Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was addressing the use of the term "death panel" when applied to Obamacare.
What is the difference whether an insurance company or the government denies coverage to certain people?
They are BOTH deciding who will live and who will die.....so why does Obamacare get that label and for profit insurance companies do not?
That is the question I am asking and you all have yet to answer.
But you go under the guise that these people would live if either of them didn't exist. They wouldn't and they would have died quicker with a lot less cost. That's how nature has worked for billions of years.
But you go under the guise that these people would live if either of them didn't exist. They wouldn't and they would have died quicker with a lot less cost. That's how nature has worked for billions of years.
So......why does one system get the label "death panel" and the other does not? THAT is what I am asking.
I guess when you get right down to it.....doing away with ALL forms of health insurance would solve a lot of problems.
There would be more jobs available because a lot of people would die and leave job openings.
Social Security would be solvent because a lot more people would die before they could collect it.
There would be less welfare because a lot of welfare mama's would die in childbirth and a lot of babies would die.
Is that what we should go with.....TOTAL personal responsibility?
If not, whatever system we go with is going to have to draw lines on care that will be covered. When the government does it they are creating "death panels.....when insurance companies do it.....they are what....."culling the herd" ?
Now maybe you can tell me what that IPAG thing that has come up in the Affordable Care thing is other than a death panel for we old folks. Please try and remember that Sarah Palin or somebody she knew had seen this part way back when. 15 people who will make the rules about whether Medicare can keep certain old people alive. Ain't it a wonder what powers those people will have?
It's easy to forget this when you're a blind sheeple.
I was addressing the use of the term "death panel" when applied to Obamacare.
What is the difference whether an insurance company or the government denies coverage to certain people?
They are BOTH deciding who will live and who will die.....so why does Obamacare get that label and for profit insurance companies do not?
That is the question I am asking and you all have yet to answer.
Also note that most employer-sponsored coverage does not have a pre-existing conditions clause. I have seen one that says you cannot have that specific condition covered by the new plan for the first year you are on it. If you lose your job, you get COBRA for 18 months, still no denial of coverage, and when you get back on your feet with another job, you just swing on over to that policy and again, no lapse in coverage.
Far from being a death panel.
ETA: Obamacare gets that label b/c what the seniors going to do after Medicare denies them their heart transplant (or whatever)? There is literally nowhere else they can go for coverage.
I was addressing the use of the term "death panel" when applied to Obamacare.
What is the difference whether an insurance company or the government denies coverage to certain people?
They are BOTH deciding who will live and who will die.....so why does Obamacare get that label and for profit insurance companies do not?
That is the question I am asking and you all have yet to answer.
Is that IPAG anything other than a death panel for old people? When Palin was yelling "death panel" nobody but here seemed to know about those 15 people. Of course, Republicans didn't know about that since none of them were allowed to take part in the writing of the bill and didn't get to ask questions in debate. There was no debate after the Senate bill replaced the House bill. They just voted and got it done before too many people could find out about it.
There is a huge difference in mandated death panels and what insurance companies do. I know that you, like the rest, have to use this as another excuse for the law death panels, but it is like comparing raisins to horse turds.
1) What confusion at doc's offices? I've never been told something would be covered and then had it not be.
2) It doesn't matter if you simplify the language, each policy will still cover different things. They are all written in the same way already, pretty much, it's just a matter of reading to know what is covered and what isn't.
I can't understand how any rational person can NOT comprehend an insurance policy.
Btw, it's not that I'm against it per se. It's that I'm against Obamacare and I disagree that things need to be dumbed down even more than they already are in this country. We are breeding a nation of idiots.
You're young; you probably haven't had a lot of health problems. I can tell you, I work in a dr's office and we have a person whose job it is to find out what insurance will cover. Sometimes I have to do this, as well. What a waste of nursing time. We get put on "eternal hold" by these high school drop-outs that work for the insurance companies, deal with these devil-spawn voice recognition systems that pretend to be real people, etc, sometimes for hours just to find out if something will be covered. There is no way a doctor can know the intimate details of every insurance policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero;20535348[B
]any plan from a company is a group plan and accept pre-existing...always have[/b]
the ones that had trouble is the INDIVIDUAL people who wanted INDIVIDUAL plans
every company I have ever worked for (privaye and public) that offered ins, never had any problems with pre-existing
and the 'pre-existing ' is a starw man too...INSURANCE will ALWAYS deny pre-existing....if you have lots of tickets and/or accidents try to get car insurance...it will be tough or you will pay through the nose...because insurace has NEVER been about care
If the group is small enough, pre-existing conditions can kick in and become a problem. DH was once part of a company of 5 employees. The owner's son was a diabetic, and that impacted our rates. Of course, the agent's solution to the problem was for the owner to take his kid off the policy, but the owner made a decision as a father and not a businessman and kept him on, for which I was grateful. That meant if one of our kids developed a problem, he wouldn't try to get us to drop her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh
This is hardly a ground breaking concept. Lots of health insurers have that. Besides all you need to understand is addition and subtraction and fractions to understand how deductibles and coinsurance works.
