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.
That's not a good analogy. He's not asking them to cover treatments for a problem he had 5 years ago, he's asking them to cover him in the future. The correct analogy would be something like:
Your roof blew off in a tornado five years ago and you fixed it, but the insurance company is not going to sell you insurance because you still live in tornado country. Come back five years from now and they'll think about it.
So if your house gets hit by a tornado in the meantime (or in the real case, if the cancer returns), you're screwed.
And why is it that every time health care gets debated, everyone wants to talk about overweight people and smokers? There's plenty of health problems that have nothing to do with either, or any behavior of the patient. They just happened to get bad genes, or have an accident.
Someone I know broke his leg while he was uninsured between jobs. It was a bad break and he had to have multiple operations to put pins in his leg. His medical bills were over $50,000. He couldn't pay, and had to declare bankruptcy. His credit rating was trashed and he couldn't find anywhere that would rent to him because of his bad credit, and ended up living on the street until a relative paid his way to come stay with them. So guess what? Under the current system, we're all still paying for everyone's health insurance. Just instead of higher taxes, we're paying in the form of higher insurance and medical costs.
It is an accurate analogy because medically he is still a cancer patient. You need to understand the nature of cancer.
It's quite possible they spend less, but they seem to be generally more healthy in terms of lifestyle. America has twice the obesity rate (and therefore corresponding health issues and costs), and since America has a larger population, that's a lot of people. So maybe it's no surprise they spend less if people live healthier.
Health and behavior (http://www.rvz.net/cgi-bin/rvz_p.pl?id=69 - broken link)
Makes sense. I can agree with that statement.
Without competition prices rise and quality goes down. If the government says it will pay no more than $200 for XX type of surgery/dental work. How much is going to be charged? answer the maximum 200
What incentives do businesses have if they know they can get the $200?
The same pills in Canada and Mexico are alot cheaper.
That's not a good analogy. He's not asking them to cover treatments for a problem he had 5 years ago, he's asking them to cover him in the future. The correct analogy would be something like:
Your roof blew off in a tornado five years ago and you fixed it, but the insurance company is not going to sell you insurance because you still live in tornado country. Come back five years from now and they'll think about it.
So if your house gets hit by a tornado in the meantime (or in the real case, if the cancer returns), you're screwed.
And why is it that every time health care gets debated, everyone wants to talk about overweight people and smokers? There's plenty of health problems that have nothing to do with either, or any behavior of the patient. They just happened to get bad genes, or have an accident.
Someone I know broke his leg while he was uninsured between jobs. It was a bad break and he had to have multiple operations to put pins in his leg. His medical bills were over $50,000. He couldn't pay, and had to declare bankruptcy. His credit rating was trashed and he couldn't find anywhere that would rent to him because of his bad credit, and ended up living on the street until a relative paid his way to come stay with them. So guess what? Under the current system, we're all still paying for everyone's health insurance. Just instead of higher taxes, we're paying in the form of higher insurance and medical costs.
exactly thankyou.....
Joe,in a freemarket business is suppose to be able to prosper while benefiting consumers also by providing service and competition in prices.This is not happening with insurance specially health insurance.
Insurance is a business of risk but they have gotten politicians to pander to them to create laws that allows these companies to gain profit without risk,to gain profit without providing service in return to the consumer,to not have to compete with each other.They only want to insure you if you are healthy when their business is suppose to be providing a service to cover illness.
Insurance is suppose to a business of collecting premiums from say,100 people while knowing that out of that hundred sometimes they will have to pay out to a few.
I don't believe in government takeover,people who do are wrong to think it will be perfect or less of a robbery,but I believe reform is needed where insurance cannot refuse just because of pre existing conditions or medical history,or government must pickup for those.I believe we need to address insurance loopholes much like Teddy Roosevelt reformed business abuse of labor and unethical practices.
It is insane that a person plays by the rules,works and pays there bills and in one shot can have that wiped out because of illness being slammed with leins and bills and forever in debt.
Politicians continue to make legislation that allows insurance companies to maximize profit and deny service in return.Recently our state congress critters passed a law for car insurance not to have to use original replacement parts,just another law favoring insurance that s**ts on consumers.But that is nothing like health insurance,which is more important.And a real kicker is those politicians don't have to be worried about being denied because they are guarenteed the best possible care paid by you and I.Damn, a win win situation for the politician,paid health care by the tax payer and extra income and or campaign funds by insurance companies if they create laws that deny healthcare to the taxpayer to help maximize profit for the insurance company......
As far as my melonoma,it was cut off end of story,yet because of history all insurance companies are allowed to deny.I do have insurance offered as a group plan by my employer but it is limited,and I must use it because it is the only choice I have so how is a free market working then?What about those who work for themselves that can't even get a group plan who because they had a bad mole,can't get insurance anywhere how is competition of a free market working in that case?
So is this America? "work,play by the rules,buy a house pay it off,love your country.But if you get ill...well F you buddy in that case business profit is more important if you can't pay your medical bill go live on the street and or die,you playing by the rules in life means dick in that case,the insurance companies are really what make America great not you,you only made America great when you weren't a risk to profit of the insurance companies".Is that America?
