• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think no more preexisting conditions is right or wrong?

Do you think no more preexisting conditions is right or wrong?


  • Total voters
    24
Insurance is a service to protect you from things that might happen. What you are doing, essentially, is betting that the bad thing you are getting coverage for will occur, while the insurance provider is betting that it will not; the odds of those events happening to you are calculated and set the payouts for the bet. The more likely the event and the more insurance coverage, the more you have to pay in premiums. This isn't any more evil than sports betting; it's the exact same process, and it's how insurance works.

A pre-existing condition is not something that might happen. A pre-existing condition is something that has already happened and will continue to happen. Insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions is fundamentally asking a bookie-- a very smart, professional bookie with a team of actuaries-- to bet against a guaranteed outcome. It breaks the way insurance works, which means that companies that sell insurance don't profit, and if they don't profit they cannot continue to provide insurance.

The problem with healthcare in this country is not that people cannot get insurance. The problem with healthcare in this country is that people can't afford it without insurance.

Nice post.

It seems that, with health care, the supply/demand curve is broken. It's not something that a person can do without, so they have no option to refuse and limited means to shop around (often enforced by the insurance company). Nor is care refused. But the cost can be overwhelming.

Often, the bills just don't get paid. Charity care and union-contracted pensions pushed a hospital system near me into bankruptcy last year. They had one hospital turning a healthy profit, and another in a poorer area burning through it plus some. In effect, lack of access to insurance made everyone poorer. Pensions, pay and benefits were trimmed for hundreds in both communities -- at least among those who weren't laid off.
 
Stupidity is a preexisting condition, so pretty much any injury that comers as a result of it probably should not be covered by insurance.
 
Insurance is a service to protect you from things that might happen. What you are doing, essentially, is betting that the bad thing you are getting coverage for will occur, while the insurance provider is betting that it will not; the odds of those events happening to you are calculated and set the payouts for the bet. The more likely the event and the more insurance coverage, the more you have to pay in premiums. This isn't any more evil than sports betting; it's the exact same process, and it's how insurance works.

A pre-existing condition is not something that might happen. A pre-existing condition is something that has already happened and will continue to happen. Insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions is fundamentally asking a bookie-- a very smart, professional bookie with a team of actuaries-- to bet against a guaranteed outcome. It breaks the way insurance works, which means that companies that sell insurance don't profit, and if they don't profit they cannot continue to provide insurance.

The problem with healthcare in this country is not that people cannot get insurance. The problem with healthcare in this country is that people can't afford it without insurance.

I love your last paragraph.

Are you not aware that insurance companies take these bets alllll the time? Anyone in a group plan provided by their employer is already covered for pre-existing conditions. At worst, there might be a 60-90 day waiting period from their date of hire. Further, the majority of people who have health insurance are covered by these group plans. And still the insurance companies make handsome profits. Why? Because everyone, every single person who works for a particular company with a particular group plan, must be covered...whether they want to or not. Mandatory insurance. It works just fine.

The pre-existing conditions exclusion profoundly effects those who have to buy their health insurance individually....those who lose their employer healthcare because they get laid off...entrepreneurs who start their own businesses...those whose employers don't provide group coverage.

Who are these people? They're waitstaff, convenience store workers, lawn service people, your auto mechanic, cab drivers, independent contractors like Realtors, your next-door neighbor who lost his job, anyone brave enough to set out on their own to start their own business, workers at most mom-and-pop businesses, the guys at your corner gas station, the lady who cuts your hair. In short, they're you and me.

Everybody buys health insurance. Everybody's covered. No pre-existing conditions allowed. It's time. It's long past time.
 
I love your last paragraph.

Are you not aware that insurance companies take these bets alllll the time? Anyone in a group plan provided by their employer is already covered for pre-existing conditions. At worst, there might be a 60-90 day waiting period from their date of hire. Further, the majority of people who have health insurance are covered by these group plans. And still the insurance companies make handsome profits. Why? Because everyone, every single person who works for a particular company with a particular group plan, must be covered...whether they want to or not. Mandatory insurance. It works just fine.

The pre-existing conditions exclusion profoundly effects those who have to buy their health insurance individually....those who lose their employer healthcare because they get laid off...entrepreneurs who start their own businesses...those whose employers don't provide group coverage.

Who are these people? They're waitstaff, convenience store workers, lawn service people, your auto mechanic, cab drivers, independent contractors like Realtors, your next-door neighbor who lost his job, anyone brave enough to set out on their own to start their own business, workers at most mom-and-pop businesses, the guys at your corner gas station, the lady who cuts your hair. In short, they're you and me.

Everybody buys health insurance. Everybody's covered. No pre-existing conditions allowed. It's time. It's long past time.

