Page 103 of 114 FirstFirst ... 35393101102103104105113 ... LastLast
Results 1,021 to 1,030 of 1136

Thread: Health Care Bill has passed

  1. #1021
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,940

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    Not sure. It is an affliction that results in pre-existing condition.

    I don't like the idea of extending insurance or not based on behavior.
    Why not. It is personal responsibility. If you dont want to take care of yourself why should it be up to others to pay for your lazy butt. So do you think that we shouldnt decide if people get loans or not based on behavior as well. Nevermind that the guy is in debt to his eyeballs and always makes the min payment and spends everydime he makes. He should get the same loan as the guy who saves and is responsible. Why shoudnt the dumbass who droped out of high school get the same paying job as the lady who spent all that time and effort going to med school. I mean it is only fair right. I dont see the difference. If more people would take care of themselves and qute looking for a hand out and take responsibility for themselves this country wouldnt be in the mess it is in right now.
    President Franklin Roosevelt eulogized a fallen American Soldier by saying, “He stands in the unbroken line of patriots who have dared to die [that] freedom might live, and grow, and increase its blessings. Freedom lives, and through it he lives--in a way that humbles the undertakings of most men."

  2. #1022
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    It's spread out over several posts over several threads. Here's what I remember....
    As we have discussed before, this is one of the things you and I agree on.

    This is a perfectly reasonable plan that will never win support from those that are supposedly most concerned with the health care issue simply because it doesnt give the government more power.

  3. #1023
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain America View Post
    If an uninsured motorist hit's your car, your insurance covers it and your rates go up.
    No true. Most states ban auto insurance rates from rising due to an uninsured or under insured claim.

    Another difference... uninsured insurance coverage is not mandatory. You can take it or leave it.

    If an uninsured person has to go to the hospital, we have to treat them anyways, and our rates go up.
    And now, our rates will go up anyway. What's the difference???

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





  4. #1024
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Gill View Post
    No true. Most states ban auto insurance rates from rising due to an uninsured or under insured claim.
    Per individual policy. However, the added cost still has a price effect on the respective risk pool.

    Another difference... uninsured insurance coverage is not mandatory. You can take it or leave it.
    But you cannot legally drive a vehicle in the US without liability coverage. You can think of this as similar to major medical coverage.

    And now, our rates will go up anyway. What's the difference???
    Who's? Not mine.
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #1025
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Per individual policy. However, the added cost still has a price effect on the respective risk pool.
    It's a state by state law and has nothing to do with individual policies.

    But you cannot legally drive a vehicle in the US without liability coverage. You can think of this as similar to major medical coverage.
    I never said otherwise.

    Auto liability insurance protects others from your negligence. Health insurance protects only the person insured.

    Who's? Not mine.
    You actually think that people with pre-existing conditions can be added, along with "kids" under 26 without a corresponding rate increase.

    Those are just two of the many causes of insurance rate increases that will come out of this bill. Even the CBO, using the faulty assumptions from Pelosi, said there would be rate increases.

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





  6. #1026
    Why so serious?

    Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,291

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Right so you are against government subsidizies that do not benifit you, but are for them when they do,

    I understand that totally
    We shouldn't he take advantage of something that he and his family pay for with their taxes? It would be rather stupid of him to pay extra for something when he and his family are already paying for the student loan subsidy. Nice 'gotcha' attempt though.
    "I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."

    --Albert Einstein, 1929

  7. #1027
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Health care is NOT a right. It is an option. In my plan there are "Tiers" of health insurance. NO ONE is required to purchase health care insurance, and there are no fines if you do not.
    Does this equate to everyone in the US being covered in one way or another (particularly to a major injury/disease)?

    Tier 1: Public Option: this option is offered by the government at prices competitive with private insurance, or at low cost for those who have problems with affordability based on eligibility. It would be paid for through an additional tax called the "HC" tax. Folks who do not want this option, can opt out, and will either get a tax rebate for the "HC" amount, or will simply not be required to pay it, which ever is more efficient.
    I agree for the most part. However, what about those who still opt out and happen to develop a serious injury or disease? How does this reduce/eliminate medical bankruptcy?

