Pre-existing conditions coverage

[dnsmith35]

Healthy people are forced to pay more for the same coverage than they would if they were not subsidizing the sick.

Yes, that is the point. Requiring everyone to get into the system spreads the risk more uniformly.

How do the young and health have a responsibility to "share the risk" presented by the old a sick, witht hat responsibility being so acute that the state -must- enforce it?

If we want to cut back on overall medical care costs, yes. As it is, the old have Medicare and the sick have the emergency room which the young pay for with their taxes anyway.[/quote]
Even the young need medical care, if its not for anything other than accidents.

Actually, they are being forced by the state to pay for things they do not receive; no amount of spin will change this.

No spin required. Everyone needs medical care eventually and if you wait until you really need it, its too late, you have a preexisting issue.

There's -nothing- fair about that.

There is nothing unfair about it.

So... why do you support the state screwing the young and the healthy?

The young and healthy are screwing themselves over time. No one else has to do it for them. Most of us start out young and healthy, but we eventually need insurance, and to do it like may want to now, eventually is too late, they are already sick.

Of course, there is another way to do it. Tax the crap out of everyone and furnish government insurance. No premiums at all.

 

[The Rabbi]

Give them two choices, Medicare and Medicaid, with the appropriate premiums billed from their employers or paid by the government if not employed.

Why would we give people the choice of tyranny or oppression?

I agree, why should we? But as a modern society we owe our people medical care and I believe it should be done at the least cost to tax payers as possible. Thus instead of Obama care and all the money that will take it will be less expensive to simply cover everyone not currently covered with Medicaid and bill their employer for the premiums if they are profitable. No tyranny! No oppression! It eliminates the tyranny and oppression of not being able to afford insurance.

Billing the employer for services he didnt ask for isn't tyranny? Howso?
We do not owe our people (whoever that is) anything other than a stable system of laws and recourse to the courts.
Medicaid is grossly inefficient and I wouldn't subject anyone to that.

 

[The Rabbi]

Even the young need medical care, if its not for anything other than accidents.

There's the lie right there. Young people can easily be covered by cheap catastrophic policies, the very policies Obamacare outlawed. It shouldn't cost anyone anything to do that.

 

[Contumacious]

C and P from the other thread:

Is the "feel-good" part the fact that we aren't required to explain to them, when very ill, that actual Capitalism would drop them like a hot rock if it were allowed to and tell them never to return? That once sick, if unregulated, no insurance company would ever cover them again and no employer would hire them given the chance? Yeah, that would make you feel-good I bet.

Yo Vern

While adamantly denying that Capitalism prevails any where in the world, I ask you :

Can Aetna, Cigna, BCBS print money?

Can they send IRS goons to loot plunder and confiscate?


If not, then how they attract capital?

If an insurance company invited you to invest your 401k money on them with the understanding that they were going to go belly up, would you do it?

.

 

[Listening]

Somehow, liberals think that you can charge next to nothing and give people insurance coverage that will pay for extremely expensive surgeries and sicknesses.

The problem is that overall, the sick people will buy that insurance. The healthy young people will not. So the sick people are the only ones paying premiums. And they are the ones collecting all the benefits and the cost has to increase. Otherwise, the Insurance companies cannot make money. That is what they are in business for, to make money. If I owned a business and the governemnt made me operate it so that I lost money, I would close up shop.

again, that's why there is a mandate... .to spread the cost among everyone, including young, healthy people.

perhaps you should stick with that bong.

Yep, stick it to the health young.

Great strategy. Should play well in the next election.

 

[Listening]

HIPPA addressed a number of issues regarding pre-existing conditions.

As HealthMyths has pointed out....the number Sebelius and Co. are spouting are pure bunk.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes, that is the point. Requiring everyone to get into the system spreads the risk more uniformly.

How do the young and health have a responsibility to "share the risk" presented by the old a sick, witht hat responsibility being so acute that the state -must- enforce it?

If we want to cut back on overall medical care costs, yes

I see.
Show that cutting back on health care costs is such pressing a matter that the federal government must force people to pay for goods and services they do not receive.

Actually, they are being forced by the state to pay for things they do not receive; no amount of spin will change this.

No spin required.

And yet, that's excacly what you;re trying to do - spin away the fact that the state forces people to pay for goods and services they do not receive.

So... why do you support the state screwing the young and the healthy?

The young and healthy are screwing themselves over time.

You did not answer my question.
Why do you support the state screwing the young and the healthy, in forcing them to pay for goods and services they do not receive.

You want the state to diminish the financial freedom from some so that others may directly benefit. How does that differ from state-enforced involutary servitude?