But your missing the point of insurance. It's a corporation. The only goal of a corporation is to make profit (though the good ones do it in a moral way). By forcing the insurance companies to take on pre-existing conditions, you are forcing them to no longer be able to maximize a profit on their customers (without raising rates). The only way they can continue to provide coverage is to continue to make a profit - or they go bust. I agree, sure it's better for all of us if we all have insurance. But forcing insurance companies to insure everybody makes it that much more difficult to insure anybody.

There is a problem that obviously needs to be fixed: Health Care costs. But by significantly increasing demand of healthcare (by making sure everyone has insurance and can go to the hospital) without increasing supply first is only going to make Health Care that much more expensive. So insurance companies, again, need to increase their rates to pay for more expensive health care in addition to needing to raise rates to account for all of their 'losing' customers that this law gives them no choice but to accept as customers. So they have a double incentive to raise rates, or go bust. It's a downward spiral from here. Soon none of us will be able to afford insurance (and yet we'll all have to legally buy it or pay a fine)
 
About a year ago, maybe 2 years, I read in Google News that insurance companies would be willing to take on pre-existing conditions IF we are all required to have health care insurance. It is only fair....
 
But your missing the point of insurance. It's a corporation. The only goal of a corporation is to make profit (though the good ones do it in a moral way). By forcing the insurance companies to take on pre-existing conditions, you are forcing them to no longer be able to maximize a profit on their customers (without raising rates). The only way they can continue to provide coverage is to continue to make a profit - or they go bust. I agree, sure it's better for all of us if we all have insurance. But forcing insurance companies to insure everybody makes it that much more difficult to insure anybody.

There is a problem that obviously needs to be fixed: Health Care costs. But by significantly increasing demand of healthcare (by making sure everyone has insurance and can go to the hospital) without increasing supply first is only going to make Health Care that much more expensive. So insurance companies, again, need to increase their rates to pay for more expensive health care in addition to needing to raise rates to account for all of their 'losing' customers that this law gives them no choice but to accept as customers. So they have a double incentive to raise rates, or go bust. It's a downward spiral from here. Soon none of us will be able to afford insurance (and yet we'll all have to legally buy it or pay a fine)

You're missing the point, FredMertz. Insurance companies are already covering pre-existing conditions. And doing just fine, thank you. The secret to their "doing just fine" with pre-existing conditions is because everyone hired by a company who has a group plan must have insurance whether he wants it or not.
 
You're missing the point, FredMertz. Insurance companies are already covering pre-existing conditions. And doing just fine, thank you. The secret to their "doing just fine" with pre-existing conditions is because everyone hired by a company who has a group plan must have insurance whether he wants it or not.


True... I don't deny that. But what I do deny is that they are already covering EVERY pre-existing condition. If this were the case, then this bill would obviously be obsolete and so would this debate. But this is such a hot-topic because there are a significant number of pre-existing conditions that weren't covered already.
 
True... I don't deny that. But what I do deny is that they are already covering EVERY pre-existing condition. If this were the case, then this bill would obviously be obsolete and so would this debate. But this is such a hot-topic because there are a significant number of pre-existing conditions that weren't covered already.

And further, in a group plan, the goal is that the group pays for itself and more. So they take on pre-existing condition with their primary goal still in tact: to make a profit. When it doesn't pay for itself, they raise costs to each member of the group. It's a voluntary agreement they entered with the employer. not a government mandated agreement with each indvidual.
 
But your missing the point of insurance. It's a corporation. The only goal of a corporation is to make profit (though the good ones do it in a moral way). By forcing the insurance companies to take on pre-existing conditions, you are forcing them to no longer be able to maximize a profit on their customers (without raising rates). The only way they can continue to provide coverage is to continue to make a profit - or they go bust. I agree, sure it's better for all of us if we all have insurance. But forcing insurance companies to insure everybody makes it that much more difficult to insure anybody.

There is a problem that obviously needs to be fixed: Health Care costs. But by significantly increasing demand of healthcare (by making sure everyone has insurance and can go to the hospital) without increasing supply first is only going to make Health Care that much more expensive. So insurance companies, again, need to increase their rates to pay for more expensive health care in addition to needing to raise rates to account for all of their 'losing' customers that this law gives them no choice but to accept as customers. So they have a double incentive to raise rates, or go bust. It's a downward spiral from here. Soon none of us will be able to afford insurance (and yet we'll all have to legally buy it or pay a fine)

This isn't Star Trek, Feringi rules have not been applied yet, profit is not the ONLY reason for a corporation to exist.
A service being provided is at least one other reason....
 
