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.
Can someone please point out in the Constitution where the government has the right to tell companies how to run their businesses? Or better yet point out to me where the government has the right to tell me I have to buy insurance?
I keep hearing about this government takeover of the health care system. Yet from what I can tell, I am still going to buy into a private health care plan and see my private doctor under this new law. The main change is that people without insurance will now be required to buy it - from a private company. That sounds more like a private company/forced capitalism "takeover" to me. There is no single-payer. No government-run clinics. No government-run option even. I just don't get the argument. Someone enlighten me.
Could someone tell me exactly how or what the government has taken over here?
Last time I checked, private health care insurance could not dictate to me that I have it.
You would also have to be pretty dense to think that the various mandates on coverage will not result in negative influence in the business.
If you take a risk assessment business, to which specifically is designed around pricing, selecting, and managing on the issue and then force them to disregard it, well... you just put them out of business and if you are the government running a like business, you just took over the industry.
First let me say that I am not in favor of this current boondoggle but I do sympathize and understand that something has to be done for those who truly need insurance but are unable to get it.
That being said, the reason people say the government has taken over healthcare is not because the government is going to be the name on your insurance card, it's because the companies that currently provide insurance are now going to be told by the government who they must insure and the government is going to reimburse them when they lose money (and they will).
I agree that some of the policies of insurance companies are wrong...there's never been a question in my mind that some people truly get scr##ed, but it doesn't take a lot of research to find out that insurance companies normally make about a 3% profit. Compare this with 30% profit margins for grocery stores, 35% for coffee shops and 17% for Verizon...I think the rhetoric of the
"big bad insurance company making billions while letting people die" really is easy to disprove.
Also, the idea on paper for this mandatory insurance idea was a good one...it makes sense if everyone follows the rules. The simple equation is that if you make everyone buy insurance and pay up to a certain amount of their income, you'll have a bunch of healthy middle-to-high income workers who rarely see a doctor and the amount that they're paying for nothing (much like those of us who have paid auto insurance for decades but never had a claim) will offset the cost of providing healthcare to someone who doesn't pay as much into the system but will need regular care. The problem of course is that many of those people who the government is hoping will offset the cost already have insurance or are going to continue to not have insurance and and risk being fined.
What IS going to happen is that the cost of medical treatment will continue to go up, certain insurance companies are going to be labeled as the "one that everyone who needed the government bill is using" and more and more doctors are going to start dropping off the provider lists of those insurance providers. The insurance companies can't tell someone that they are dropped from their healthcare plan, but they can give you a specific list of doctors who are approved for appointments and as those doctors start falling out of the system, the doctors who will provide care will shrink. This happens anyway, I have insurance and was given a list of very specific doctors I could see and many of those on my list had an asterisk next to their name indicating that they weren't seeing new patients. The good pediatricians in my area have a 3-months in advance appointment system to have your child get their well-child visit.
So, more and more people get added to the system, more and more insurance companies have to start decreasing their list of providers because those providers aren't going to want to be reimbursed at government rates and can't handle the onslaught of new patients, and then the government will step in and say, "see...we told you so. Insurance companies haven't been able to provide care the way they promised. The only answer is to let us, the government, provide everyone with care so we can bypass the evil insurance company's policies."
Remember the so-called credit card fix that the government rolled out that was supposed to help everyone? Well, the credit card companies were forced to change their ways, but spent months before the bill took effect raising everyone's rates. I don't carry a credit card balance and have never paid a bill late in the 20 years I have had my card, but even my card rate was raised to 23%! Same for the mortgage situation. The government stepped in and told banks they have to start lending but the banks found the loophole and won't lend to anyone without a certain FICO score, so the so-called huge improvement that was supposed to happen didn't happen at all. Healthcare isn't going to be different. It will start with great fanfare and hope and then reality will set in and the people who really need the help aren't going to get it.
First let me say that I am not in favor of this current boondoggle but I do sympathize and understand that something has to be done for those who truly need insurance but are unable to get it.
That being said, the reason people say the government has taken over healthcare is not because the government is going to be the name on your insurance card, it's because the companies that currently provide insurance are now going to be told by the government who they must insure and the government is going to reimburse them when they lose money (and they will).
I agree that some of the policies of insurance companies are wrong...there's never been a question in my mind that some people truly get scr##ed, but it doesn't take a lot of research to find out that insurance companies normally make about a 3% profit. Compare this with 30% profit margins for grocery stores, 35% for coffee shops and 17% for Verizon...I think the rhetoric of the "big bad insurance company making billions while letting people die" really is easy to disprove.
So you're saying no insurance company has EVER rescinded someone's policy just because they were sick and might cost the company big bucks?
Sure they'll claim it was "fraud" because so and so didn't tell them she had acne as a teen and therefore that's why they can't cover her chemo for breast cancer but I think most people can see through that sack of bs.
Healthcare isn't going to be different. It will start with great fanfare and hope and then reality will set in and the people who really need the help aren't going to get it.
Anecdotal evidence is already coming in. People are already going to doctors expecting free procedures all the way up to breast augmentations. Others are surprised when their current insurance rates are going up. The average person didn't pay a bit of attention to this bill.
Anecdotal evidence is already coming in. People are already going to doctors expecting free procedures all the way up to breast augmentations. Others are surprised when their current insurance rates are going up. The average person didn't pay a bit of attention to this bill.
Ha! Ha! Ha! I'd love to see the link where somebody ran into the plastic surgeon demanding their brest augmentation under the new bill.
