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.
Well, enlighten us, because people are all over the map on this issue.
No need to even delve that deep. This comes down the the basic definition of insurance. When an insurance company is forced to accept new applicants with pre-existing conditions that they are expected to pay for, they cease to be an insurance company.
It makes absolutely zero sense to anyone with a brain in their heads. It's complete and total fantasy to think that by forcing insurance companies to accept applicants with pre-existing conditions, those applicants will somehow magically be taken care of at the current price point. Hey, geniuses, insurance is based on risk.
At least a complete government takeover of health care, whether you're for or against it, makes logical sense. This does not.
then maybe...just maybe...people should SAVE for those occasions
Disagree with this. What do you do when you're dealt an unfortunate card that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to live. If health care rates were a bit more affordable like other parts of the world, maybe we could save, but it isn't.
a doctors office vist is what...roughly $60...maybe $100
meanwhile you guys have NO PROBLEM paying 700 for an Iphone
Huh. I was forced to go to the doctor when I had no insurance to get bloodwork for a condition I have & that bill, blood test & doc visit, was $400. And that was back in 2006. I guess you fancy $400 to be easy as pie to pay. You must be a gazillionaire like every other conservative on this forum. LOL.
OK, I've made it to post #90. Here are my comments thus far:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
One question I have is why there are no charities that cover the costs when someone doesn't have insurance? Perhaps people should see to it they have insurance BEFORE they get sick.
Do you have a freaking clue how much hospitalization costs? I was in the hosp. for three days for hip surgery and the bill just for the hospital, not the dr, mind you, was $76K. What little country church, or inner-city church, or any church for that matter, has that kind of loose change around?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn
.
Perhaps someone was born with a preexisting condition and lost their insurance under their parents after they turned 26.
BTW, how many bake sales would it take to pay for treatment for stage II breast cancer?
Maybe you could throw in some show-shoveling marathon money!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
The only hysterical ranting I saw - was yours. Please.
No, there is Workingclasshero's stuff, too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
I think most of us would agree that insurance companies should not have to be abused by the leeches in society. What I mean by that, are the people who will purposely go without health care insurance until they get sick, then force the insurance company to pay for their care, only to drop their insurance once they are treated, rinse repeat.
Those would be the people who fit the analogy of the person who goes without paying for insurance, until his house is on fire, or his car is totally demolished, and then runs out to get insurance.
Health insurance is not like car insurance. most every car accident or traffic ticket is due to your own gross negligence. In life, you can follow all the rules, obey the law, take care of yourself, and come down with cancer, or even give birth to a baby with health problems.
A person who purposely goes without health insurance aught to pay the piper, and not force everyone else to pay for their scam against the health care insurance system. I do not pretend to have all the answers, but if a leech on society refuses to buy health insurance they should not get a free ride on the dime of everyone else, and in extreme cases maybe they should be denied treatment that they cannot pay for. Sometimes "too bad, so sad" is what some of the dredges in society deserve.
You might have somewhat of a point with the above, if you didn't say it so nastily, but what about the person who gets cancer at say, 14, and is forever after excluded from insurance b/c of that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
nope did miss anything
yes an individual currently pays.....about 25% of a premium...but that same indivual (if they are a taxpayer) will end up paying 3-5 times as much under singlepayer
profits of insurance have NOTHING to do with it
and most hospitals are not making much profit...infact many are closing...many doctors are closing thier doors
Ventu Medical Group has filed for bankruptcy, closing its doors to more than 1,000 patients.
even France is going BROKE on their health care system....the spent 200 billion to cover 65 million (their population)
canada has a NHC,,,and its starting to PRIVITIZE
germany is in the RED,
less than 1/3 of our population is taxpayers...you want all covered by a MINORITY???