This isn't Star Trek, Feringi rules have not been applied yet, profit is not the ONLY reason for a corporation to exist.
A service being provided is at least one other reason....

and this, right when I just placed my order with Sharper Image for that tooth sharpener for you, too!
 
Local co-ops covering the poor (replacing Medicaid), the old (replacing Medicare) and the sick (those with pre-existing conditions) is the way to go forward. The funds the federal gov't spends on Medicaid and Medicare need to be transfered to the local co-ops. Extra local funding should be raised through a combination of property taxes and consumption tax. Everyone who needs it and can't get it from insurance companies will be covered.
 
True... I don't deny that. But what I do deny is that they are already covering EVERY pre-existing condition. If this were the case, then this bill would obviously be obsolete and so would this debate. But this is such a hot-topic because there are a significant number of pre-existing conditions that weren't covered already.

That's not quite right, Fred. Every pre-existing condition is covered -- in group plans. Read my post earlier. This is such a hot topic because people are deadset against the government interfering, against a government option (which we don't have btw), and against the government mandating that everyone will have to purchase health insurance....which is the only way that individual health insurance policies can cover pre-existing conditions.
 
And further, in a group plan, the goal is that the group pays for itself and more. So they take on pre-existing condition with their primary goal still in tact: to make a profit. When it doesn't pay for itself, they raise costs to each member of the group. It's a voluntary agreement they entered with the employer. not a government mandated agreement with each indvidual.

Yes, you're right here. "The group pays for itself and more. So they take on pre-existig conditions with their primary goal still i tact: to make a profit." With Obama's plan we're all going to be "in the group." As to it being a voluntary agreement the employee entered into with the employer, the only thing voluntary about it is the fact that the employee accepted his job. Barring not working for the company, the employee has absolutely no choice but to be in their health plan.
 
Local co-ops covering the poor (replacing Medicaid), the old (replacing Medicare) and the sick (those with pre-existing conditions) is the way to go forward. The funds the federal gov't spends on Medicaid and Medicare need to be transfered to the local co-ops. Extra local funding should be raised through a combination of property taxes and consumption tax. Everyone who needs it and can't get it from insurance companies will be covered.

Local control leads to multiple local corruption, harder to deal with...
The poor, and the "poor", probably don't pay property taxes, or much in the way of consumtion taxes, leaving the rich and upper middle class to pay the bills. They won't like that....
 
Yes, you're right here. "The group pays for itself and more. So they take on pre-existig conditions with their primary goal still i tact: to make a profit." With Obama's plan we're all going to be "in the group." As to it being a voluntary agreement the employee entered into with the employer, the only thing voluntary about it is the fact that the employee accepted his job. Barring not working for the company, the employee has absolutely no choice but to be in their health plan.

NOT true. the "groups" will still be as varied as they are now, and prices will still be different from employer to employer, and you can still buy your own insurance if you choose.
 
Local control leads to multiple local corruption, harder to deal with...
The poor, and the "poor", probably don't pay property taxes, or much in the way of consumtion taxes, leaving the rich and upper middle class to pay the bills. They won't like that....

I prefer local control over federal control and centralized corruption.

Most definitely the "rich" will be paying for services of the "poor", just like it is now. I view it as a community health tax. They don't like it now (paying for federal entitlements) and they won't like it with this model.

It does maintain coverage for the poor and old. It extends coverage to those with pre-existing conditions who are not covered under an employers group plan and are unable to obtain individual insurance.

Local co-ops, modeled after co-ops like Group Health in Seattle, will be able to invest in facilities and medical professionals to control costs.

One issue I see, other than the tax, is that employers may be motivated to drop group health plans and put their employees in the local co-op. This should be regulated.
 
NOT true. the "groups" will still be as varied as they are now, and prices will still be different from employer to employer, and you can still buy your own insurance if you choose.

Not if you have a pre-existing condition and your employer does not offer any group plans. Been there, done that.
 
NOT true. the "groups" will still be as varied as they are now, and prices will still be different from employer to employer, and you can still buy your own insurance if you choose.

I worded that wrong. It won't be the same group -- but everyone will have insurance. I completely agree with you.
 
NOT true. the "groups" will still be as varied as they are now, and prices will still be different from employer to employer, and you can still buy your own insurance if you choose.

My group is better than most. I have Tricare Prime now, soon will have Medicare Part A, Tricare for Life as Part B, no part D needed as I am retired military and pills are free (even Levitra). I have access to military doctors, civilian doctors, and Veterans Administration doctors. Gonna get free hearing aids thru the VA in the next few months. That is the wife's idea, she thinks I need to hear her commands better. She will be causing the govt to pay out many thousands of dollars for something I don't want. Sounds like she is turning liberal in her old age.
Eye exams are free every 2 years. Dental care does cost extra, tho. I can see specialists for my pre-existing or ongoing conditions without referrals from another doctor.
Dang if I ain't a lucky duck:2razz:....
 
