MeBelle
MeBelle 4 Prez 2024
- Jul 16, 2011
- 21,086
- 10,782
- 1,245
"Often" is a codeword used to say "we can't make a statistical statement and we can't even say 'most' so we'll just say that it's more than one." That said, one of the "most basic standards" that plans did not cover was no-cost birth control. So if the non-compliant plan charged $50 for a pap smear and $10 per month for Previfem, it was lumped into this category.
So here's a direct statistical reference:
About 20 of my current clients are single men that have had vasectomies. They have no need for a bronze level plan when it comes to birth control, and all of them had plans that were compliant in all other areas. The other issue is that this study did not delineate those with catastrophic policies, those with high deductibles but generous benefits beyond $5000. For a professional couple that has a decent emergency fund, this was a great option for health insurance. Under normal circumstances they got cash payment discounts because their deductibles were high and the insurance only kicked in for major medical issues. The premiums were low, they weren't locked into any small networks for routine care, and their overall value was actually greater than similar situations with people on employer plans that had a myriad matrix of co-payments.
one of the thing that OBAMA did when he was talking to the insurance companies on pricing, it was about birth control and costing the policy holder nothing... the Insurance companies came up with the Idea that they would rather charge the policy holders nothing for birth control... their reasoning was it a hell of a lot cheaper to give out birth control pill then it was to Pay for a pregnancy to full term ... Obama agreeded with them... according to the insurance companies, birth control pill, they aren't charging to the policy holder or pricing it in some other part of the policy ... that's what the insurance companies are saying ... so nice try ... try again
Do you have any idea how incredibly stupid you sound when you say shit like this? The only possible way birth control will end up being less expensive in the long run is if no one ever has a baby again. Since that is not going to happen the actual cost is the total of the borth control and the pregnancy, which is, obviously, higher than the cost of the pregnancy alone. Sebelius, being a raving lunatic, is operating under the delusion that the only reason women get pregnant is that they can't afford birth control, despite the fact that it is available at no cost to them almost everywhere in this country, so she decided to make access to birth control the central point of her new package of regulations for insurance. Even I don't blame Obama for that as he was caught flat footed when the announcement was made.