Do conservatives not understand how important it is to protect pre-existing conditions?

[Flash]

Fuck pre existing conditions. That is nothing more than welfare to have a government mandate to require that insurance companies accept somebody that didn't pay into the insurance pool.

Liberals don't understand the concept of what insurance is all about. It is not welfare. It is pooling. You pay in when you are well and take out when you are sick. If you don't pay in then you shouldn't be allowed to take out.

All filthy Liberals want is for somebody else to pay their bills. Despicable!

You just made the perfect case for a mandate. You are the despicable person.

It is your responsibility to pay your bills Moon Bat. Stop being so greedy SOB demanding other people pay for you. That makes you an asshole. You are not entitled to my money just because you are alive. Go pay your own bills and that includes your health care .

You are the fucking asshole. SOB s like you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself. Go find a desert island and you don't have to pay for anything. You get all sorts of subsidies from others that you don't complain about.

...and you are a fucking asshole thinking that somebody else should pay your health care bills.

That is your responsibility you greedy little fuck.

Stop being a piece of welfare shit.

 

[Flash]

Insulin For Life | Insulin Donations
Insulin for Life USA is a not-for-profit with a mission to rescue unused diabetes supplies here in the United States and deliver them to people across the world who have no access to these life saving necessities. Please consider how you can support IFL USA and donate your supplies or cash contribution tod

Rating 5 Popular Diabetes Non-Profits
2. Children’s Diabetes Foundation

Charity Navigator Star Rating – 3 out of 4
Overall Charity Navigator Score – 80.28 (out of 100)
Financial Score – 73.01 (out of 100)
Accountability and Transparency – 93 (out of 100)

2012 Total Revenue – $3,240,914
2012 Total Expenses – $4,006,306

Expenses Breakdown (Fiscal Year ending 12/2012)
Program Expenses – 60%
Fundraising – 30%
Administrative – 10%

Donating Unused Insulin to charity?

I mean seriously people bitching and moaning about 132,000 kids with diabetes and they can't use the INTERNET and find the above????

So, what happens to those children when the become adults and this charity no longer helps them?

Do you have any clue how expensive of a disease Type-1 is to control and the massive health issue that can arise if it is not controlled?

Hey I use the Internet to find answers to your dumb ass questions! Why don't YOU????

Treating Type 1 diabetes without Insurance - The #OverTheCounterT1DChallenge
check out the above and then calculate the below and you will see less than $100/month...

Here are the products I used on the #overthecounterT1Dchallenge:

• Novolin R Insulin – $25 per vial (I used 1 full vial in the 30 days)
• Novolin N Insulin – $25 per vial (I used 1 full vial in the 30 days)
• Test Strips from One Drop today – $39 per month for unlimited strips (I used over 250 in the 30 days, because R and NPH require more attention due to bouncing between highs and lows)
• ReliOn Syringes – $12 per box of 100 (I used ~150)

Diabetes is not something that is expensive to keep in check. However insurers charged people with diabetes much higher rates as if it were expensive to treat. That means people with diabetes may find insurance too expensive to afford.

I went in for a check up a couple of years ago and the doctor told me that I was pre diabetes.

He gave me a list of things I should do . He said Type II diabetes is a self inflicted disease.

I took personal responsibility and did what he told me. It was not easy but not all that hard either.

I am not diabetic now .

Other people should also take responsibility for their health and not expect me to pay their bills for them just because they are alive.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You idiot. The point is that healthcare shouldn’t be treated like it’s insurance. You equating car insurance as justification for rejecting healthcare coverage is ridiculous

Then, why is it call insurance, you cocksmoking fucktard?

 

[Oddball]

Diabetes is not something that is expensive to keep in check. However insurers charged people with diabetes much higher rates as if it were expensive to treat. That means people with diabetes may find insurance too expensive to afford.

That's not insurance...That's pre-paid medical...There's a difference.

 

[Flash]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

That's why it can't include pre-existing conditions.

Pre-existing conditions should be included. There is no reason why it shouldn't.

There is a reason. A damn good reason.

The reason that if you don't pay into an insurance pool then you are getting welfare and all welfare is wrong.

You should not demand that other people pay your bills for you. It is your responsibility to pay your own. If you have not been paying into an insurance pool when you were not sick then that means somebody else must pay for you. You don't want to be greedy and have somebody else have to work to make money to give to you, do you? Because that is exactly what a stupid preexisting condition requirement means and that is despicable.

Be responsible for your own well being. Stop demanding that other people be forced to pay you bills. You don't want to be one of these filthy ass welfare queens, do you? That would be shitty, wouldn't it?

 

[Oddball]

What they are asking for is reasonable rates. They are not saying they should pay nothing. Quit lying.

The end game is "free" medical care for everyone...Quit lying and saying that it's not.

