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.
They're just part of the problem. Many liberals believe killing a fetus because it's inconvenient is A-OK but killing a very costly-to-treat ill person who is going to die anyway, isn't. What kind of sense does that make? /SMH
Exactly. So why do seriously ill people have a right to treatment paid for by others while fetuses do not even have a right to life? Why are fathers prosecuted for intentionally killing a fetus but mothers aren't?
Exactly. So why do seriously ill people have a right to treatment paid for by others while fetuses do not even have a right to life? Why are fathers prosecuted for intentionally killing a fetus but mothers aren't?
Our daughter and her husband, both in their mid 50s and owners of a small business are facing shopping for new insurance. She retired early from one of the major airlines because her back and shoulders could no longer handle the heavy bags ticket agents handle each day. Now her conbra is running out and they will be on their own in a few months. Guess what, talking about pre existing conditions they are having trouble finding a plan that covers pre existing at a price that is anywhere in a reasonable range. If they can't get it why should those with Obama care get it?
Every ACA compliant plan covers pre-existing conditions NOW.
Every. single. one.
Do you honestly believe there is some special type of insurance for those who have subsidized policies?
There isn't.
The policies that are available via whatever portal one uses have the same benefits as a policy that one buys directly from the carrier.
What your daughter and her husband are now discovering is what anyone who has ever had to buy an individual plan has known forever. When you don't have an employer subsidizing your coverage, you pay the entire amount.
If your income is too high to qualify for subsidies, you pay the entire amount.
Thanks to the guy now in the WH, premiums increased exponentially from last year to this.
And they are expected to do so again in 2019.
Exactly. So why do seriously ill people have a right to treatment paid for by others while fetuses do not even have a right to life? Why are fathers prosecuted for intentionally killing a fetus but mothers aren't?
So basically you believe that insurance should only cover healthy people. If they get a chronic illness they should be dropped from insurance.
It's still illegal for companies to discriminate due to pre-existing conditions. As a result, I have a hard time believing your story.
Oh, I believe it.
There are still lots of people who believe that "Obamacare" is some sort of special insurance that only certain people are entitled to.
As I'm sure you know, no one buys an "Obamacare" policy because there is no such thing.
Every policy sold today is ACA-compliant and covers pre-existing conditions.
What we are likely seeing in that case, are people trying to find a policy that provides the same sort of coverage that previous employer-sponsored coverage provided and experiencing sticker-shock.
Lots of people are stunned to discover how much they have to pay out of pocket for monthly premiums.
They never considered just how much of their coverage their employers were subsidizing.
Having had the option to utilize COBRA, I do find it hard to believe that the individual premiums are more expensive, but if there are limited options in that poster's state, I guess anything is possible.
They're just part of the problem. Many liberals believe killing a fetus because it's inconvenient is A-OK but killing a very costly-to-treat ill person who is going to die anyway, isn't. What kind of sense does that make? /SMH
What kind of sense does what make?
The two things are not in any way comparable.
Removing astronomically expensive treatment from someone who is not ever going to recover and who does not have any quantifiably positive quality-of-life is not "killing" someone.
At some point no treatment, other than keeping a body breathing with the aid of a ventilator, will make the least bit of difference.
Why would you advocate for prolonging that suffering?
An untreated pre-existing condition does not mean that a person is at imminent threat of death. The illness may simply incapacitate, which has an on-going cost to society, too. My pre-existing condition, which is being successfully treated, causes blindness.
So basically you believe that insurance should only cover healthy people. If they get a chronic illness they should be dropped from insurance.
You haven't answered any of the questions.
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.
