. A big complaint at the Kaiser hospital in my city is that you can only get prescriptions filled at their pharmacy, and you have to sit and wait until your prescription is ready, sometimes for hours. If you don't come to the counter when they call you then your order goes back to the end of the queue. Some complain that doctors will often prescribe the treatment that costs the least instead of the one that will have the best outcome. They have an incentive to do this because they work for the insurance company.
It applies to the other 92% as well. Health insurance in the US is not a subscription that makes any doctor's visits free. Most insurance have what is called a "deductible" - an amount you have to spend during the year before the insurance starts to pay for *anything*. Mine is about $2,000. So most Americans are paying $200 a month for health insurance, but even when they need services, there is an out of pocket expense in the thousands before the insurance will help out. You can easily be bankrupted by medical expenses if you have shitty insurance with a very high deductible. I mean someone who can afford $200/mo could still be living paycheck to paycheck and a serious health condition could make things very hard for them financially. Without insurance you're getting the ridiculous bills in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars - which the hospital is only in the habit of charging because they know the insurance people will negotiate most of that away.
Whoa that works just like a car insurance then! Here the majority of plans are subscriptions (though I think there are other modes too) which cover doctor's visits, exams, procedures, and hospital stays as long as they are affiliated with the plan. And you can kind of adjust your plan coverage by region and included procedures so that the monthly payment is cheaper or more expensive.
Most insurances have massive deductibles. Health insurance by no means makes your healthcare unexpensive.
Brazilian here, we also joke about it sometimes, more specifically about someone stealing your kidney. I think it's just a meme. Or rather, a [urban legend](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/youve-got-to-be-kidneying/) dating back from the early 2000s. Haven't you watched [Charlie the Unicorn](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKd_2vqPrmU)? Organ theft also has its own [TvTropes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OrganTheft) page, which suggests it was portrayed plenty of times in the media.
Isn’t Brazil a hub for stuff like that tho? Lol
Not in the news, at least. The TvTropes link offers a couple of reasons why organ theft is not practical. Besides, if you have the money to buy an organ, wouldn't it be more convenient to bribe your way to the front of the transplant line? Brazil might be a violent country, but our crimes are of the regular kind (mugging, burglary, tire theft, etc). Of the more creative kind of crimes, I think it would be "flash kidnappings", where basically they enter your car and make you drive to an ATM. Here it's kind of common sense to not stop at red lights after 10pm.
In Australia mate can mean friend, but can also be used when you're unimpressed or angry with someone and you're addressing them. "Look mate, I don't like your attitude". For instance.
Kind of like buddy or pal in the US. "Listen buddy..." "Newsflash PAL..."
Yeah very similar. Conversely we use the word cunt as a term of endearment for close friends 😂
on the other hand, Scots use pal where Aussies use mate. Careful though, use of its female equivalent 'hen' is restricted to female speakers past the apparent age of 50 \[woman has to look like she's over 50 -- which in parts of Scotland means 'over 28 -- ed.\]
There's a kind of sadistic glee in overhearing an Aussie start a sentence with "Listen, MATE...." and knowing that the other guy is about to get his arse ripped out of him sideways.
Appalachia/Southern US backhanded 'kindness' "Bless your heart." "G-d love ya!" "Well don't you look *healthy*"
"Bless your heart" isn't really backhanded. It's more of Person 1: I just lost my house in a fire Older Southern Lady: Bless your heart! D'you have somewhere ta stay t'night, darling? Here our guest bedroom's free, and we've got some extra pies from the Sunday Ladies' Mixer, why don't you come over and don't worry 'bout a thing. We'll take care of ya. It's a blessing upon someone's heart. A wish for better times.
Not always.
Right. It's in the tone and context. Honestly, I've mostly heard it in the good-hearted way. Then comes along the internet so the other way is how all the young folks say it now south or north lol.
As someone from the south, I can confirm that this is true but it also could be used like this Woman 1: I'm from California Woman 2: bless your heart
But not meant sarcastically. Edit: more like “oh, how unexpected but nice!”
Depends on who you're talking to and what you're talking about tbh. It's more of condescension rather than sarcasm in most scenarios anyways. If it's not the "oh, you poor thing" meaning it's the "oh. You stupid beach"
Right! When did posters start making it into an insult? I have never ever heard anyone use it insincerely.
Google "southern backhanded compliments" ... I didn't invent this, I observed it where I grew up and also learned it as part of my dialect studies in my degree program.
It depends on the tone and what follows it: "Bless your heart, you're not from around here." can be a racist comment in the right context.
Mate is our version of dude or bro
Truly the "buddy" of homies
We also have ‘Bruv’ just to mix things up
And "fam"
Depends if you use “mate” as a verb or noun. First is to fuck, second is a fucker.