 

[emilynghiem]

10s of millions Americans would be affected by this. Either conservatives do not even understand this subject, or they believe it won’t affect them personally. That’s their “I got mine - fuck everyone else philosophy”. Of course once they realize it will affect them, only then would they support the protections.

That’s America for you.

Dear Billy000
Do Liberals who believe in universal health care
understand if you want to provide and pay for everyone's access
then you should do the work to set up provisions and make sure they are not abused?

If I want everyone to have free transportation then I should take on the responsibility for
provisions that would make this accessible, affordable and sustainable for all the people I want to serve.

so why not hold liberals and conservatives to their own approaches to health care
A. if Liberals believe in universal coverage, then by all means, set up a system
that Liberals pay for so Preexisting conditions can be covered under that policy.
Not to meantion coverage for abortion, recreational drug use, or added conditions
AGAINST high sugar diets, meat consumption, or anything liberals DON'T believe in supporting either
in terms of health care costs and medical conditions caused by adverse factors.

B. if conservatives believe in free market provisions WITHOUT govt regulating the business conditions
(except for medical professional licensing, health and safety regulations on drugs and services provided)
then require conservatives to go through private programs and not access public institution unless they pay their costs of services used.

So if Christians/Conservatives want to fund health care through charity, and do NOT believe in
paying for abortions, birth control, drug addiction or abuse, smoking or alcohol effects, sex changes etc.
then those believers can fund programs under the terms of their choice as well.

Do liberals not understand the concept of free choice?
and not wanting govt to dictate what can and cannot be paid for through public systems?

Do liberals not understand there are not enough public hospitals to accommodate
the populations, especially given the growing immigrant populations that Liberals
believe in including and providing services and education for.

Do liberals not understand that working citizens and taxpayers that
pay for these services and institutions have EQUAL RIGHT to be represented in policies?
And if there is disagreement, then taxpayers should have equal right to separate
funding so they are NOT forced to fund policies they don't believe in?

Do liberals understand the difference in service quality and efficiency between
nonprofit groups, free market businesses, and govt run bureaucracies that
require voting on legislation before policies can be changed, corrected or improved?

Billy000 if you ask any Harvey survivor like me the difference between
getting help from nonprofits vs. getting help from a govt agency like FEMA
trying to serve several cities and states at once with one centralized program,
you would know that health care cannot be managed collectively through federal govt.

We had to wait in line, miss work, and wait for months, going back and forth
to answer appeals and claims through a bureaucratic user-unfriendly system.

You would understand why conservatives are saying not to rely on federal govt
to manage benefits. It all needs tob be localized.
and the nonprofits that worked locally fared much better.

That's what conservatives mean. it's not about denying services
but not tying them up in govt bureaucracy that can't provide individualized attention
to the masses from the top down.

 

[Oddball]

No one is talking about smoking or drinking. We are talking about conditions that are not the fault of a individual.

How do you make their care less costly by making everyone else pay for it?...Please be specific.

 

[bripat9643]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

Under Obamacare, the parasites don't "share" costs. They impose their costs on others.

So older people and people with pre-existing conditions are parasites. You are a true fucking asshole .

When people get what they haven't paid for, they are parasites. That's how the term is defined. It doesn't matter what their age is. If you want to pay for their healthcare, no one is stopping you.

 

[bripat9643]

10s of millions Americans would be affected by this. Either conservatives do not even understand this subject, or they believe it won’t affect them personally. That’s their “I got mine - fuck everyone else philosophy”. Of course once they realize it will affect them, only then would they support the protections.

That’s America for you.

Let me explain the insurance business to you, billy.

Insurance companies charge for risk. If someone smoke half a carton a day, and drinks heavily, maybe suffers from COPD and cirrhosis, that represents more risk to them, more of a chance they are going to have to pay a claim. Same if a customer has aids, cancer, parkinsons.

Very pricy treatments, they have to charge more to make it worth their while.

Insurance companies aren't in the business of losing money.

No one is talking about smoking or drinking. We are talking about conditions that are not the fault of a individual.

One thing is certain: your healthcare issues are not my fault. Explain why I should pay for them.

 

[Oddball]

I'm still waiting for your argument. You seem to have a black hole where your mind is. Not one of the analogies makes a bit of sense.

My argument is freedom and MYOB...Two concepts that are completely lost on virtue signaling statists.

 

[bripat9643]

Insulin For Life | Insulin Donations
Insulin for Life USA is a not-for-profit with a mission to rescue unused diabetes supplies here in the United States and deliver them to people across the world who have no access to these life saving necessities. Please consider how you can support IFL USA and donate your supplies or cash contribution tod

Rating 5 Popular Diabetes Non-Profits
2. Children’s Diabetes Foundation

Charity Navigator Star Rating – 3 out of 4
Overall Charity Navigator Score – 80.28 (out of 100)
Financial Score – 73.01 (out of 100)
Accountability and Transparency – 93 (out of 100)

2012 Total Revenue – $3,240,914
2012 Total Expenses – $4,006,306

Expenses Breakdown (Fiscal Year ending 12/2012)
Program Expenses – 60%
Fundraising – 30%
Administrative – 10%

Donating Unused Insulin to charity?