it costs half in other countryies, because they DENY SERVICE
the POINT is that there is NO WAY (unless liberals are willing to talk about getting rid of the INCOME tax and going to a consumption tax) to pay for a singlepayer system in america
look at medicaid ( our quazi singleplayer) (federal AND state paid(so its a twopayer )it COSTS 320 BILLION FEDERAL dollars (have no clue what EACH of the states ends up chipping in on TOP of that) just to cover about 30-40 million people( and that's NOT the most costly demographic(the elderly))...so to cover the 320 MILLION people in our population..at that rate, would be around 3-4 trillion..that's why I give a larger window of 2-5 trillion...and remember many , many doctors are refusing to take medicare/caid because IT DOEST PAY ENOUGH to cover THEIR bills
and who will get hit with that cost..the taxpayer...the WORKER(according to the IRS 110 million taxfilers average year.(and of those 47% get nearly everything back and those are the LOWERS earners)..but using the 105 million to divide into the 2-5 trillion would cost the average taxpayer 20-60k a year..can you as a taxpaying worker of poor/working/middleclass afford a 20k annual bill on top of all your other taxes???? I certainly cant
not to mention, europeans in general are HEALTHIER than americans,,,they dont eat the GARBAGE we do, and they actually WALK, and BIKE to work...they shop at the LOCAL market and get what they NEED, for (what we would call) their dormitory size refrigerators,,htye get out on weekends and do things like volksmarches, etc
we dont allow the kids to pay outside anymore, we are more interested in nintendo, texting, and eating "boxed" food, (and lets not forget our 'southern' food (very fatty))
I'm not going to argue with you about electric bills right now, though I see you haven't given up that stupid meme, but it is totally untrue that only 1/3 of the public is taxpayers, unless you are including a bunch of kids under 18 in that.
I don't know of any hospitals that are closing in my area.
And if you think all illness can be avoided by a "healthy lifestyle", you have another think coming.
As a disabled person who lost a good part of his hearing through absolutely no part of his own, I often wonder why is it that I was chosen to pay extra for my pre-existing condition to live life like a normal person...
I guess I live in a barbaric society where people have no sympathy for the unfortunate.
I don't mind paying the doctors for the technology to let me hear better.
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 am fully convinced that unless/until one of these people experience this for themselves or their child, they will continue to propose letting sick people die in the streets, since that is effectively, what they are advocating for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks
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.
I know there are a lot of sick people in the country, but I also think the vast majority of healthy people spend a very unhealthy amount of time discussing healthcare. Many people spend far too much time using healthcare, but that's another story.
It was amusing when John McCain adopted a fairly radical healthcare policy for his 2008 campaign.
His plan was unique, in that it focused on the free market, and for the first time, attempted to direct responsibility for expenses away from the employer, and to the employee. The theory was to target the $212 billion tax expense generated by employers deducting employee healthcare expenses.
Therefore, he would eliminate the exclusion of those expenses from income. In turn, people would receive a $2,500 credit towards their own insurance, $5,000 to families. Over a 10 year period, $3.6 trillion was to be generated by the expense exclusion, which would fund the credits.
The grand theory behind this plan was to have a nationwide market of health insurance available. Another assumption would be that employers, those freed from the health insurance burden, would enrich employee's wages in kind.
Many plans, including to some extent, Obamacare, attempt to enact a form of social and economic engineering by having people involved more financially in their plans. Skin in the Game, always means people pay more attention.
It's a bunch of BS that it's the consumer who is driving up health care costs by going to the dr. for "every little thing". And my experience with people who have high deductible ins. is that many try to get stuff from their doctors w/o having to come into the office to be examined, e.g. antibiotics prescribed based on a phone conversation, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Keegan
If you want medical care to be not for profit, how will you convince people to spend all that time and effort and money on medical school? Most of the best & brightest will find other avenues for their aptitudes, where they can earn far more money. Not for profit medical care will result in not very effective medical care.
Non-profit does not mean people cannot be justly compensated for their work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812
How exactly does that work? Are my doctors, nurses and staff allowed to earn an income? How can I buy new equipment, expand the hospital, if I cannot make a profit and set money aside for those things? Or are you referring a co-op?
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Keegan
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?
My daughter had melanomoa when she was 14. She was insured under our policy. When she has to get her own ins, if she can't get into a large group, she is going to be screwed. Got it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
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.
I am getting very weary of hearing about how much chronic disease is due to an unhealthy lifestyle. The biggest risk factor for heart disease is male sex. Should we encourage males to get sex change surgery? Many, many chronic conditions are due to genetics and aging.
I am fully convinced that unless/until one of these people experience this for themselves or their child, they will continue to propose letting sick people die in the streets, since that is effectively, what they are advocating for.
Looks like the point flew right over your head too.
"Why on Earth should Insurance companies, in particular, have to cover pre-existing conditions?"
This ain't rocket science, and what you're talking about is A. not relevant to the OP's point and B. a typical lame attempt to win using emotion.
No, what's fascinating is your assumption that I don't understand.
But, then, you get free healthcare, don't you?
Touche!
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
then maybe...just maybe...people should SAVE for those occasions
You have $76K sitting in a shoebox for a hip replacement? And that was just the hospital bill, mind you. There was the doctor bill, the physical therapy bill, the pharmacy bill, etc.
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.