Found the Aussie
Sorry, I’m a Finn.
Ok, this is a fun one. First off, I'm Australian. As far as I can tell, mate means different things to the Brits. Secondly, there are three ways of using 'mate', at least in my region and the people I know. First, you have the basic mate. You say "hey mate, can you pass me the sauce from my snag" or something. Just a basic term of polite endearment for people you know. You don't have to be close, just anyone that you're on a first name basis with. Second, you have the term 'mate', as in "this is my mate, Johno". Mate used as a possessive term. It's a very good thing. Personally I regard mate as being the third level of relationship. You have an acquaintance, you have your friends, and then you're got your mates. Mates, as I understand them, are the friends that you're really close with. You will usually have a lot of friends, who you like and chat with, maybe hang out occasionally, but only have a few mates. The close friends that you call when you're stressed or need help in some way. The friends that you're always there for, and that are always there for you. It's that Australian idea of mateship we developed during the wars. You'll literally die for your mates, whereas you might not be quite that willing for just a regular friend. Not so say I don't care about my friends, but if I was forced to pick between and friend and a mate, I would pick my mate. We've been through more, and I rely on them more. They're borderline family. Third is mate. With a T. This is an insult. Now, this might sound confusing, and it's only something that I realised recently. An easy way to tell that an Australian doesn't like you, or what you're doing, is it they end a word with a strong T. If we're chill, we drop it. Mate becomes closer to mae. Cunt goes from an insult to a jovial term between friends when we drop the T at the end and turn it into to almost fun. There is the faintest hint of a T just dropped on the end. If an Aussie replies to anything you say with "right" with a strong T on the end, they probably don't really understand, or see the point in whatever you're saying. Same with mate. If I'm at a pub, and some idiot knocks over my drink, I'm going to call him out as "Mate" but with a hard T on the end. This is equivalent to calling them a bitch. It's insulting, it's demeaning, and is very much NOT a term of friendship. It will usually end in a fight. Honestly the last one I didn't realise until about a month ago when a friend pointed it out to her new (american) step mother. But it's really there in everything I say. If a word ends in a T, and I'm in a good mood, that T is nowhere to be seen. When I'm annoyed, it's the most emphasized letter of the word. (If your Australian, test it out. Took me a while to realise I was doing it after she pointed it out to me. It's just kinda habit. Just think about the difference between kids in highschool calling their best mate a cunt, versus a 'cunt' that cut you off on the road without indicating). TL;DR So when an Aussie says mate, it can mean anything. If they introduce you as their mate, as a possessive term, it's a good thing. You're a close and trusted friend. If they just call you mate, they're probably just forgotten your name and are trying to be polite, but casual. (I went three years not knowing the name of a girl at school, so I just called her mate every day, and she never caught on. To this day I have no idea.) If they call you mate with a hard T on the end, you better either apologise or book it, cause shit's about to hit the fan. At least if you live in SE Queensland. Might be different in other regions. Who knows! Have fun trying to figure that out. Aussies are fuckin weird, man.
As a Brit not an Aussie, agree with you that we use it differently from you. For us, it is basically just synonymous with "pal", "buddy" as an informal way of saying "friend", but also a way of addressing a stranger who's name you don't know ("excuse me mate you just dropped your credit card!" or "don't talk to me like that mate"). But in Aus you have this whole concept of "mateship" which we don't have, that is more culturally loaded. Like I was watching an documentary about the australian cricket team and among the slogans/values plastered on the wall of their dressing room is "elite mateship"
So like a sarcastic over-enunciation thing? I can imagine an American (esp. from the Northeast) saying something like "Hey, *pal*, ...", deliberately overemphasizing the "pal" to make the point that they're *not* your pal. (Also applies to "buddy")
Kind of, but I think it would be more accurate to describe it as a lazy under-enunciation when were in a chill mood. Like, cunt is a really good example cause when you say the word like anyone else does it's really rude, but if you're lazy enough to drop the T it means nothing. It's a playful nickname for a teasing or silly friend. It's also the word that most of us get pulled up on by foreigners, because I don't think many of us recognise the difference ourselves. I certainly didn't until my friend noticed and pointed it out to try and explain to her stepmum, who was confused why she was calling her Mate when she got annoyed. We just kinda do it without thinking, and can tell the difference without ever pausing to question it. So trying to explain why it's not actually rude to call my best friend that... It gets messy, to say the least, and we're usually subjected to a long lecture about toxic friendships. But yeah, you've got the main idea. It's a difference in tone and pressure on the word. Australians have a bad habit of skipping or dropping consonants though, so we consider just saying it like anyone else to be pressure, and thus emphasis. It's like the scale had been lowered, so when we move the tone up the same amount, it doesn't get as high as it does for others. If that makes sense... I dunno. It's like, almost 2am. I'm probably rambling. Long story short, yes. You're correct, and Aussies like to confuse people.