I mean seriously people bitching and moaning about 132,000 kids with diabetes and they can't use the INTERNET and find the above????

So, what happens to those children when the become adults and this charity no longer helps them?

Do you have any clue how expensive of a disease Type-1 is to control and the massive health issue that can arise if it is not controlled?

Hey I use the Internet to find answers to your dumb ass questions! Why don't YOU????

Treating Type 1 diabetes without Insurance - The #OverTheCounterT1DChallenge
check out the above and then calculate the below and you will see less than $100/month...

Here are the products I used on the #overthecounterT1Dchallenge:

• Novolin R Insulin – $25 per vial (I used 1 full vial in the 30 days)
• Novolin N Insulin – $25 per vial (I used 1 full vial in the 30 days)
• Test Strips from One Drop today – $39 per month for unlimited strips (I used over 250 in the 30 days, because R and NPH require more attention due to bouncing between highs and lows)
• ReliOn Syringes – $12 per box of 100 (I used ~150)

Diabetes is not something that is expensive to keep in check. However insurers charged people with diabetes much higher rates as if it were expensive to treat. That means people with diabetes may find insurance too expensive to afford.

My insuline costs $500/month. paying cash doesn't lower the price.

 

[emilynghiem]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

That's why it can't include pre-existing conditions.

Pre-existing conditions should be included. There is no reason why it shouldn't.

There is a reason. A damn good reason.

The reason that if you don't pay into an insurance pool then you are getting welfare and all welfare is wrong.

You should not demand that other people pay your bills for you. It is your responsibility to pay your own. If you have not been paying into an insurance pool when you were not sick then that means somebody else must pay for you. You don't want to be greedy and have somebody else have to work to make money to give to you, do you? Because that is exactly what a stupid preexisting condition requirement means and that is despicable.

Be responsible for your own well being. Stop demanding that other people be forced to pay you bills. You don't want to be one of these filthy ass welfare queens, do you? That would be shitty, wouldn't it?

Dear Flash and busybee01
Yes and no.
If liberal Democrats/progressive Greens want collective discounts as a group,
then by all means, "health care cooperatives" can be set up where members
DO agree to pool their resources together and pay for each other's services on a sustainable basis.

I recommend this be set up through medical education and training programs to ensure there
are enough service providers to meet the needs of local populations.
I even recommend converting prison facilities and budgets into health care
screening, treatment and rehab/recovery programs so the resources can come from there.

The way the Christian health share ministries work is by sharing costs among
the members who agree to the same cost-cutting policies (such as no smoking, drinking or drug use).

If liberals believe in a more lax policy, including sex that could lead to abortion
and smoking or drug use that could lead to lung and brain damage,
the terms of membership in that collective pool would be different to cover these costs
that other groups may not agree to pay for!

Instead of saying NO to the progressive ideal of health care for all,
we should encourage advocates to set up their own health care cooperatives,
train enough workers and build enough facilities/schools, in order to meet this lofty goal and get to YES.

Give them what they want.
If they want that responsibility, then spell it out.
And require them to write up sustainable business plans
and apply for loans and grants like any other business or nonprofit seeking donations, investors and support.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

10s of millions Americans would be affected by this. Either conservatives do not even understand this subject, or they believe it won’t affect them personally. That’s their “I got mine - fuck everyone else philosophy”. Of course once they realize it will affect them, only then would they support the protections.

That’s America for you.

Republicans don’t care – they adhere blindly to the failed dogma of Social Darwinism, believing that only those who can afford access to healthcare should have access to healthcare; and that those who don’t have access to affordable healthcare have only themselves to blame, that they lack access to affordable healthcare due to their own failings and incompetence, and should do without access to affordable healthcare as a consequence.

Hence the reprehensible right.

It's even worse than that, Republicans also understand insurance and math.

No, they do not understand insurance at all.

Allowing people who didn't have insurance to get it after they are sick is the opposite of insurance.

That is why you had a mandate. To prevent people from buying insurance only when they get sick. Discovering a pre-existing condition is not getting sick. No one says they should not pay anything. What we are talking about are rates that a family can pay.

The mandate didn't prevent people from waiting until they were sick, or discovering a pre-existing condition, before buying insurance.

 

[bripat9643]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

That's why it can't include pre-existing conditions.

Pre-existing conditions should be included. There is no reason why it shouldn't.

Included in what? You believe someone should walk into an insurance office with a preexisting condition and get approved for a policy the same day? Once again, that isn't insurance. It's welfare.