 

[dnsmith35]

Why would we give people the choice of tyranny or oppression?

I agree, why should we? But as a modern society we owe our people medical care and I believe it should be done at the least cost to tax payers as possible. Thus instead of Obama care and all the money that will take it will be less expensive to simply cover everyone not currently covered with Medicaid and bill their employer for the premiums if they are profitable. No tyranny! No oppression! It eliminates the tyranny and oppression of not being able to afford insurance.

Billing the employer for services he didnt ask for isn't tyranny? Howso?

Oh, so you are one of those people who believe taxes are tyranny.

We do not owe our people (whoever that is) anything other than a stable system of laws and recourse to the courts. Medicaid is grossly inefficient and I wouldn't subject anyone to that.

A modern society owes all its members medical care and basic services. It is part of a reasonable infrastructure.

 

[The Rabbi]

I agree, why should we? But as a modern society we owe our people medical care and I believe it should be done at the least cost to tax payers as possible. Thus instead of Obama care and all the money that will take it will be less expensive to simply cover everyone not currently covered with Medicaid and bill their employer for the premiums if they are profitable. No tyranny! No oppression! It eliminates the tyranny and oppression of not being able to afford insurance.

Billing the employer for services he didnt ask for isn't tyranny? Howso?

Oh, so you are one of those people who believe taxes are tyranny.

We do not owe our people (whoever that is) anything other than a stable system of laws and recourse to the courts. Medicaid is grossly inefficient and I wouldn't subject anyone to that.

A modern society owes all its members medical care and basic services. It is part of a reasonable infrastructure.

WHat you're describing isn't a tax.
Where do you get this shit about "a modern society owes blah blah"? It's garbage. Pure assertion. I could posit a modern society owes free contraceptives and abortions. Or three meals a day. Or free vacations every year.

 

[Politico]

It doesn't owe anyone anything.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A modern society owes all its members medical care and basic services...
It is part of a reasonable infrastructure....
But as a modern society we owe our people medical care...

We do? It is? According to what?
Why are the the young and healthy financially responsible for the health care costs of the old and sick?

 

[dnsmith35]

Which healthcare programs in the US have the highest patient satisfaction? The government ones.

VA Posts Annual Medical Quality Report Quality of Care Better than Private-Sector Health Plans

Medicare Beats Private Plans for Patient Satisfaction: Survey

So, yes, I do want the government to "take over healthcare" and give us our Public Option if we can't have single payer. Just put Medicare on the exchanges for ANYONE to purchase...problem solved.

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

Just a note for your own understanding. The federal government does not oversee medicare. They contract it out to civilian companies. All the government does is pay the bill. People see the medical providers they wish. Incompetence is a human issue, not a government issue. (I am not saying MC is good or bad, just what it is)

 

[Listening]

Which healthcare programs in the US have the highest patient satisfaction? The government ones.

VA Posts Annual Medical Quality Report Quality of Care Better than Private-Sector Health Plans

Medicare Beats Private Plans for Patient Satisfaction: Survey

So, yes, I do want the government to "take over healthcare" and give us our Public Option if we can't have single payer. Just put Medicare on the exchanges for ANYONE to purchase...problem solved.

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

Just a note for your own understanding. The federal government does not oversee medicare. They contract it out to civilian companies. All the government does is pay the bill. People see the medical providers they wish. Incompetence is a human issue, not a government issue. (I am not saying MC is good or bad, just what it is)

There isn't anything that the government does where they just "pay the bills". There are always all kinds of strings attached.

Check out medicare. They don't even pay enough to incent doctors to take on new patients. Now, that's health care for you.

 

[dnsmith35]

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

Just a note for your own understanding. The federal government does not oversee medicare. They contract it out to civilian companies. All the government does is pay the bill. People see the medical providers they wish. Incompetence is a human issue, not a government issue. (I am not saying MC is good or bad, just what it is)

There isn't anything that the government does where they just "pay the bills". There are always all kinds of strings attached.

Check out medicare. They don't even pay enough to incent doctors to take on new patients. Now, that's health care for you.

I am 78 years old and my primary coverage is Medicare, with a supplement to cover the co-pay. I have never had a medical provider turn down providing services to me. If there are medical providers who won't accept Medicare, shame on them.

Of course our medical providers in my area aren't so greedy as those in some other areas.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Since I have been covered by Medicare Advantage ( 7 years, now) I have never had to wait more than 5 days to see my doc., and my out of pocket dollars are less than when I was employed with group health insurance. I have never had an authorization request refused, nor have I ever been told that a doc I wanted to see did not take Medicare patients. In short, it is the best insurance I have ever had.

 

[The Rabbi]

Anecdote=/Evidence

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just a note for your own understanding. The federal government does not oversee medicare. They contract it out to civilian companies. All the government does is pay the bill. People see the medical providers they wish. Incompetence is a human issue, not a government issue. (I am not saying MC is good or bad, just what it is)

There isn't anything that the government does where they just "pay the bills". There are always all kinds of strings attached.

Check out medicare. They don't even pay enough to incent doctors to take on new patients. Now, that's health care for you.

I am 78 years old and my primary coverage is Medicare, with a supplement to cover the co-pay. I have never had a medical provider turn down providing services to me. If there are medical providers who won't accept Medicare, shame on them.

Of course our medical providers in my area aren't so greedy as those in some other areas.

Ah... so you don't just want the federal government to force the young and healthy to subsidize the old and sick in general, you want them to be forced to subsidize YOU, personally.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A modern society owes all its members medical care and basic services...
It is part of a reasonable infrastructure....
But as a modern society we owe our people medical care...

We do? It is? According to what?
Why are the the young and healthy financially responsible for the health care costs of the old and sick?

No response... no surprise.

 

[Listening]

Just a note for your own understanding. The federal government does not oversee medicare. They contract it out to civilian companies. All the government does is pay the bill. People see the medical providers they wish. Incompetence is a human issue, not a government issue. (I am not saying MC is good or bad, just what it is)

There isn't anything that the government does where they just "pay the bills". There are always all kinds of strings attached.

Check out medicare. They don't even pay enough to incent doctors to take on new patients. Now, that's health care for you.

I am 78 years old and my primary coverage is Medicare, with a supplement to cover the co-pay. I have never had a medical provider turn down providing services to me. If there are medical providers who won't accept Medicare, shame on them.

Of course our medical providers in my area aren't so greedy as those in some other areas.

Is this supposed to mean something ?

Many can't make any money on Medicare....and that makes them greedy ?

Check this one out....the Mayo in Glenndale, AZ....

Mayo Clinic in Arizona to Stop Treating Some Medicare Patients - Bloomberg

The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little.

More than 3,000 patients eligible for Medicare, the government’s largest health-insurance program, will be forced to pay cash if they want to continue seeing their doctors at a Mayo family clinic in Glendale, northwest of Phoenix, said Michael Yardley, a Mayo spokesman. The decision, which Yardley called a two-year pilot project, won’t affect other Mayo facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota.

*****************

Here is the greed:

The Mayo organization had 3,700 staff physicians and scientists and treated 526,000 patients in 2008. It lost $840 million last year on Medicare, the government’s health program for the disabled and those 65 and older, Mayo spokeswoman Lynn Closway said.

SHAME ON THEM.

 

[Bfgrn]

The 'left' wanted single payer are at least a public option. But America is infested with fear filled right wing ideologues who worship what they falsely believe is a free market, when in fact it is a 'FEE" market.

The individual mandate was created by the right wing Heritage Foundation to address the "free rider' problem.

Conservatives have ZERO solutions, just scorn for what they once praised....

The Left's solution to the problem of gov't screwing up the system is more gov't. Always. Explain how a gov't that couldn't get a website to run correctly is going to manage everyone health care. Yeah, they wont.

More blather about how conservatives invented the mandate. that is total bullshit and it gets debunked on here about once a day.
And more bullshit about how conservatives (or maybe its Republicans--to you they're all the same) don't have any solutions. Another meme debunked about twice a day.
So other than repeating falsehoods, do you have anything to say before admitting your ass has been handed to you again?

You have debunked NOTHING....

1994

Personal Freedom, Responsibility, And Mandates
by Robert E. Moffit

The national debate on universal health coverage is the latest incarnation of an ancient, enduring question of political philosophy: reconciling personal liberty and the authority of the State. It is the central problem of American political culture and is at the heart of nearly every major constitutional conflict in our history.

Americans-heirs of a classical liberal tradition, grounded in the political philosophy of John Locke and the spirit of Thomas Jefferson, in which personal freedom is paramount - harbor a deep distrust of governmental authority. We do not automatically assume that the individual is or should be subordinate to society, whether the issue is literary censorship or economic regulation.1 Therefore, any political limitation on personal freedom, regardless of prevailing wisdom, prejudices, or majority interests, must be based on a compelling argument.2

The Taxpayer Mandate
Policy analysts at The Heritage Foundation have wrestled incessantly with this problem, while developing a “consumer choice” plan for comprehensive health system reform, now embodied in a major legislative proposal.3 Only after extensive analysis of the peculiar distortions of the health insurance market did Heritage scholars reluctantly agree to an individual mandate.