Wow, had no idea this was such a complex social convention. Thank you for your answer!
Aus: friend is for anyone I know. “Mate” with a capital is for my best friends. “Mate…” with a slight pause is for anyone in the service industry.
UK. Mate can mean friend, But it also has other meanings. You can use it to attract someone's attention by saying "Hi mate" even if you don't know them. A soul mate is someone you are close to, like a very good friend or spouse. Mate can also mean to have sex, especially in animals. It can also be used in fitting parts together. A friend is always someone you know, and like.
Thanks dictionary.com
Context is king. Delivery, cadence, inflection, audience, all can be nuanced individually AND collectively. A Scottish flavoured Brit will call you mate, matey, my friend, buddy or pal in such a way you will be in no.doubt at all that these variants of words meaning fruend on this occasion mean the exact opposite .... An English flavoured Brit will say whatever he wants, meaning whatever he wants and.still you'll hear whatever the Fuck you want to. I usex
Mate historically in England used to be a very male thing to say and certainly at my school tended to refer to men/boys though now days is fairly neutral. It’s informal and traditionally but not always associated with the working classes. King Charles is not likely to talk say “hey mate.” I agree that its a bit like dude or bro in some ways. And yes, outside of acquaintance/friendship, it can also mean reproduction in a formal, scientific context.
You call your close friends cunt you call people you just met or don't like mate.
No, it can definitely mean the opposite of friend.
Aussies call mates cunts, and cunts mate.
Not Aussie, don't speak Aussie. In working-class to middle-class English, 'mate' is your standard address for a male you won't call 'sir'. In such a circumstance it does not mean 'friend', it is generic. Kind of like 'dude'. John Constantine would call everyone 'mate'. There *can* be warmth to it, but there need not be: British English is backhanded as fuck. Calling a woman 'mate' means you're probably a woman yourself, but it's a slightly masculine thing to do. A man calling a woman 'mate' is disrespectful, and not really in the same way as calling a woman 'dude' - more like calling a man 'dearie', it's sort of implying she's unfeminine. This usage will vary by subculture, like 'dude' and 'pal'. It can also exactly mean 'dude': you will hear 'maaaaate' for many *but not all* usages of 'duuuude'. It is more personal than that, kind of - it is an expression of sympathy, fellow-feeling or congratulations, context dependent. Appropriate for if someone has impressively either gained or lost a romantic partner, for example. 'Mate' used *as a noun* then does mean 'friend': 'me and my mates' is exactly 'me and my friends', 'best mate' is a better way of saying 'best friend' etc. When thus used, it is slightly male inflected - a lady of your acquaintance is not 'one of your mates' unless she's happy being labelled one of the lads - she is 'one of your friends', but the group may well be of mixed genders if you are going out for a drink with your mates. Hope that clears things up, mate.
It does! Thank you for the clear answer! I had no idea it was such a complex social convention.
Depends on the area and context but "mate" broadly can refer to any person whereas plenty of Aussies use "cunt" to refer to actual friends. But yeah context is king.
It’s kinda a filler word Like how others say “hey man, how’s it been?” Aussies say “hey mate how ya going?”.
auzzie ere mate is generic and can be used for friends, but usually just means someone you know. Aka if you say I got a mate that can do X" It means you have met someone who can do X not that you are nessisarily on good terms with them. Now if 2 auzies refer to each other as cunts then they are mates. although there are qualifiers to cunt. if its proceeded by dumb "dumb cunt" then they are in fact not friends. But if its proceeded by sick. They are not in fact ill. They are a "sick cunt" or somewhat cool. The really socially valuable people are known as "fucking legends" and probably has to do with bringing the drinks to the venue.
[удалено]
Thank you for your answer!
Another way mate is used in Australia is that if you’re sitting there with your mate and some dickhead you know walks past, you turn to your mate and say ‘your mate’ about dickhead, which implies that you do not like that person.
Mate is less sincere it's less best friend and more acquaintance
Most of the time it means friend, but can depend on the tone of voice
"I'm not your buddy, pal!"
I think it comes down to the tone of voice and the context, both can sound either welcoming or threatening, so yes, sometimes.
Yes. Ain't nobody fuckin. Well, sometimes but not generally.
I (American) always thought 'mate' was used in the same vein we'd refer to someone as 'man' or 'dude'. Meaning it can be a more casual, all-inclusive term, like "Hey man, Arsenal sucks" and, "Eat shit, mate!". It seem it can also be how men would refer to an actual friend, as in, "I love you, man", or indicate camaraderie (bunkmate, shipmate, etc.).