About a year ago, maybe 2 years, I read in Google News that insurance companies would be willing to take on pre-existing conditions IF we are all required to have health care insurance. It is only fair....

It is only fair, and it is the cornerstone of "Obamacare." Unfortunately, the courts didn't see it that way. What will happen now is anyone's guess. My guess is that the upward spiral of cost will continue, but will now be attributed to that same Obamacare.
 
My group is better than most. I have Tricare Prime now, soon will have Medicare Part A, Tricare for Life as Part B, no part D needed as I am retired military and pills are free (even Levitra). I have access to military doctors, civilian doctors, and Veterans Administration doctors. Gonna get free hearing aids thru the VA in the next few months. That is the wife's idea, she thinks I need to hear her commands better. She will be causing the govt to pay out many thousands of dollars for something I don't want. Sounds like she is turning liberal in her old age.
Eye exams are free every 2 years. Dental care does cost extra, tho. I can see specialists for my pre-existing or ongoing conditions without referrals from another doctor.
Dang if I ain't a lucky duck:2razz:....

And the most wonderful part of all is that you realize you're that lucky duck! You deserve it all, Utah. Retired military. Thank you for your service.

Wife deafness, huh? Sorry, hearing aids won't help.
 
That's not quite right, Fred. Every pre-existing condition is covered -- in group plans. Read my post earlier. This is such a hot topic because people are deadset against the government interfering, against a government option (which we don't have btw), and against the government mandating that everyone will have to purchase health insurance....which is the only way that individual health insurance policies can cover pre-existing conditions.

Let me clarify - I'm not disagreeing that group plans cover pre-existing conditions. I have already agreed with this. I am saying that there are a significant number of pre-existing conditions that are currently not in a group plan and not insured otherwise that the insurance companies will now have to be liable for... by law, whether they want to be or not. These are non-profitable ventures that is going to cut into their profits unless they raise rates. It is unsustainable because those people who didn't have insurance and now do, can now go get healthcare - in an environment where demand already exceeds supply. Now we'll have significantly more demand than supply causing prices to go up further, which is another reason for increased prices in HealthCare. Prices go up in the economy when demand goes up to try to slow demand down to the equilibrium. But with the government backing the costs of those people, costs will skyrocket like never before. The problem is high healthcare costs making it unaffordable. Pre-existing conditions clause has just guaranteed that they are going to go higher. I'd love for everyone to be healthy and have the opportunity to be so. But this is the wrong avenue. The cost is too high.
 
I am saying that there are a significant number of pre-existing conditions that are currently not in a group plan and not insured otherwise that the insurance companies will now have to be liable for... by law, whether they want to be or not.

What pre-existing conditions are those?
 
First, I think the government and Medicare should be bound by the same rules. Seniors on Medicare go in "coverage gap" when their medicines exceed what the government is willing to pay. I am not embellishing this, literally the rejection code when this happens is "coverage benefits exceeded." Medicare puts people in a coverage gap when they have paid enough for the patients prescriptions forcing patients to pay out of pocket. The preexisting condition is cost, which I find to be disgusting. We pay into Medicare all our lives, we deserve good coverage without "gaps." If the government is going to force insurance companies to accept everyone regardless of expensive conditions, they should take a dose of their own reform and not put people on Medicare in coverage gaps when they become to expensive.
 
First, I think the government and Medicare should be bound by the same rules. Seniors on Medicare go in "coverage gap" when their medicines exceed what the government is willing to pay. I am not embellishing this, literally the rejection code when this happens is "coverage benefits exceeded." Medicare puts people in a coverage gap when they have paid enough for the patients prescriptions forcing patients to pay out of pocket. The preexisting condition is cost, which I find to be disgusting. We pay into Medicare all our lives, we deserve good coverage without "gaps." If the government is going to force insurance companies to accept everyone regardless of expensive conditions, they should take a dose of their own reform and not put people on Medicare in coverage gaps when they become to expensive.

Hold on a minute. First, Medicare Part D (that covers medication) has only been around a few years. Medicare never even used to pay for medications taken by prescription. And if you've been on Medicare since Part D started, you never paid one nickel toward it during your working career. Further, the premium for Part D coverage is miniscule compared to the benefits received. There are no pre-existing conditions. Diabetic going in? No problem. Benefits the same.

The average premium for Medicare Part D is under $28/month. With no pre-existing conditions taken into account. There's a $275 deductible and a small co-pay until one reaches the donut hole. Medicare Part D is a gift.

This entitlement attitude is going to sink our ship. It really is.
 
Back
Top Bottom