Page 50 of 122 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #491
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    If #441 wasn't enough for you then 443-444 should have been.
    *sigh

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman
    Ha, ha, you crack me up. Everybody has some pre-existing condition and ins. companies often use any little illness you might have forgotten to deny coverage for major illness that was not pre-existing. It is racket they use to get rid of sick people and increase profit.
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian
    Who's gonna keep paying a company that reneges on its agreement using fine print? That's either a contract not made in good faith (civil law matter), or at least a reason for customers to abandon/boycott the scam and watch the company crash and burn.
    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    The entire industry does this so there are no other options except NONE. Not many people are going to take that option.
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    So you're saying people would rather be scammed than save for their own medical care?
    If insurance companies all scam their customers, how do they still have customers? If the choice is be scammed or don't be scammed, people are going to choose to be scammed?

    Perhaps the point is that it isn't in fact standard protocol for insurance companies to breach their contracts with their customers, that is a rare exception that's being way overblown by folks like you and iguanaman.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 03-29-12 at 01:11 AM.

  2. #492
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,377

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    I'm sorry but which justice wrote the law?

    The sun always shines on a fool



    The court won't rule on that issue because there isn't any constitutional Queston in regards to telling as business what it can and can't do. If the court does rule on that they'll VCR over turning 100s of years if legal precedence and open the flood gates. That's an issue confess will have to address

    The sun always shines on a fool
    If the court overturns the mandate, the deal to end pre-existing conditions is over. If everyone is not required to buy insurance, the staus quo continues and in the next 5 years 20,000 more Americans will have their policies "recsended", the insurers fancy word for dropping you when you get sick AND you will still get to pay 20% of your premium to cover the young people who don't think they need insurance. Let's all cheer those Justices on!
    Last edited by iguanaman; 03-29-12 at 01:16 AM.

  3. #493
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    If the court overturns the mandate, the deal to end pre-existing conditions is over. If everyone is not required to buy insurance, the staus quo continues and in the next 5 years 20,000 more Americans will have their policies "recsended", their fancy word for dropping you when you get sick. Let's all cheer!
    "Rescind," you mean.

    20,000 people? What's that, ~7 out of every hundred thousand?

  4. #494
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Perhaps the point is that it isn't in fact standard protocol for insurance companies to breach their contracts with their customers, that is a rare exception that's being way overblown by folks like you and iguanaman.
    Good point. For every 1 insurance company that has been found to be in violation of hte law through illegal recissions, etc, you can easily find 10 that haven't.

  5. #495
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Why could they not pay out more, keep more and raise the rates? If it's an 80/20 cut, why can't they just spend more, keep more, and charge more?
    I guess they could -- if they were all colluding on price, which would be illegal. Otherwise, there's this thing called market competition.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  6. #496
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    If the court overturns the mandate, the deal to end pre-existing conditions is over. If everyone is not required to buy insurance, the staus quo continues and in the next 5 years 20,000 more Americans will have their policies "recsended", the insurers fancy word for dropping you when you get sick AND you will still get to pay 20% of your premium to cover the young people who don't think they need insurance. Let's all cheer those Justices on!
    It is not a fancy word for dropping someone when they get sick. It is a fancy word used in contract law, meaning to do away with the contract (not just insurance), and bring it to a point where no contract ever existed - making each party as whole as possible - typically due to misrepresentation by one party to the contract, but there could be other causes. You may actually want to read how it works before trying to talk about it as if you have any clue what it is.
    Last edited by buck; 03-29-12 at 01:21 AM.

  7. #497
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I guess they could -- if they were all colluding on price, which would be illegal. Otherwise, there's this thing called market competition.
    Why couldn't this thing called market competition be the thing that puts downward pressure on their 30%+ overhead?

    IOW, if the overhead and executive salaries are so wasteful and unnecessary, which is what liberal folks tell us, then why hasn't competition taken care of it?
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 03-29-12 at 01:22 AM.

  8. #498
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    Good point. For every 1 insurance company that has been found to be in violation of hte law through illegal recissions, etc, you can easily find 10 that haven't.
    They don't have to break the law to drop you. They just have to wait until your next renewal date, when they can tell you to go pound sand. Of course you can then just go to another insurance company ... oops! Now you have a preexisting condition!

    Better just declare bankruptcy and get it over with.

    Let's hope the SC legislates from the bench so we can save that awesome system.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  9. #499
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:08 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,602

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Let's hope the SC legislates from the bench so we can save that awesome system.
    "Legislates from the bench."
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #500
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Why couldn't this thing called market competition be the thing that puts downward pressure on their 30%+ overhead?
    Well, let's get some facts straight. First, the law requires them to spend 85% of premiums on medical care -- not 80%. Second, most insurers are already pretty close to that numbers, so it wouldn't be a huge change. Third, they're all for-profit companies, right? Why don't they just raise their rates and make more money? Don't they want to make more money?
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Page 50 of 122 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •