Why is Obamacare so important?

[dblack]

Lots of ways. Expand the welfare state, charity, etc... the usual social welfare stuff. Why should insurance companies do that?

It creates incentives for insurance companies to only offer insurance to the very healthiest of us, which creates a two tier system. One part of the country is healthy and has private insurance and the other part is dumped onto the welfare state.

Insurance isn't social welfare. It's not a means of providing poor people with health care.

 

[colfax_m]

Insurance isn't social welfare. It's not a means of providing poor people with health care.

Who's talking about poor people? The ACA attempted to broaden Medicaid to poor people, which previously was a mismash of different state requirements, some states even preventing any adult who was not disabled to get state funded insurance regardless of their poverty.

The preexisting mandates are to get people who have means, who have an income that is not poverty level, to be able to even afford health insurance despite the fact that they may have preexisting conditions.

 

[dblack]

Insurance isn't social welfare. It's not a means of providing poor people with health care.

Who's talking about poor people?

People who can't afford the health care they need are poor. Do you disagree?

The preexisting mandates are to get people who have means, who have an income that is not poverty level, to be able to even afford health insurance despite the fact that they may have preexisting conditions.

Health insurance isn't for people who are already sick. People who are sick need health care, not health insurance. If they can't afford what they need, they are poor.

There's just a lot of delusional thinking regarding health insurance, and it's not helping us. Insurance is a hedge against unforeseen risk. It's not a means of financing regular expenses. You wouldn't buy insurance to pay for oil changes, or tire replacement, or tuneups for your car (unless you were an idiot). It would only make those things more expensive. You buy insurance for the unlikely emergencies that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Insurance is a financial tool - a hedge against risk for people who have money and want to protect their savings from being depleted by unexpected, catastrophic loss. If you don't have a savings account, you don't need health insurance. You need money for health care.

 

[colfax_m]

People who can't afford the health care they need are poor. Do you disagree?

Absolutely do not agree. Health care can be unaffordable for solidly middle class people depending on circumstances.

Health insurance isn't for people who are already sick. People who are sick need health care, not health insurance. If they can't afford what they need, they are poor.

There's just a lot of delusional thinking regarding health insurance, and it's not helping us. Insurance is a hedge against unforeseen risk. It's not a means of financing regular expenses. You wouldn't buy insurance to pay for oil changes, or tire replacement, or tuneups for your car (unless you were an idiot). It would only make those things more expensive. You buy insurance for the unlikely emergencies that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Insurance is a financial tool - a hedge against risk for people who have money and want to protect their savings from being depleted by unexpected, catastrophic loss. If you don't have a savings account, you don't need health insurance. You need money for health care.

The car metaphor just doesn't work. Insurance covers accidents which have nothing to do with oil changes. Whereas with health insurance, those tune ups are essential to preventing future catastrophe. The idea that health insurance should only cover unforseen risk ignores the fundamental realities of health. Health insurance spreads the cost of health care over a large number of people, which is why employer based coverage has been the most common way for people to get insurance, since that was the most convenient group to be a part of.

 

[dblack]

People who can't afford the health care they need are poor. Do you disagree?

Absolutely do not agree. Health care can be unaffordable for solidly middle class people depending on circumstances.

Sorry, but if you've spent all your money on health care, and have none left, you are poor. Not sure how you get around that one.

Health insurance isn't for people who are already sick. People who are sick need health care, not health insurance. If they can't afford what they need, they are poor.

There's just a lot of delusional thinking regarding health insurance, and it's not helping us. Insurance is a hedge against unforeseen risk. It's not a means of financing regular expenses. You wouldn't buy insurance to pay for oil changes, or tire replacement, or tuneups for your car (unless you were an idiot). It would only make those things more expensive. You buy insurance for the unlikely emergencies that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Insurance is a financial tool - a hedge against risk for people who have money and want to protect their savings from being depleted by unexpected, catastrophic loss. If you don't have a savings account, you don't need health insurance. You need money for health care.

The car metaphor just doesn't work. Insurance covers accidents which have nothing to do with oil changes. Whereas with health insurance, those tune ups are essential to preventing future catastrophe. The idea that health insurance should only cover unforseen risk ignores the fundamental realities of health. Health insurance spreads the cost of health care over a large number of people, which is why employer based coverage has been the most common way for people to get insurance, since that was the most convenient group to be a part of.

The idea that insurance should be used to finance regular expenses is dumb. It inflates prices and funnels all our ordinary expenses through insurance companies, who take their cut. Financially, it makes much more sense to pay for as much health care as possible out-of-pocket, and maintain insurance only for expenses that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Again, we're trying to pretend insurance is something its not. It doesn't make health care more affordable. It makes it more expensive. It's not a club you join to get cheaper health care, but unfortunately that's how most people think of it.

 

[colfax_m]

The idea that insurance should be used to finance regular expenses is dumb. It inflates prices and funnels all our ordinary expenses through insurance companies, who take their cut. Financially, it makes much more sense to pay for as much health care as possible out-of-pocket, and maintain insurance only for expenses that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Does that make more sense financially? Not when routine care prevents the massive expenses later on. It makes no sense for insurance to not cover blood pressure management but pay for the heart bypass surgery that would have been prevented by such care.

 

[Flash]

How will preexisting protections be protected without the ACA?

Preexisting condition requirement is nothing more than another form of welfare and is despicable.

Why should I as an insurance pool participant be required to pay for somebody that never paid into the pool? That is a tax on me and that is not right.

It wrong for it to be government policy and it is wrong for Trump and the filthy Democrats to support it.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

What is it about this horrific program that the democrooks are so adamant about keeping in place, in spite of the incredible election loss they suffered in 2010 after barely getting it across the finish line?

It's a bullshit law. It did the exact opposite of every promise the meat puppet faggot made. The fuckin WEBSITE ALONE cost $1.7B and was a complete goatfuck. A handful of college dipshits created Face(ASS)Book for next to nothing and became billionaires. The entire law should have been flushed down a toilet but for some unknown reason we're still stuck trying to get rid of it. Even the republicrats act as if it needs to be "replaced".

It's a turd, you don't polish turds and pretend you made something better out of it. The reason HC costs so much is BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT, not because they needed to regulate the shit out of it more.

I hope that after ACB gets to fumigate the smell of sulphur and old diapers from RBG's old office she will put the final fork into this abysmal program and that the GOP led by Trump will get the fucking lawyers out of the medical industry.

.

I'd have responded if you hadn't gone the faggot route

I don't think there is a single post by this guy without some sort of weird preoccupation with homosexuality.

It's common for gay people like yourself to desire those not on your team secretly are.

It's common for idiots like yourself to be pre-oocupied with sexuality of others and making up total bullshit out of thin air.

I aint making anything up, not pre-occupied either. Are you saying you haven't come out?

100% you are making up bs.

I am in fact straight and it's really tough to see how someone in their right mind would be making up sexuality of total strangers on some online forum.

It's just that I've seen your posts, and you sport a gay avatar.

I play high level tennis and in my avatar is the greatest player of all time and multi-year athlete of the year among all the sports.

But to stupid, ignorant bumpkin like you it's a sign of homosexuality.

I'm afraid you've misread me. It doesn't bother me you're a high-level gay person playing tennis. What's troublesome is these are representative of the condition of your brain today. Like I mentioned, I've read some of your posts.

Not all gay people are PROG
Not all tennis players are PROG
All gay tennis players are PROG

 

[dblack]

The idea that insurance should be used to finance regular expenses is dumb. It inflates prices and funnels all our ordinary expenses through insurance companies, who take their cut. Financially, it makes much more sense to pay for as much health care as possible out-of-pocket, and maintain insurance only for expenses that would bankrupt you otherwise.

Does that make more sense financially? Not when routine care prevents the massive expenses later on. It makes no sense for insurance to not cover blood pressure management but pay for the heart bypass surgery that would have been prevented by such care.

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

 

[basquebromance]

it's the calm before the bloodbath in November: ACA VS. ACB!

 

[colfax_m]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

 

[dblack]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

 

[colfax_m]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

Cost sharing is what we call it when a person pays for their health care in addition to the insurance. Like copays, deductibles and the like. What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

 

[kaz]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

dblack: "I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance."

Yep. which is why people should only buy insurance for things they can't underwrite themselves. Like home and auto insurance. Never buy insurance for things like TVs and electronics and furniture you can afford to replace yourself. It doesn't pay.

dblack: "Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be."

Damn, that's true. I had a high deductible policy for my wife, me and two daughters under $400 a month with an HSA to pay medical bills tax free I was perfectly happy with. Under Obamacare the premiums rocketed until they cancelled it and Obamacare policies were over $1,000 a month since I ran my own businesses and didn't have a group policy but made too much for any subsidies.

Obamacare is a disaster

 

[kaz]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

Cost sharing is what we call it when a person pays for their health care in addition to the insurance. Like copays, deductibles and the like. What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

You know nothing about this. Do some research and get a basic education rather than just making yourself look stupid and uninformed

 

[dblack]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

What are you talking about? Paying for things out of pocket is better that financing them with insurance. It's makes far more financial sense to have high deductibles and low premiums.

What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

Medications, "wellness visits", massage therapy, etc, etc ... all shit I'd rather pay for out of pocket. But, thanks to ACA, it gets loaded on to what used to be inexpensive, high deductible plans. You still get the high deductible, but they plans are no longer inexpensive because they've been loaded down with regulated bloat.

A few weeks back I went to get a prescription filled. The cost was $40 for a tube of skin cream that will last, at most, two months. When I balked the price, the pharmacist smiled and said, "That's actually just your co-pay. The full cost is $389." - this is the kind of insanity create by using insurance for normal expenses. No person in their right might would pay $389 for a tube of skin cream. And no insurance company would pay for that if they weren't required to do so by horseshit regulation.

