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.
Who do you think is going to have access to this information? Wouldn't you need a password (or two, or three) to get into the database? You are comparing apples to oranges.
The insurance company gets fined if they leak private info who will the govt answer to if they do it? There are no checks when the govt is in control.
I do not CHOOSE to pay for you! It is called personal responsibility that the cons are so big on! Being insured is the responsible thing to do, so that's what I do. It so happens that as things are now, the hospitals charge the insurance companies inflated rates to make up for the people like you who are unable to pay. So the insurance company charges me more to cover their cost to the hospital. I do not choose this! I choose to be personally responsible and my only "choice" now is crap! Thanks a lot for giving me a "choice!"
People like me who are unable to pay ? read my posts again before you speak about me again
Just the opposite will happen. Employers will jettison their coverage. It will be cheaper for them to dump their benefits on the government (you and me, plus they will not reduce their prices for the savings they realize, good deal huh). Only the wealthy will have private insurance and it will be priced like a luxury item.
You're wrong about the pricing. Insurance companies need volume. All companies need volume.
I never cost you a dime you are to lazy to shop around and cut your costs you just sit around and let some greedy ins agent or your gove do it for you.well then pay for it . my 2 daughters were free no doctors no hospital.all my doctor bills are paid cash at time of service keeps out the real expense, abuse
Again, until something catastrophic happens.
No way would I have a baby at home! What if there was a complication and he needed immediate medical attention? Besides, I had to have 2 c-sections. I'm pretty sure they don't do those at home.
My thought is that if you get hit by a car or get cancer, or something and end up in the hospital, that I will end up paying for you to be there.
You are assuming that everyone who is currently uninsured is UNABLE to pay for their care. That assumption is a fallacy.
There are plenty of people (like my SO as well as several that we know, all early-retired but not yet Medicare-eligible) who have enough assets to pay for several hundred thousand dollars of medical expenses IF that were to happen. But they choose to self-insure rather than to hand over tens of thousands of dollars to an insurance company whether they have medical claims or not.
If someone wants to roll the dice and keep $10K or more in their own pockets every year, there should not be anything preventing them from doing so.
As for catastrophic insurance coverage, I would buy it in a heartbeat if it were available in New York. But it is not, and people are not currently allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines.
You're wrong about the pricing. Insurance companies need volume. All companies need volume.
No the volume will be impossible to get because the vast majority will flock to the heavily subsidized government program. Employers will discontinue their sponsored plans. So most insurance companies will fall by the wayside and those that are left will have to charge high premiums because they will not be able to get the volume.
Look at it like schools, private schools charge huge tutitions because they don't have the volume. When you compete against the government you will always loose on the volume end because they have something no business has, they can print money.
You are assuming that everyone who is currently uninsured is UNABLE to pay for their care. That assumption is a fallacy.
There are plenty of people (like my SO as well as several that we know, all early-retired but not yet Medicare-eligible) who have enough assets to pay for several hundred thousand dollars of medical expenses IF that were to happen. But they choose to self-insure rather than to hand over tens of thousands of dollars to an insurance company whether they have medical claims or not.
If someone wants to roll the dice and keep $10K or more in their own pockets every year, there should not be anything preventing them from doing so.
As for catastrophic insurance coverage, I would buy it in a heartbeat if it were available in New York. But it is not, and people are not currently allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines.
Only 20% of the uninsured make over $75,000 most voluntarily uninsured could not pay for a catastrophic condition.
No way would I have a baby at home! What if there was a complication and he needed immediate medical attention? Besides, I had to have 2 c-sections. I'm pretty sure they don't do those at home.
why not to scared? its pretty normal for any animal like us to give birth. most c sections are performed for the docs convience. if you are due on sat near his tee time you are pretty guarenteed a c section on friday. so why should i pay for that? get real they got you brainwashed bad real bad
I can't believe there isn't a thread about this already, so here goes.
What are your thoughts on this?
As soon as I saw that it will be a MANDATED plan (individuals are required to participate if they don't have other health insurance, or face a penalty equal to 2.5% of their adjusted gross income) I saw sixteen shades of red.
What the heck happened to Obama's promise that a government health insurance plan would not be "forced on anyone" but would merely be "one of several options"????
Here are the provisions as reported online:
-- A Health Insurance Exchange providing individuals and small business with choices for coverage, including a government-funded public option.
-- No more coverage exclusion for pre-existing conditions.
-- Affordability credits for low- and moderate-income individuals and families, available to those with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $43,000 for individuals and $88,000 for a family of four.
-- Limits on annual out-of-pocket spending.
-- Expanded Medicaid coverage to individuals and families with incomes at or below 133 percent of the federal poverty level.
-- Required participation by individuals, with a penalty of 2.5 percent of adjusted gross income for non-compliance.
-- Requirement that businesses with payrolls exceeding $250,000 provide their employees with health insurance or contribute up to 8 percent of their payroll on their behalf.
-- A series of measures intended to reduce costs of Medicaid, Medicare and other existing systems.
I am okay with all of the above provisions EXCEPT the "required to participate" one. Just because Massachusetts did that, doesn't mean it's right or fair.
And btw I am one of the howevermanyMillion with NO health insurance coverage and am not likely to have any for another five years until I qualify for Medicare. So I should love this proposal, right? Well, sorry, people.... the fastest way to get me to oppose ANYTHING is to tell me that I HAVE TO join in (and at my own expense!) or else I will get fined.
Thoughts?
Good news: It will be mandated.
Bad news: It is not single payer, and is based on the Mass. system, which is largely not delivering as promised.
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.
