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.
Because if they were human beings worth anything, they would have a "church home" to help them foot the bill for healthcare costs.
That is where we are at in America in 1959...I mean 2019.
Trump took away the charitable deduction too.....so the Church may not be able to help as much as before.
1959?
Truman:
"Harry Truman and Health Care Reform: The Debate Started Here. ... He had already included “the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health” in his proposed Economic Bill of Rights"
My favorite Churchill quote is "Americans will always do the right thing - AFTER all other possibilities have been exhausted".
We are moving on health care at about the same speed we are doing civil rights and full-on equality.
So to you there are few real rights. Instead, with rare exceptions, life is based on getting privileges earned, often by having sufficient money to pay for them. One of those rare exceptions is the right to breathe air without having to earn a privilege to do so.
Not just to me, but to definitions and logic, there are no "positive rights" (I deserve, I am owed, you must give me...) and there are innumerable negative rights (you cannot prevent me, stop me, oppress me, use force against me).
Your negative rights are a condition of existence and what we properly consider rights. Speech, religion, association, self-defense, life, liberty, ability to own property, etc.
What people call "positive rights" are entitlements, privileges and other gifts from the collective that enslave members of the collective to the collective will. Welfare, food stamps, entitlements, grants, health care, education, etc. These are benefits, privileges and entitlements, not rights.
A common "yeah, but what about" tactic of people who defend tyranny is to confuse negative rights with welfare state entitlements and attack a straw man of false equivalency. You are doing it now.
There are a lot of ways people can become infirm and dependent that do not involve poor lifestyle choices. Often it happens to a loved one (a child or parent perhaps, little sister or brother) and it can bankrupt the entire family.
I heard all of the above. I have the wherewithal to take care of myself.
I looked up my condition to see what would happen in pre-ACA days. My plan would have declined coverage of it for six months, and then it would pay. But my ACA plan would never pay, because it doesn't have the specialist.
It's a loophole that Obama allowed for insurers not to cover pre-X conditions: they simply don't put that specialist in the network! Voila! So, for example, if you develop rheumatism and the insurer doesn't want to cover that, they simply don't include a rhematologist in their network.
Or, they just have ONE specialist. So let's say you have a retinal condition, and the insurer has ONE retinologist to serve a population of 200,000. The wait is six months. So, you end up going private and paying in cash to someone else. It's a way for insurers to make it so unappealing to use them that you just give up and pay cash.
And Obama allowed all that.
I think you chose the cheapest plan, not thinking of possible future out of network costs. My plan, maybe a tier up, has covered everything. It always boils down to “you get what you pay for”.
There can't be a replacement until there is an end to what is in place. No one wants to do it again like Obama did it and shove it down the throats of people. Its going to take both parties to provide a replacement if its going to be worthwhile or lasting.
This is an absolute FACT.
There is absolutely no way that Democrats will ever vote on any Health Care Plan unless they can control it all .... IF any Republican presents a bill the Democrats will always vote NO. That's exactly what they do on ANY Immigration bill. It's why DACA folks are in limbo - Trump offered a plan to make them Legal, the Democrats said NO!
As for the pre-existing conditions .... Donald Trump first said in a CNN Debate in 2016 in answer to a question about pre-existing conditions that they should be included in any health care plan.
He has never changed his mind about that ..... NEVER and I challenge anyone to find a direct quote from Donald Trump that says "no pre-existing conditions".
The main problem with the ACA is that it is not Funded -- it was written as a Giant Bailout to Hospitals and Insurance Companies ..... with a lot of tossed in benefits to Pharma and AMA.
It will crumble under the burden of no path to fund it .... the Democrats wrote it that way because they KNEW they could not pass it even with a Majority of Democrats in both House and Senate if anyone understood the true cost of the Bailout Provisions. The "Medicare for ALL" will never fly -- the minute it becomes clear to those age 65 or older that the "new" Medicare means they lose what they have and might end up with a Medicaid ... it's dead in the water. They WILL find that out. Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez and her Squad are promoting a Socialist program that will be rejected. Even Nancy and Chuck know that won't pass. They knew they couldn't get a single payer plan in 2009 and it would be even harder today after the failed attempt at ObamaCare.
That's the Reality folks .... exactly who in Washington D.C. today do any of you think might just have the Leverage and the guts to go against BOTH Political Party's and get a decent Health Care bill?
I can only think of one person - keep in mind that Nancy had her chance and flubbed it up and Mitch doesn't want to take any risks.
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.