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 02-21-2018, 07:53 AM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,445,026 times
Reputation: 6960

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacanegro View Post
Why would mandatory HC be divisive unless you are listing to one of those channels that can't admit the Democrats could have a good idea ?

More options - like anyone with a chronic condition not having insurance...
What is wrong with having options? If you want more options get more options and pay for more options. WTF is the problem with that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:54 AM
 
12,270 posts, read 11,329,966 times
Reputation: 8066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacanegro View Post
Why would mandatory HC be divisive unless you are listing to one of those channels that can't admit the Democrats could have a good idea ?

More options - like anyone with a chronic condition not having insurance...
You aren't seriously pretending Obamacare wasn't divisive?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:56 AM
 
18,983 posts, read 9,075,608 times
Reputation: 14688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
So besides offering people more options about controlling their own healthcare choices, we get to go back and look at all the lies Democrats told us before jamming one of the most divisive bills down America's throat. Right before the 2018 midterms.
"More options" in this case means a return to junk policies that offer no real insurance benefits. Basically you are saying that insurance companies should be allowed to return to the days of taking people's money and offer nothing in return.

That's why they're cheap--they cover nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:56 AM
 
8,384 posts, read 4,367,951 times
Reputation: 11890
I would have to question the coverage.

Insurance is a numbers game. Of course it is about profit.

Perhaps "cheap" insurance for young people may pan out and simply cover annual check ups, coughs, colds, runny nose etc. Maybe even minor surgery.

The cravat being, if they ended up with serious medical issues, cancer, trauma etc ..... who gets to tell them ... sorry ... no coverage for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:57 AM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,445,026 times
Reputation: 6960
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
"More options" in this case means a return to junk policies that offer no real insurance benefits. Basically you are saying that insurance companies should be allowed to return to the days of taking people's money and offer nothing in return.

That's why they're cheap--they cover nothing.
So don't buy one and stop trying to control what other people want or do it's none of your business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:57 AM
 
Location: City Data Land
17,155 posts, read 12,962,522 times
Reputation: 33185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
So you would deny cheaper health insurance plans to those who can't afford the full plan?
You didn't read your own article. Trump's so called great alternatives would charge more for people who had preexisting medical conditions, you know, the people who need health insurance But Trump wouldn't understand that because "he never knew healthcare was so complicated."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:57 AM
 
Location: NC
5,129 posts, read 2,597,200 times
Reputation: 2398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
You aren't seriously pretending Obamacare wasn't divisive?
sure sounds like the poster you are quoting believes so and it certainly was/is
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:59 AM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,445,026 times
Reputation: 6960
Quote:
Originally Posted by ditchoc View Post
I would have to question the coverage.

Insurance is a numbers game. Of course it is about profit.

Perhaps "cheap" insurance for young people may pan out and simply cover annual check ups, coughs, colds, runny nose etc. Maybe even minor surgery.

The cravat being, if they ended up with serious medical issues, cancer, trauma etc ..... who gets to tell them ... sorry ... no coverage for that.
They themselves will tell themselves that. It will be in the policy. WTF??????? Why do you people think you need to be the righteous saviors of stupid people who won't read their policy? Let them be stupid what is it to you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:04 AM
 
Location: NC
11,222 posts, read 8,303,040 times
Reputation: 12469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
I think this is a great idea.


The economy is in recovery mode but a lot of people are still just getting by, especially millenials burdened with student debt. The last thing they needed was a full care package with full price rates. This will be an excellent alternative.
The resistance to this idea is because if people are "still just getting by", then how would they pay for healthcare if they are not fully covered.

It's another example of the party of supposed accountability passing the buck. Why should I, as a responsible person who has full coverage, have to pay for all the freeloaders who have no coverage, or sub-par coverage and are going to default if they get sick because they are "still just getting by".



Again, until you are ready to deny people life-saving medical care based on their ability to pay for it, this plan does not work. I am not, and will never be a person who could deny people healthcare because they are being underpaid while working for a person who is getting wealthy on their back. I'm fine with wealth, even obscene wealth is OK by me, but part of the deal is we have to take care of those who play a part in making it possible. Why is that so wrong?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 08:09 AM
 
13,898 posts, read 6,445,026 times
Reputation: 6960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost View Post
The resistance to this idea is because if people are "still just getting by", then how would they pay for healthcare if they are not fully covered.

It's another example of the party of supposed accountability passing the buck. Why should I, as a responsible person who has full coverage, have to pay for all the freeloaders who have no coverage, or sub-par coverage and are going to default if they get sick because they are "still just getting by".



Again, until you are ready to deny people life-saving medical care based on their ability to pay for it, this plan does not work. I am not, and will never be a person who could deny people healthcare because they are being underpaid while working for a person who is getting wealthy on their back. I'm fine with wealth, even obscene wealth is OK by me, but part of the deal is we have to take care of those who play a part in making it possible. Why is that so wrong?
Worry about yourself and stop trying to be the righteous overlord of everyone. Why is that so hard? If you want to make sure your neighbor has extensive coverage, buy them a plan and ****.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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