    Tier 2: Private Option: for those who opt out of the public option. Folks can pay for private insurance, or accept their company's insurance options.
    Are they forced to comply with various regulations that add to inefficiency i.e. state boundaries, insuring those with pre-existing conditions, etc...? A "public option" that competes with a private firm(s) will create a market foothold for the public option given firm objectives (profit/stop loss). It would be incredibly hard to compete in this environment.

    Exemptions: Under no circumstances can any illegal alien receive any kind of health insurance, public, private, or Medicare/Medicaid.
    Agreed.

    Cost offset: This is the radical, yet cornerstone of my plan. If you opt out of the public option, and do not purchase a private plan, if you get ill, you MUST pay out of pocket. Under NO circumstances will the government subsidize your treatment. NO EXCEPTIONS... catastrophic illness, accident, children... NO EXCEPTIONS. The options will be there and will be affordable. You chose not to take one of them, you lose. No physician or hospital will be under any obligation to treat anyone with no ability to pay. They MAY if they choose, but they can also "opt out".
    What effect does this have on current ER mandates? Hospitals and physicians will be able to turn anyone away if they perceive that they will not be able to pay? What about someone who "says" they will pay but does not have the means in which to comply? This (IMHO) will lead to an increase in medical bankruptcy which accounts for the majority of all bankruptcies in the US. Not to mention, MB is still a reality for millions of middle class Americans who do have coverage due to various payment restrictions.

    Although inflation in insurance premiums has moderated in recent years, the Kaiser survey found that employees were continuing to spend more in medical costs, including their share of yearly insurance premiums. Employees are paying an average of $3,354 in premiums for family coverage, more than double the amount they paid in 1999. The total cost for family coverage now averages $12,680 a year, up 5 percent from 2007.

    And as people are paying more, they are finding the higher expense less affordable. In the study by the nonpartisan Center for Studying Health System Change, based on its national survey of households, nearly one of every five families had problems paying medical bills last year. More than half of these families said they borrowed money to pay these expenses, and nearly 20 percent of those having difficulty said they contemplated declaring personal bankruptcy as a result of their medical bills.

    The study estimates that 57 million Americans live in families struggling with medical bills, and 43 million of those have insurance coverage. “It’s hitting both the insured and the uninsured, and it’s hitting middle-class families,” said Karen Davis, the president of the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit research organization that financed the study.

    Because they are already in debt over their medical care, some families start forgoing treatments, even for serious or chronic conditions, Ms. Davis said. By deciding not to fill a prescription for high blood pressure medication or failing to go to the doctor for diabetes, they are at risk of incurring more serious and costly problems that can land them in the emergency room.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/bu.../25health.html

    Other parts of my plan:

    1) Major Tort Reform.
    2) The ability to purchase health care across state lines to further stimulate competition.
    3) Elimination of insurance company driven utilization review, putting all treatment decisions in the hands of the provider.
    4) No pre-existing condition limitation.
    5) Adult children can remain on parental health insurance until 26.
    6) Centralized, independent organization reviewing/evaluating all health care insurers (including the public option) with the power to fine or even shut down.
    While i agree with the bold, how do private firms compete with the public option given the remaining points?

    These are broad strokes, of course, but you get the gist. The plan above should both please liberals with a public option and making health care affordable to everyone, and to conservatives with creating a system that requires personal responsibility and competition. I'd be happy to answer questions about this plan, and am open to some REASONABLE additions. If you just want to throw hysterical partisan hackery at me, don't bother responding to this post. Both HarryGurellia and LaMidRighter have seen parts or all of this and, if I recall correctly, liked what they saw.
    I have been toying with an idea for about a year now. It is very simple and has similar points.

    1.) Guaranteed public option for anyone regardless of income, health, and age. This will be funded by the tax payers and can be considered "open arms" from medicaid/medicare. Even if you have private insurance and it does not cover the costs, this option will pick up the tab (although the private sector will not be able to use this as a means to "free ride").

