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.
What you are advocating for is a second-class set of citizens. Those who get rebates, discounts, etc. because they are deemed worthy of the privilege of buying health insurance and those who, due to no fault of their own, are not.
Do you consider people who do have health insurance and get discounts via co-pays, etc. leeches?
huh???
your not reading my point
I advocate getting rid of ALL insurance (government and private)
doctors provide a service...
i believe YOU (the person RECEIVING THE SERVICE) should pay for your OWN BILL
its your health...its your body...its your bill
NO-ONE else and NO-ENTITY (company or government) should have to pay your bill
No, what's fascinating is your assumption that I don't understand.
But, then, you get free healthcare, don't you?
No one gets FREE healthcare, unless a doctor, nurse, or other caregiver is not getting paid for his time, effort knowledge and care. Some people get healthcare they don't pay for, which just means that other people are paying for healthcare they don't get.
People do not understand the difference between underwriters gambling for profit and socialist medicine's compulsory charity.
Neither addresses the underlying issue - WHAT drove up the cost for trading in medical care?
_ Government
_ Government, and
_ Government.
Who criminalized unlicensed trade? Who debased the money token system?
Who is responsible for inflation? Who has been robbing the sheeple for generations?
Who taxed medical care givers? Who required ever more records keeping?
So you're saying health insurance companies shouldn't insure people for health issues?
Health insurance companies should insure people for health issues. Health insurance companies should NOT be forced to take on clients whose health, including pre existing conditions, make it a guarantee that the insurance company will pay out more in health care costs than they can expect to receive in insurance premiums.
Health insurance companies should insure people for health issues. Health insurance companies should NOT be forced to take on clients whose health, including pre existing conditions, make it a guarantee that the insurance company will pay out more in health care costs than they can expect to receive in insurance premiums.
Did people with pre-existing conditions at one point not have a pre-existing condition?
I have no idea how they get the care. Talk to health care providers about lowering their costs. How I come up with the money to pay for my care shouldn't be your concern, and that is all insurance is; a way to cover UNEXPECTED costs.
Insurance is a FINANCIAL issue.
Yeah, thought so.
Easy to talk, isn't it, when it's not something you have to deal with on a daily basis.
But, I bet you'll just keep on whining about all the people taking up space in the ERs, huh?
Not to mention how your rates will keep going up to cover their costs.
How people pay for their care should be everyone's concern, if for no other reason than because the current system detrimentally impacts everyone's wallet.
Finally, contrary to what people want to believe, coverage for health care is no longer simply a way to cover "unexpected costs." It is now a way to manage costs, period.
Health "insurance" stopped being about catastrophic illness a long time ago. As has been noted, it is now about maintenance and reducing the risk of incurring the costs associated with catastrophic care. To deny the very people who would benefit the most and incur the highest costs if their conditions are not managed is simply not good business sense, not to mention inhumane.
If you really can't grasp why it makes absolutely no sense for insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, you're an idiot and/or you have absolutely no idea what insurance is. How people this dumb have figured out how to use the internet is beyond me.
Did people with pre-existing conditions at one point not have a pre-existing condition?
What has that to do with anything?
You want an insurance company, which is a FINANCIAL company, not a health care provider, to take on clients for whom they are guaranteed to lose money? Explain how that works, long term.
You want an insurance company, which is a FINANCIAL company, not a health care provider, to take on clients for whom they are guaranteed to lose money? Explain how that works, long term.
It has to do with the fact that eventually everyone gets sick or injured. If you're saying insurance companies can discriminate based on pre-existing conditions, that means that an insurance company would be able to deny your claims as soon as you get sick or injured. As soon as you get sick or injured, from that point on you would be in the same boat as those others with pre-existing conditions.
I see quite a few conservatives in this thread saying insurance companies shouldn't be required to cover those with pre-existing conditions. I think that in 2014 this should be a major plank in the GOP's platform.
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.