I know there are plenty of PhD's and J.Ds and even Accountants whose brains freeze at the mention of terms like "coinsurance". Engineers don't for some reason. They "get it". But really, it is no more difficult than 4th grade math.
For example if you have a $1000 deductible and 80/20 coinsurance to $10,000 with a $2000 out-of-pocket maximum not including the deductible or co-pays, after you pay the deductible, you would pay 20% of the expenses until you'd paid out another $2000.
For example, after you paid the first $1000 in whatever the eligible expenses that counted towards the deductible were, you'd pay $20 on a $100 blood test or $60 on a $300 x-ray. Once your share accumulated to where you had paid out $2000 (and the insurance company would have paid $8000), The insurance company pays 100% of the rest. It shouldn't be that difficult to understand.
If you have a lousy plan like all the Obamacare plans will be, there will be fixed dollar co-pays that apply to things that don't apply to the deductible so you will be on the hook for those co-pays forever and ever. Your insurance will never kick in and start covering those expenses like it does if you have a GOOD plan with GOOD coverage that really PROTECTS you that DOES NOT HAVE SEPARATE CO-PAYS FOR PRESCRIPTIONS.
Here's why co-pays are bad. Let's say you have to be on 10 Prescriptions each with a $50 co-pay. That ads up to $6000 per year in co-pays with no end in site since there is no STOP_LOSS protection with co-pays where there comes a point where your losses STOP and the insurance company starts paying for everything.
Well, what a clever little tutorial you gave us, but you missed the whole point. There are many services that are "not a covered benefit" and do not apply to deductibles, etc no matter what they cost. It all depends on the policy. DH works in engineering, and believe me, this is all Greek to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece
Anyone who has ever had to fight with their insurance company or file an appeal to get a bill paid knows it's not aways easy to understand, even the people handling the claims for the insurance companies themselves don't always know.
Nobody ever thinks it's a problem until it happens to them. It won't always happen to everyone, and those folks will go through life convinced that other people are the problem, not the insurance itself. And if you think Dr's offices (billers, coders, etc.) don't have a problem with it all you are crazy. Even the Dr's themselves don't know who they can or can't refer you to without checking with someone in their office who's sole job it is is to keep up with the changes in insurances, medical groups, affiliations, etc.
Too true! It's happened to us! As I said earlier, our office has such and insurance person, as well. We also have someone who checks people's policies to see who needs a referral to a specialist, who doesn't, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821
So someone with bipolar disorder as a preexisting condition is now going to die b/c they were denied insurance?
Stop with the hyperbole.
Yes, it's entirely possible. Suicide is fairly common among people with bipolar.
So......why does one system get the label "death panel" and the other does not? THAT is what I am asking.
Politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
I guess when you get right down to it.....doing away with ALL forms of health insurance would solve a lot of problems.
Money wise. But I see things differently than a lot of people. I see your entire "western" standard of living you manipulating the natural order of things.
You remember when Hoover went "hands off" (although he didn't completely go hands off, you have the Hoover Dam)? You got the Great Depression. That's what your life should be like. The equilibrium is a GDP of $11,200 per capita for the planet and yet you have managed to manipulate the rest of the world so that your GDP per capita $47,200.
What you're seeing now, and will for the foreseeable future, is that equilibrium bringing you down to $11,200 (2010 dollars) per capita.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
There would be more jobs available because a lot of people would die and leave job openings.
Umm... maybe maybe not. There are still vast regions of the planet where $1 day is a lot of money. There's something really wrong with the equilibrium and the planet here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
Social Security would be solvent because a lot more people would die before they could collect it.
Yes I see where you're going with this. It's entirely true too, the strongest survives. It's how you got here in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
There would be less welfare because a lot of welfare mama's would die in childbirth and a lot of babies would die.
That sounds just horrible. You can probably use that as a talking point in your next partisan exchange.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
Is that what we should go with.....TOTAL personal responsibility?
Why not? Greed, errr, self-interest is what got you here. Looking out for number one is the status quo and that goes all the way up to your altruistic congressman/woman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
If not, whatever system we go with is going to have to draw lines on care that will be covered. When the government does it they are creating "death panels.....when insurance companies do it.....they are what....."culling the herd" ?
Finally. So how much does a life cost?
Some places on the planet less than $1 and other very small concentrated parts it may cost $billions.
How much does Down-Syndrome cost? Scoliosis? Herpes? How much does every single problem cost? That's what it needs to be broken down to with UHC or Obamacare or whatever social medicine scheme, right?
So someone with bipolar disorder as a preexisting condition is now going to die b/c they were denied insurance?
Stop with the hyperbole.
OMG I think everyone here but you knows we are talking about outrageously expensive, life threatening conditions.
I guess we should be taking baby steps.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think everyone here but you knows we are talking about outrageously expensive, life threatening conditions. 