Can someone please point out in the Constitution where the government has the right to tell companies how to run their businesses? Or better yet point out to me where the government has the right to tell me I have to buy insurance?
1st question:
Article 1, sect. 8 + a couple hundred years of case law (Unless your name is Scalia)
2nd question is more interesting, although Congress and the President, and most Constitutional lawyers think it won't be a problem, but again
Article 1, sect. 8
Of course government has a role in what companies can do. Should a company be allowed to put mercury in lollipops?
First let me say that I am not in favor of this current boondoggle but I do sympathize and understand that something has to be done for those who truly need insurance but are unable to get it.
That being said, the reason people say the government has taken over healthcare is not because the government is going to be the name on your insurance card, it's because the companies that currently provide insurance are now going to be told by the government who they must insure and the government is going to reimburse them when they lose money (and they will).
I agree that some of the policies of insurance companies are wrong...there's never been a question in my mind that some people truly get scr##ed, but it doesn't take a lot of research to find out that insurance companies normally make about a 3% profit. Compare this with 30% profit margins for grocery stores, 35% for coffee shops and 17% for Verizon...I think the rhetoric of the
"big bad insurance company making billions while letting people die" really is easy to disprove.
Also, the idea on paper for this mandatory insurance idea was a good one...it makes sense if everyone follows the rules. The simple equation is that if you make everyone buy insurance and pay up to a certain amount of their income, you'll have a bunch of healthy middle-to-high income workers who rarely see a doctor and the amount that they're paying for nothing (much like those of us who have paid auto insurance for decades but never had a claim) will offset the cost of providing healthcare to someone who doesn't pay as much into the system but will need regular care. The problem of course is that many of those people who the government is hoping will offset the cost already have insurance or are going to continue to not have insurance and and risk being fined.
What IS going to happen is that the cost of medical treatment will continue to go up, certain insurance companies are going to be labeled as the "one that everyone who needed the government bill is using" and more and more doctors are going to start dropping off the provider lists of those insurance providers. The insurance companies can't tell someone that they are dropped from their healthcare plan, but they can give you a specific list of doctors who are approved for appointments and as those doctors start falling out of the system, the doctors who will provide care will shrink. This happens anyway, I have insurance and was given a list of very specific doctors I could see and many of those on my list had an asterisk next to their name indicating that they weren't seeing new patients. The good pediatricians in my area have a 3-months in advance appointment system to have your child get their well-child visit.
So, more and more people get added to the system, more and more insurance companies have to start decreasing their list of providers because those providers aren't going to want to be reimbursed at government rates and can't handle the onslaught of new patients, and then the government will step in and say, "see...we told you so. Insurance companies haven't been able to provide care the way they promised. The only answer is to let us, the government, provide everyone with care so we can bypass the evil insurance company's policies."
Remember the so-called credit card fix that the government rolled out that was supposed to help everyone? Well, the credit card companies were forced to change their ways, but spent months before the bill took effect raising everyone's rates. I don't carry a credit card balance and have never paid a bill late in the 20 years I have had my card, but even my card rate was raised to 23%! Same for the mortgage situation. The government stepped in and told banks they have to start lending but the banks found the loophole and won't lend to anyone without a certain FICO score, so the so-called huge improvement that was supposed to happen didn't happen at all. Healthcare isn't going to be different. It will start with great fanfare and hope and then reality will set in and the people who really need the help aren't going to get it.
Great post! Have to run now, but this is the best explanation of what could happen - and without all the fear/anti-constitution/anti-Obama rhetoric - that I've heard on CD. Thanks!
Can someone please point out in the Constitution where the government has the right to tell companies how to run their businesses? Or better yet point out to me where the government has the right to tell me I have to buy insurance?
There isn't any language of that sort in the Constitution. but Good Luck gettin' an answer on this one from the koo koo crowd
I keep hearing about this government takeover of the health care system. Yet from what I can tell, I am still going to buy into a private health care plan and see my private doctor under this new law. The main change is that people without insurance will now be required to buy it - from a private company. That sounds more like a private company/forced capitalism "takeover" to me. There is no single-payer. No government-run clinics. No government-run option even. I just don't get the argument. Someone enlighten me.
Could someone tell me exactly how or what the government has taken over here?
You might want to tell the 38 states who are suing the federal government because they say this bill will force them into bankruptcy due to all of the unfunded mandates.. If there is no "takeover", then why are their costs projected to bankrupt the states? (per the states)..
The fact is this isnt a "takeover" of healthcare. I've said it all along that this is simply a TAX BILL, with requirements of individuals to do something.
It does however force more individuals onto the medicaid system because it raises the maximum income limits and then changes medicare to the point that its economical for companies to push their companies onto the governmental systems.
Takeover, not quit, but incentivizing companies to no longer insure their employees was not a step in the right direction because when insurance companies are no longer profitable (due to removal of pre-existing conditions), or they are forced to raise their rates on everyone to compensate for the mandated coverage required in the bill, then the costs will go up and make it more affordable to simply pay the "fine" then have care.
The idea behind a bill is to encourage individuals to get insurance, not encourage them to drop them. The idea also was about controlling costs and making it more affordable, and this bill doesnt do that either.
In short, the bill might be successful in the long haul just like many consider Social Security etc, but it wont be successful in accomplishing the published goals. It'll be known for its push to move more individuals to the taxpayer liability, and some are fine with this taking place..
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.
