Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:04 AM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,939,042 times
Reputation: 1867

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
Every insurance plan I've purchased took between two weeks to a month before the application was processed and I was covered, unless it was through an employer and it provided immediate coverage on the first day of work. Show me where in the law insurance companies are mandated to change that time period and offer immediate coverage on demand?
It varies by policy and employer. Your employer can dictate when your coverage kicks in. If you get individual insurance it also varies. Some companies say your coverage begins when you turn in your application and pay your first month's estimated premium. Some it's the 1st day of the next month after turning in your application. It all depends on when you turn it in and how.

The best advice I can give young people is to get health and life insurance. Why? Because young healthy people pay almost nothing to be insured and the last thing a young person needs (or their family) is the burden of medical debt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:10 AM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,939,042 times
Reputation: 1867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Sorry, but that's no longer true, under Obamacare.

Under Obamacare, if you have some illness or injury BEFORE you sign up, the insurance company MUST take you as a client and MUST pay for that previously-existing condition.

You didn't know this?

Seriously?
So I have cancer for 20 years. I pay all of the expenses out of pocket. I then sign up for Obamacare and the insurance company pays me back for all of my medical expenses. Is that what you are saying? I really hope not because your response is poorly worded.

Now if you are saying that an insurance company cannot turn you away because of a preexisting condition and must pay for any related expenses AFTER signing up then yes. You are correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:12 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,479,963 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by tluv00 View Post
So I have cancer for 20 years. I pay all of the expenses out of pocket. I then sign up for Obamacare and the insurance company pays me back for all of my medical expenses. Is that what you are saying? I really hope not because your response is poorly worded.

Now if you are saying that an insurance company cannot turn you away because of a preexisting condition and must pay for any related expenses AFTER signing up then yes. You are correct.

after 2014, for now the pre existing condition clause only applys to children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:20 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,698,996 times
Reputation: 22474
Quote:
Originally Posted by tluv00 View Post
It varies by policy and employer. Your employer can dictate when your coverage kicks in. If you get individual insurance it also varies. Some companies say your coverage begins when you turn in your application and pay your first month's estimated premium. Some it's the 1st day of the next month after turning in your application. It all depends on when you turn it in and how.

The best advice I can give young people is to get health and life insurance. Why? Because young healthy people pay almost nothing to be insured and the last thing a young person needs (or their family) is the burden of medical debt.
Young healthy people don't need insurance really because if you're healthy you don't need a doctor or pills or hospitalization. Many people only rarely go to doctors and aren't on any drugs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:22 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,479,963 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Young healthy people don't need insurance really because if you're healthy you don't need a doctor or pills or hospitalization. Many people only rarely go to doctors and aren't on any drugs.

That is the one thing many who support the mandate would prefer to overlook.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:26 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,698,996 times
Reputation: 22474
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterboy7375 View Post
That is the one thing many who support the mandate would prefer to overlook.
Yes and they aren't looking at the absolute glee with the hospital CEO's who get $8 million yearly bonuses on top of extravant salaries, this just has the government taking more money away from the little guy who worked hard for it and turning it over to them. Insurance CEO's love it too -- now people are forced to buy costly insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:44 AM
 
Location: Texas
1,187 posts, read 995,380 times
Reputation: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
Have no fear; they will quickly adjust that penalty / tax so that it's a nice stick to encourage this housewife and others to sign up for the healthcare. And I'm fine with that.

Everyone will be in the healthcare market at some point - it's just a question of timing, frequency, and severity. As such, they should pay in what they can while they are healthy; that's the whole point of insurance. Assuming they can afford to pitch in something, why should they get a free ride at my expense? That's not fair. If their participation can be coupled with other mechanisms to provide decent coverage options that get more people on the path for regular preventative care rather than just relying on emergency rooms once things get catastrophic, that will be much better for the system overall as well.

If people have the money to put in for health insurance and refuse to do so, that's fine - but we should have a law that says they only get the care they can pay for out of pocket, and after that care is cut off and they can be carted away to die.
And this, ladies and gentleman, is the TRUE liberal color! Do as I say or we'll leave you to die. Nice. Where's the liberal "compassion" now? Oh but won't you please think of the children! ROFL!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:52 AM
 
1,176 posts, read 1,819,871 times
Reputation: 260
Many people here have mentioned being hurt in an auto accident as a reason for a young healthy person to need HI. My auto insurance covers injuries to both me and any passengers even if I am at fault. Also last time I was injured in auto accident, not my fault, costs were covered by 1) my auto policy thru un/underinsured coverage, 2) auto insurance of person who hit me, AND 3) workers compensation since I was on the job. My health insurance paid nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:55 AM
 
13,422 posts, read 9,952,903 times
Reputation: 14357
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Young healthy people don't need insurance really because if you're healthy you don't need a doctor or pills or hospitalization. Many people only rarely go to doctors and aren't on any drugs.
What about my friend who in our 20's totalled his motorbike and is now a paraplegic? Did he not need insurance? He hardly went to the doctor before that. Now he has a lifetime of care required.

90% of the patients in the spinal ward he was in for 6 months were males under 30, who'd had catastrophic accidents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 07:56 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 3,479,963 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus View Post
What about my friend who in our 20's totalled his motorbike and is now a paraplegic? Did he not need insurance? He hardly went to the doctor before that. Now he has a lifetime of care required.

90% of the patients in the spinal ward he was in for 6 months were males under 30, who'd had catastrophic accidents.

and they make up less then 1/100 of 1% of the population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:43 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top