Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 128

Thread: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

  1. #31
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Yea, rescission touted as a huge problem, was nearly nonexistent.
    Yes, it was really only a problem for people who needed insurance the most. You know -- those people who got really really sick and then got dropped when they actually needed the insurance they'd been paying for all their lives.
    "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

  2. #32
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,007

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Yes, like how earthquake codes mean we have "one size fits all buildings."
    It would be a better metaphor if the earthquake code applied to regions that dont have earthquakes.

  3. #33
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Yes, it was really only a problem for people who needed insurance the most.
    Not really. Mainly just a problem for those few individuals that lied on their application for insurance and those lies were material to the issue of the policy. With very few exceptions (that easily could have been corrected with a much less intrusive law) everyone else was not affected.

  4. #34
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The facts are, alcohol is a carcinogen, aka it causes cancer.
    Increased premiums for tobacco users don't differentiate between light users and heavy users.

    Sorry bud, I know it's easy to let go when your ox isn't being gored, but you need to pay your share of the risk to.

    Light Drinking May Cause Dementia - Page 2 - Technorati Lifestyle

    Medscape: Medscape Access

    Even light drinking increases cancer risk - Health News - Health & Families - The Independent
    If you made exceptions for every substance that may arguably increase the risk of cancer you'd need a rule book that would fill the Library of Congress. Meanwhile, moderate drinking also has some salutary effects.

    Drinking Alcohol And Benefits
    "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

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,007

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Yes, it was really only a problem for people who needed insurance the most. You know -- those people who got really really sick and then got dropped when they actually needed the insurance they'd been paying for all their lives.
    If the sickness happened before you got dropped (your contract expired), it wont matter. Your insurance will pay out. Theres also no reason that you couldnt have negotiated a better insurance contract which had the services you desired.

  6. #36
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    Not really. Mainly just a problem for those few individuals that lied on their application for insurance and those lies were material to the issue of the policy. With very few exceptions (that easily could have been corrected with a much less intrusive law) everyone else was not affected.
    In many cases it's used by insurance companies to try to avoid paying based upon technicalities. But if, as you claim, it was extremely rare, then the new rules should have minimal impact.
    "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

  7. #37
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    In many cases it's used by insurance companies to try to avoid paying based upon technicalities. But if, as you claim, it was extremely rare, then the new rules should have minimal impact.
    "Many" is rather nebulous. Break it down in percentages for us. It was rare that the insurance company misused recission provisions. In probably 99% of cases, the recission was accurate and based on a material misrep on the application that resulted in a rating other then what it shoudl have been.

    There were a small percentage of abuses by the insurance company where they used the recission as a technicailty, and I have already stated that could have been corrected with a better, more pointed law.

    I am not the one that said it was rare. But as a percentage of total policies issued, it was a small percentage, but still a large number.
    Last edited by buck; 11-21-12 at 11:31 AM.

  8. #38
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    If the sickness happened before you got dropped (your contract expired), it wont matter. Your insurance will pay out. Theres also no reason that you couldnt have negotiated a better insurance contract which had the services you desired.
    Not necessarily. In some cases policies can be rescinded retroactively if the company claims, e.g., that the insured failed to report a preexisting condition. There have been cases where insurance companies have paid agents bounties to root out alleged preexisting conditions so that the insurer can avoid paying out on a claim. Sometimes these are legitimate cases of fraud, but other times it's the insurance company trying to manufacture an out.
    "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. #39
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    So they can charge smokers up to 5x more, but what about obese people, people with diabetes that can be controlled with diet, alcohol drinkers?
    Exactly. As a long-time RN, I see a much higher percentage of obesity-related illness than smoking-related illness.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,007

    Re: Federal government releases long-awaited health reform rules

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Not necessarily. In some cases policies can be rescinded retroactively if the company claims, e.g., that the insured failed to report a preexisting condition. There have been cases where insurance companies have paid agents bounties to root out alleged preexisting conditions so that the insurer can avoid paying out on a claim. Sometimes these are legitimate cases of fraud, but other times it's the insurance company trying to manufacture an out.
    So since both sides abuse each other, why does only one side get punished?

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •