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.
Q: Why on Earth should Insurance companies, in particular, have to cover pre-existing conditions?
A: Because they want to control "the market", the "general welfare" of the people.
One question I have is why there are no charities that cover the costs when someone doesn't have insurance? Perhaps people should see to it they have insurance BEFORE they get sick.
.
Perhaps someone was born with a preexisting condition and lost their insurance under their parents after they turned 26.
BTW, how many bake sales would it take to pay for treatment for stage II breast cancer?
right now most people have EMPLOYER provided health insurance
that the EMPLOYER PAYS 75%+/- of the premuim..the employee pays 25% (give or take)
the employee CURRENTLY PAYS (about) 300-400 a month....while the employer pays 900-1200 a month...for a total monthly premium of....about15k (14400-19000)
undersingle payer..the TAXPAYER will be hit with that bill...companies and corporations will actually love the savings they are getting while the individual taxpayer gets killed
I bet these employers/job creators would do much better if they didn't have to provide health insurance as a benefit. Another great argument for a national health care insurance.
look at the cost of the LOWPAYING medicare/medicaid.....900 billion just to PARTIALLY cover less than 70 million people ......900 billion to cover 1/5 of the population
singlepayer would cost between 3 trillion and 6 trillion EVERY YEAR (we already spend 1 trillion so the NEW added cost would be 2-5 trillion)
we have 140 million tax FILERS, (of which nealy 50% dont pay anything)
3 trillion divided by 140 million is what.......$20,000
6 trillion divided by 150 million is what......$40,000
thats between 20k to 40k PER TAXPAYER.....CAN YOU AFFORD THAT
You miss a couple of factors here.
1) Subtract from the total cost the total premiums currently being paid to insurance companies, and
2) Subtract from that total cost the profits health insurance / hospitals etc. make
My guess is you take those out of the equation, along with allowing medicaid etc. to negotiate for bulk prescription pricing and the total bill will be radically less than what people pay today, government and private insurance together.
Oh..........that is all it takes? Open the yellow pages and you have access to healthcare. Why didn't congress think of that?
Yes, the Yellow Pages will do it. My guess is,however, that most people who complain about lack of access to health care really mean lack of access to health care funded by OPM.
Last edited by Minethatbird; 02-18-2013 at 04:44 PM..
Reason: spelling
You simply keep paying the premiums to the insurance carrier. You do not get cut off the day you lose your job, and there are already mechanisms in place that cover the gap between employers.
Let's say that I'm insurer A who covered your treatment. You stop paying. Should I, as a business continue covering your treatments?
Now, you get employed by a new company, I'm insurer B. Should I be forced to cover your treatments?
Look, you lefties seem to want a world with 300 million different rules so that no one ever has to go through hard times.
Life is tough. Wear a helmet.
Really? You just lost your job. You no longer get those employer negotiated rates. Priced Cobra lately?
You are dreaming, dude if you think it is that easy.
Insured or not - taxpayers foot the bill. Why don't you get that? W
Some people seem to have a very strange view of what insurance companies do. They point to the problem of people who have a pre-existing condition, trying to sign up for new insurance, only to find the insurance companies won't pay for the the treatment for that pre-existing condition.
Of course they won't. That's not what insurance companies do. Whoever said they did?
Insurance is a gambling game where you bet on what will happen in the future. You "bet" that you will get sick or injured, and the company "bets" that you won't. If you get sick or injured, the company pays you the stipulated amount (paying for a portion of your medical treatment etc.), and if you don't, you pay them (premiums). The purpose is to shield you from the "shock" of suddenly and unexpectedly getting hit with huge medical bills... which is why you agreed to the contract.
A pre-existing condition cannot be insured against. It's like betting on the outcome of a horse race that's already been run - there is no "chance" involved, and no "unexpectedness" to the outcome (any more). Or like trying to get car insurance after wrecking your car.
Insurance companies are in the business of selling security - the assurance that you won't be suddenly bankrupted by huge medical bills, rehab bills etc. in the future. They do it by insuring huge numbers of people and getting them to each pay relatively small amounts (their premiums) each. They and their clients all know that most of them will never incur the huge medical bills they are worried about. But since no one knows which few people WILL incur them, they are all happy to pay the premiums, for the knowledge they won't have to pay the huge amounts if they turn out to be the unlucky ones.
Insurance companies sell safety from FUTURE possible disasters. And that's all they sell. Asking them to cover pre-existing conditions, is like asking a submarine designer to design a supersonic jet - it's got nothing to do with his business or his area of expertise, and he never volunteered to design jets in the first place, for good reason.
If you want to set up some kind of universal pool to pay for pre-existing conditions, fine, go ahead. But why drag insurance companies into it? It's got nothing to do with their areas of expertise, and they never volunteered to do it in the first place - for good reason.
You're right: the ideal would be to get rid of health insurance companies completely. Thanks for seeing this.
This is why you buy insurance when you are healthy enough to pay lower rates. So you have it if you lose the odds game and need it. I don't get why people whine when they didn't take care of themselves. Insurance is cheaper when you're young. That's when you need to buy into it.
I remember my dad working two jobs to make sure we were insured. You do what you have to.
I do think there should be a catastrophic safety net though.
And people with asthma or type I diabetes from childhood? When are they healthy enough to get low(er) rates?
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.