 

[bripat9643]

Do conservatives not understand how important it is to protect pre-existing conditions?

Do dumb ass liberals not understand it doesn't take a 2,000 page Obamacare bill and 10's of thousands of pages of government regulations to protect pre-existing conditions? There was bi-partisan support for this and a dozen or so common sense healthcare system improvements that would have fit in a 200 page bill. But Dem's drunk on victory told the other half of the country to STFU and crammed through Obamacare. They paid the price in 2010 the American people bitch slapped them and they lost the House. Then they lost the Senate. Then the White House. You would think your average liberal would get a clue.

The Republican bills were soundly rejected by voters. Obamacare has gotten more popular since Republicans have shown their ideas. They will likely lose the House. Maybe the Senate.

What Republican bills?

The bills Republicans tried to shove down the Senate's throat.

Name one.

Obama is the only one who shoved a bill down the Senate's throat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

That's why it can't include pre-existing conditions.

Pre-existing conditions should be included. There is no reason why it shouldn't.

If they're included, it's not insurance. More like welfare.

 

[bripat9643]

Anybody demanding that they get preexisting conditions covered when they didn't pay insurance is also demanding that somebody else pay their bills.

Disgusting, in't it?

What they are asking for is reasonable rates. They are not saying they should pay nothing. Quit lying.

What's "reasonable" if you have cancer?

 

[Flash]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

That's why it can't include pre-existing conditions.

Pre-existing conditions should be included. There is no reason why it shouldn't.

There is a reason. A damn good reason.

The reason that if you don't pay into an insurance pool then you are getting welfare and all welfare is wrong.

You should not demand that other people pay your bills for you. It is your responsibility to pay your own. If you have not been paying into an insurance pool when you were not sick then that means somebody else must pay for you. You don't want to be greedy and have somebody else have to work to make money to give to you, do you? Because that is exactly what a stupid preexisting condition requirement means and that is despicable.

Be responsible for your own well being. Stop demanding that other people be forced to pay you bills. You don't want to be one of these filthy ass welfare queens, do you? That would be shitty, wouldn't it?

Dear Flash and busybee01
Yes and no.
If liberal Democrats/progressive Greens want collective discounts as a group,
then by all means, "health care cooperatives" can be set up where members
DO agree to pool their resources together and pay for each other's services on a sustainable basis.

I recommend this be set up through medical education and training programs to ensure there
are enough service providers to meet the needs of local populations.
I even recommend converting prison facilities and budgets into health care
screening, treatment and rehab/recovery programs so the resources can come from there.

The way the Christian health share ministries work is by sharing costs among
the members who agree to the same cost-cutting policies (such as no smoking, drinking or drug use).

If liberals believe in a more lax policy, including sex that could lead to abortion
and smoking or drug use that could lead to lung and brain damage,
the terms of membership in that collective pool would be different to cover these costs
that other groups may not agree to pay for!

Instead of saying NO to the progressive ideal of health care for all,
we should encourage advocates to set up their own health care cooperatives,
train enough workers and build enough facilities/schools, in order to meet this lofty goal and get to YES.

Give them what they want.
If they want that responsibility, then spell it out.
And require them to write up sustainable business plans
and apply for loans and grants like any other business or nonprofit seeking donations, investors and support.

The government needs to get out of the business of taking money from a person that earns it and giving it to somebody else.

That should never be a function of government. No welfare, no subsidies, no entitlements and no bailouts.

Then we need to reduce taxes. Then everybody would have more money to spend on what they chose to spend it on. That includes charity. Americans are generous for those really in need.

Liberals are only generous with using other people's money to buy voting blocks and that is not right.

 

[emilynghiem]

Any liberal can, at any time, step in and cover somebody’s Preexisting confition. That isn’t the point. The demand that other people pay for it is always the real point of socialism.
And temper tantrums follow.

It is not socialism. You have no clue what you are talking about. Insurance is about sharing costs.

Under Obamacare, the parasites don't "share" costs. They impose their costs on others.

So older people and people with pre-existing conditions are parasites. You are a true fucking asshole .

Dear busybee01
there are more than one way to provide for older people or disabled in need.
why not give taxpayers equal choice in funding charities that serve the elderly
equally if not more effectively than federal govt?

Just because conservatives don't believe in going through federal govt for everything
doesn't mean not believing in providing for people at all who are in need.

From my experience as well, I've learned that nonprofits that are well run
do a better job of meeting needs faster and more cost effectively.
While county and federally funded agencies get bogged down by bureaucratic red tape.
I've heard enough complaints from friends who resorted to county services
and feared they would die from lack of access to real help they needed by couldn't get that way.

If you believe in govt run health care, then by all means, fund it and manage it yourself that way.
but don't force others to pay for and be under that, if they find it oppressive, wasteful and abusive.