Sick of ridiculous emergency room bills? If the private hospitals have to compete with free government clinics maybe they will be more reasonable. All the new hospitals and clinics need staff and we can train them here instead of import them. That is the most likely avenue for job creation, not 'green'.
Free government clinics.....what you're referring to is not UHC.....you're talking about flat out socialized medicine....where the government owns the hospital and the doctors....that's an entirely different ball game.....and you're complaining about a bill, wait until you find out how long you'll have to wait to get treatment at a government run facility......DMV, the post office, etc.....take a number and wait until you're called up....lol.
Sick of ridiculous emergency room bills? If the private hospitals have to compete with free government clinics maybe they will be more reasonable. All the new hospitals and clinics need staff and we can train them here instead of import them. That is the most likely avenue for job creation, not 'green'.
jobs are created by making thing and selling them to other countries. what is free health care producing?nothing becuase it is not free once the government starts to pay for somthing the prices will go up becuase it creats an unnesary demand,ie in my town a few years ago an appartment rent was 400 to 600 dallars. saction 8 was introduce,witch is a government program and now saction 8 pays up to 1200 dallars that means landlords are not going to rent for 600 dallars because they can get more money from people that are on sactoin8.private citizens can not compete with government.those people who could aford 600 dallars now have to join the government program.Soon all rents will be paid by the government
The Shriners Hospital in Galveston, Texas, is a 30-bed pediatric burn hospital providing comprehensive acute care and reconstructive and rehabilitative care to children who have been burned. There is no charge to the patient or family for any of the medical care or services provided by Shriners Hospitals. This hospital is one of 22 Shriners Hospitals throughout North America.
The Galveston hospital is equipped and staffed to treat the following:
* Acute burns
* Plastic reconstructive or restorative surgery as a result of "healed" burns
* Severe scarring, resulting in contractures or interfering with mobility of the limbs
* Scarring and deformity of the face
* Cleft lip and palate repair
Or the Scottish Rite, for those uninsured children...
Quote:
Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children provides exceptional care to thousands of Texas children every year without charge to patient families. TSRHC is not a United Way agency and does not receive state or federal funding. The hospital relies solely on the generosity of individuals, organizations, foundations and corporations to continue its mission.
It is an accurate analogy because medically he is still a cancer patient. You need to understand the nature of cancer.
Well in that case here is what you do people.You don't get insurance,you save that money that would go to a insurance premium and you spend it on yourself on cool things like a Corvette,huge TV,vacations and live day to day.
If you get sick you find a place who will treat you and when they send the bill and it is more money you will make in 20 years (if you can still work) you just laugh and rip it up.So your credit is destroyed so what.Better to find a way to skip on the bill or let someone else deal with it,you will never pay it off anyway so why send in one payment?F it....let the bill collectors try and try.
Just get those American's who say freemarket and insurance companies have the rights not you, to pay your bill with their tax money F 'em.There is no way you will ever pay off that health bill (bills) so why even try.You played by the rules,you wanted to live debt free,you were given a bad hand in the poker game of life.Now you will never be debt free again,you have no hope of ever paying off those medical bills so now it is do what you have to do and that is adopt a attitude of "oh well life is better when you break the rules"
Let Joe's tax money pay for you,let his taxes and insurance go up to pay for your bills.He decided the insurance companies had the right as free enterprise to make the rules now let his decision pay for it.A win win for you.You didn't want it that way,but in the end you gotta do what you gotta do.And if you loose everything including your home,well lol,Joe's taxes will pay for you to live also.He will rant about it,calling you a blood sucking free loader living off his taxes but let it fly over your head,don't worry about it just worry about yourself.
I can't imagine what kind of health care I would get by paying around 90 dollars a month. I would probably be paying out the nose for my prescriptions, I would have to pay 50% of the cost for my doctors visits, etc.
My wife, who at the time she signed the policy was 22 and healthy, had a plan that cost around $90. But she had to pay $30 co-pay per doctor visit and she only got 3 per year. She had to pay $100 co-pay to go to the ER, and when she went we had to pay out of pocket for a good portion of the $1,700 bill anyway: lying bastards! I honestly don't remember what her deductible was. I think it was like $1,500. They also had some stupid rules about things they wouldn't cover. For example, If we had concieved a baby less than 6 months after signing the policy, we would have had to pay for all of it out of our pocket. In other words, the insurance company needs to get in your wallet before they'll cover you for a baby. I guess from a business perspective, this is a smart idea because they don't want to be paying for something that expensive if they haven't recieved alot of money first. Good business= insured paying thousands of dollars out of pocket to have a baby. This is a perfect example of why I think business and health care don't mix.
This is what you get when there is no competition.
I'd rather have no competition and 95% or more of the money I'm spending for insurance go to care than to have 1 of every 3 dollars pay for stuff like executive salaries, advertizing, lobbying ect..
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.
socialism those not work
I guess from a business perspective, this is a smart idea because they don't want to be paying for something that expensive if they haven't recieved alot of money first. Good business= insured paying thousands of dollars out of pocket to have a baby. This is a perfect example of why I think business and health care don't mix.