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.
This topic has been played out so many times from the same dull posters over and over again, until it is shown how wrong they are in which they soon hide in the shadows only to create a new thread. To those who state that there should be some sort of safety net for those who need care the most, as though those agencies never existed. Well, they do exist because of the nature of the for profit health insurance. The VA, medicare, medicaid, Indian Health exist because of the void for-profit insurance creates. Also BCBS was originally created as a non-profit but was forced to play the for-profit card with the other rackets---Anti-Trust legislation.
Some people do not qualify for any of the above............
Quote:
What we have now is a fragmented system that rations our health care more than any modern nation on earth and costs trillions because it is so fragmented.
While it would suck, you miss the point of the post entirely. Do you actually think insurance companies ought to be required to "insure" someone for something that has already happened? Does that mean I don't need fire insurance until AFTER my house burns down? No car insurance until after I am in a pileup?
And I will ask again: should someone who has had a chronic illness since childhood be denied insurance because of their pre-existing condition?
Do you understand what a PRE EXISTING CONDITION is? It's a condition that one has already, before they attempt to purchase the insurance. And while you may have no control over getting the illness, that doesn't explain why someone else (the insurance company, and indirectly, it's other clients) should have to pay for it. Insurance is there to manage risk. To protect against things that MAY happen in the future. No to pay for things you already know you are DEFINITELY going to happen or have already happened.
So you WOULD deny insurance to anyone with asthma, Type I Diabetes, cystic fibrosis...
See, the problem with people saying we shouldn't have to pay is that the laws do not allow for refusal of service at the ER if you can't pay.
That's reality.
We are already paying for all of these people and Obamacare isn't suddenly changing that fact.
The real burning issue is that healthcare insurance costs have experienced roughly 10% annual inflation for over a decade. We all want the best healthcare, we don't want to pay for it though.
Lets say that tomorrow, science can sequence everyone's DNA, and determine if you or I have some preexisting genetic defect, that we were totally unaware of previously?
Let's say further, that you switch jobs and your employer's new insurance company demands that new DNA test, and then refuse to cover you because they discover that genetic defect you did not know about, and claim it will manifest itself as you grow older? Suddenly you too have a preexisting condition, and are not insurable, and oh by the way, neither are your children.
People with preexisting conditions are not all a bunch of scammers trying to milk the system by forcing all of us to pay for their schemes.
So you WOULD deny insurance to anyone with asthma, Type I Diabetes, cystic fibrosis...
Fascinating.
Insurance is the guarantee of payment in the event a specific event occurs, which it may or may not, in return for a smaller payment in advance and regardless of whether the event occurs or not. If a person has the condition already they don't need insurance, they need health care. I would never deny health care to anyone.
Think about this logically. If the care for the illness costs $10,000 how much will the insurance cost? If it's more than $10,000, there's no reason for the person with the illness to pay it. If the cost of the insurance is less than $10,000, the company loses money. How long can it survive? Why would anyone expect this to be the way things operate?
And I will ask again: should someone who has had a chronic illness since childhood be denied insurance because of their pre-existing condition?
How old are they now? How have their health care costs been paid until now?
I will ask this again; why should an insurance company be forced to accept a client with a preexisting condition, when the existence of that condition is guaranteed to make the company lose money above & beyond what it will collect in premiums from that client?
Agreed. If health care was seen as free, as with federally run UHC, the costs would go thru the roof.
Health care costs are the most costly item to the budgets in these countries with UHC. Costs are so high, that all any politician talks about during an election, are their schemes and grand plans to bring down the costs of state run UHC.
Health care in this country is focused on providing the best health care possible. Our doctors don't use the cost of health care to base their decisions, if they think you need a CT scan or a blood test, the schedule you one as soon as possible.
Health care in countries with UHC are focused on keeping costs down, one of the ways to keep down costs is reducced availability of various services, like limiting the use of expensive MRI scanners, medical procedures and drugs. there is a reason Canada has a shortage of these scanners, it keeps costs down, with waiting periods to use the few they do have.
Every medium sized town in the US has more then one CT, MRI, PET scanner, ultrasound, fluoroscopy, x-ray machine, and much more. Go to the UK or even Canada, and they don't invest as much in these devices, they have weeks long waiting lines for these.
If the US went to UHC, we too would switch from focusing on the best care, to focusing on keeping down costs.
Switching to UHC will not lower costs. The bureaucrats will take it over, and they won't care about lowering the costs, it won't be any of their concern. It would be like a US Air force truck driver or jet engine mechanic worrying about finding ways to keep costs down for their job. The politicians will just wallpaper over the root causes with the endless well of taxpayer money. The focus will not be on eliminating the root causes to high health care costs either, and we will join every other country with UHC, and blame the people and their lifestyle choices for high costs, and simply limit patient access to care.
The focus certainly isn't on the root causes of high health care costs now either. One factor driving health care costs is that many Americans have one or more chronic conditions, like asthma, diabetes, heart disease---in fact about 45 % of the population do. Many of these conditions, not all, are due to obesity and an inactive lifestyle. Our current medical system is great at treating acute illnesses like a heart attack. It does very poorly at preventing and managing chronic illnesses.
Insurance is a gambling game where you bet on what will happen in the future.
right, which makes it unsuitable as a health care delivery system.
the question is: why do we continue to allow the insurance industry into our health care system ?
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.