    2.) A heavily deregulated private insurance industry. Stipulated contractual coverage at multiple levels. For example, if you are a non smoker who is in good health and does not participate in "risky" activities (hang gliding etc...), you can purchase a policy that is much cheaper if you agree (contractually) to the specific terms. If it is found out that you violate them, you can be dropped immediately. Firms can deny coverage for pre-existing conditions that are not initially declared, and do not have to offer affordable policies for high risk potential clients. They will also have the ability to create policies that outsource major medical care (special surgery, experimental treatment, organ transplant).

    3.) An independent advisory board consisting of both sides of the spectrum (public/private) that conduct investigations regarding fraud, abuse, malpractice, contract reneging, competition, price fixing, pricing abuse etc.... This independent board will also outline and design tort reform that can be handed over to vote a simple "yes/no" without legislatures redesigning it for political influence and/or will. This board would also conduct research in medical efficiency, cost effective measures that do not reduce quality as well as the differential effectiveness of pro bono (private) vs public financing for extreme cases.

    It allows for true competition. Private firms cannot compete with the bottom line of a public option but have something a government run program does not: discretion. This would open the door to hospitals and physicians to refuse public insurance (Mayo, John Hopkins, Cleveland, etc... at the high end), and allow customers who feel "mistreated" to move to the public option without barriers. Essentially, it moves the most risky citizens off of the aggregate private risk pool into one that has the means in which to properly fund their medical care without "spreading" the costs. I have very little doubt this alone would dramatically lower costs or allow for more quality treatment.

    A little more extreme than your plan CC, but i think it allows for greater competition between the public and private sector, while eliminating medical bankruptcy. Medicare was essentially created to shift the most risky citizens to the public sector. Why? Because the majority of your health care costs will be incurred when you are older, and the affordability for such coverage would extremely limited given that elderly people tend to live on fixed incomes.
    Last edited by Kushinator; 03-24-10 at 11:05 AM.
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #1028
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:22 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,069

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed


  9. #1029
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Gill View Post
    It's a state by state law and has nothing to do with individual policies.
    Are you saying such a law forbids actuary accounting practices that determine risk, pricing, and sustainable cash flow necessary to "swap" risk? If so, can i see a source?

    I never said otherwise.

    Auto liability insurance protects others from your negligence. Health insurance protects only the person insured.
    Research medical bankruptcy and its effect on pricing.

    You actually think that people with pre-existing conditions can be added, along with "kids" under 26 without a corresponding rate increase.
    You are entering mucky waters. It all depends on the respective "pool" in which the policy is underwritten. Rate increases are primarily a function of declining cash flow used to swap (spread) risk. Being in a lower risk pool with a different policy mechanism does not face the same risk for declining cash flow (which lead to rate increases).

    Those are just two of the many causes of insurance rate increases that will come out of this bill. Even the CBO, using the faulty assumptions from Pelosi, said there would be rate increases.
    The CBO is about as accurate as the folks from the Mises institute.
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #1030
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Health Care Bill has passed

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Are you saying such a law forbids actuary accounting practices that determine risk, pricing, and sustainable cash flow necessary to "swap" risk? If so, can i see a source?
    I'm saying that some states do not allow insurance companies to raise rates due to claims involving uninsured drivers when it's not the fault of the policyholder..

    Research medical bankruptcy and its effect on pricing.
    Has nothing to do with the topic.

    You are entering mucky waters. It all depends on the respective "pool" in which the policy is underwritten. Rate increases are primarily a function of declining cash flow used to swap (spread) risk. Being in a lower risk pool with a different policy mechanism does not face the same risk for declining cash flow (which lead to rate increases).
    Are you claiming that all these millions of extra people with expensive illnesses can be covered without raising premiums???

    The CBO is about as accurate as the folks from the Mises institute.
    The CBO is very accurate when they are given accurate information. Pelosi had them use assumptions that were not even close to reality last week, so their numbers are inaccurate. Garbage in, garbage out.

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





Posting Permissions

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