I am a drug addict and want medical treatment
I am an alcoholic and need medical treatment
I am going to be pregnant and need prenatal care
I am a newborn and need newborn insurance for this
I am in prison and need medical insurance for this
I want to give 20% of my medical expenses to profit a corporation
I am psychotic and need pyschiatric care
I need mammograms in my insurance
I need breastfeeding insurance
I have an extra $12,000 cash per year for my deductable
While people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage through their employer (if they can get hired) the insurance carrier can deny claims based on pre-existing conditions while maintaining your coverage (and charging you for it)
So if you lie about having diabetes, etc and then submit a claim for a health problem relating to diabetes, the insurer can just refuse to pay *and* continue to collect a premium from you
It seems like some of the worry is that healthy people will join special "Healthy Person" insurance plans and sick people will join Obamacare. This will result in (possibly rich) healthy people paying less for insurance than Obamacare. It will also create a vicious cycle in which Obamacare will become more and more unsustainable. Obamacare needs healthy people to pay for the sick ones, the question is how to make that happen.
The poll asks: Which of these required insurance policy provisions you must buy applies to you?
Birth control applies to me because I use it monthly, so that is why I chose other- birth control because it applies to me. I am not complaining about that at all, I think it should be provided to all women under insurance and I don't mind paying for it. I will admit that I am complaining about not receiving those benefits under my plan that I pay for because that is what is important to me.
Is what you're living for today, worth dying for tomorrow?
Calling coverage for pre-existing conditions "insurance" is an oxymoron, a word game.
Wouldn't be great if they offered auto insurance for "pre-existing accident damage" that would repair accident damage that occurred before you bought the policy? If they did, why would anyone buy insurance until they had an accident?
Personally, unless it's free it would seem a person is economically incompetent to buy insurance until you need it - if by law you have to be sold the insurance at the same rate if you ever do need it. Since the being-an-American-annual-tax (penalty) for not having insurance is significantly lower than the insurance premium and given the huge premiums, deductible and co-pay requirements, why buy "insurance" until you need it?
That makes no sense to me. What would make sense is NOT buying the insurance and saving the premiums so that if you DO suffer a major medical issue you then have the money to not only buy the policy, but also have the money for the deductible and co-pay so you then actually CAN get treatment from the insurance. For millions of people, that would be the only way they would have the deductible and co-pay to be able to use the insurance anyway.
Can ANYONE give a rational reason to buy the costly insurance before you need it since you can't be turned down if you ever do?
I pay more in property taxes - and 90% of our property is tax exempt.
Your example does not work. School taxes do not make me pay for irresponsible behavior nor reward it. I also see school taxes as benefiting my family and myself because of the social and economic benefits of children being educated (and kept off the street).
People keep debating ObamaCare as if it is what the president says - when it's a lie. Poor and working people do NOT have $5000 deductible. Do not have $12,700 per year deductible. Do NOT have 20, 30, 40% copay.
Just for that, all the words are just a massive lie.
Here is what ObamaCare REALLY did:
1. Previously, large employers HAD to provide medical insurance for their employees. Now they do not. ObamaCare is MASSIVE corporate welfare via the law eliminating required employer paid employee medical coverage. This was a MASSIVE change that is essentially never mentioned nor ever justified by Obama and company.
2. Most indigent healthcare WAS paid for thru property taxes (ie the "hospital district"). The wealthier in real property a person or company was, the most they paid in taxes towards indigent healthcare - in effect a "progressive" health tax. ObamaCare is to shift indigent healthcare costs from a progressive tax primarily on the upper income people to instead a flat tax against working people - in the form insurance premiums radically raised with raised deductibles to cover indigent healthcare.
3. ObamaCare took healthcare decisions away from you and gave it to the government - by dictating what will and won't be paid for - and how much for each. Personally, we often opt for alternative methods in health issues, meaning insurance won't cover it anyway even if done by a doctor. In this, ObamaCare also takes virtual total control over medical decisions from doctors and gives it to the government. People not in the medical profession in DC, not you nor your doctor, now decide how to treat your medical conditions by deciding what they will and won't pay for - while you are paying for medical treatment you wouldn't even accept via the premiums.
4. ObamaCare - via huge deductibles and copay - gives justification to deny major medical care to the poor and lower middle class - while at the same time telling the huge lie that they are getting "free" insurance. Since they don't have the deductible and copay, in fact they have no usable insurance whatsoever.
5. ObamaCare attempts to defacto nationalize the medical profession and healthcare facilities by establishing a national price structure for medical services. As more and more medical professionals and facilities are opting not to play, the result is increasing threats to require such persons to do and take whatever the government demands of them or be banned from their profession.
Virtually all the ways the ACA is being discussed and debated has little to do with the ACA and often even is exactly the opposite from reality. People are furiously debating both sides of something that doesn't exist as it is being debated.
Last edited by joko104; 11-05-13 at 11:47 AM.