So, while catastrophic hospitalizations make sense for insurance coverage, paying for medications with insurance is crazy stuff indeed.

 

[colfax_m]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

What are you talking about? Paying for things out of pocket is better that financing them with insurance. It's makes far more financial sense to have high deductibles and low premiums.

What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

Medications, "wellness visits", massage therapy, etc, etc ... all shit I'd rather pay for out of pocket. But, thanks to ACA, it gets loaded onto what used to be inexpensive, high deductible plans. You still get the high deductible, but they plans are no longer inexpensive because they've been loaded down with regulate bloat.

A few weeks back I went to get a prescription filled. The cost was $40 for a tube of skin cream that will last, at most, two months. When I balked the price, the pharmacist smiled and said, "That's actually just your co-pay. The full cost is $389." - this is the kind of insanity create by using insurance for normal expenses. No person in their right might would pay $389 for a tube of skin cream. And no insurance company would pay for that if they weren't required to do so by horseshit regulation.

So, while catastrophic hospitalizations make sense for insurance coverage, paying for medications with insurance is crazy stuff indeed.

Massage therapy is not a mandated requirement. Wellness visits are screening for serious conditions, without which something small may go unnoticed that results in catastrophe down the road.

No insurance has to pay for the skin cream if it's below your deductible. My insurance doesn't cover prescriptions until I've shelled out thousands from my own pocket. That's not a product of government mandates, that's just the insurance you chose. Don't get mad at the government because of your choices.

 

[dblack]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

What are you talking about? Paying for things out of pocket is better that financing them with insurance. It's makes far more financial sense to have high deductibles and low premiums.

What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

Medications, "wellness visits", massage therapy, etc, etc ... all shit I'd rather pay for out of pocket. But, thanks to ACA, it gets loaded onto what used to be inexpensive, high deductible plans. You still get the high deductible, but they plans are no longer inexpensive because they've been loaded down with regulate bloat.

A few weeks back I went to get a prescription filled. The cost was $40 for a tube of skin cream that will last, at most, two months. When I balked the price, the pharmacist smiled and said, "That's actually just your co-pay. The full cost is $389." - this is the kind of insanity create by using insurance for normal expenses. No person in their right might would pay $389 for a tube of skin cream. And no insurance company would pay for that if they weren't required to do so by horseshit regulation.

So, while catastrophic hospitalizations make sense for insurance coverage, paying for medications with insurance is crazy stuff indeed.

Massage therapy is not a mandated requirement. Wellness visits are screening for serious conditions, without which something small may go unnoticed that results in catastrophe down the road.

I see the point went flying over your head. Neither are expensive and can be financed more effectively without insruance.

No insurance has to pay for the skin cream if it's below your deductible. My insurance doesn't cover prescriptions until I've shelled out thousands from my own pocket. That's not a product of government mandates, that's just the insurance you chose. Don't get mad at the government because of your choices.

Wrong. Prescription coverage is required in my state. And ACA mandates my employer to play the insurance scam. This is all a direct consequence of regulation. I'm sure the pharma company selling the $389 skin cream is on your side though.

 

[colfax_m]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

What are you talking about? Paying for things out of pocket is better that financing them with insurance. It's makes far more financial sense to have high deductibles and low premiums.

What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

Medications, "wellness visits", massage therapy, etc, etc ... all shit I'd rather pay for out of pocket. But, thanks to ACA, it gets loaded onto what used to be inexpensive, high deductible plans. You still get the high deductible, but they plans are no longer inexpensive because they've been loaded down with regulate bloat.

A few weeks back I went to get a prescription filled. The cost was $40 for a tube of skin cream that will last, at most, two months. When I balked the price, the pharmacist smiled and said, "That's actually just your co-pay. The full cost is $389." - this is the kind of insanity create by using insurance for normal expenses. No person in their right might would pay $389 for a tube of skin cream. And no insurance company would pay for that if they weren't required to do so by horseshit regulation.

So, while catastrophic hospitalizations make sense for insurance coverage, paying for medications with insurance is crazy stuff indeed.

Massage therapy is not a mandated requirement. Wellness visits are screening for serious conditions, without which something small may go unnoticed that results in catastrophe down the road.

I see the point went flying over your head. Neither are expensive and can be financed more effectively without insruance.

No insurance has to pay for the skin cream if it's below your deductible. My insurance doesn't cover prescriptions until I've shelled out thousands from my own pocket. That's not a product of government mandates, that's just the insurance you chose. Don't get mad at the government because of your choices.

Wrong. Prescription coverage is required in my state. And ACA mandates my employer to play the insurance scam. This is all a direct consequence of regulation. I'm sure the pharma company selling the $389 skin cream is on your side though.

Prescription coverage is required, but it is not required that they pay for anything until you reach your deductible, which can be up to $8k.

Under my insurance plan, I would have been on the hook for the entire cost.

Sure, preventative care isn't necessarily expensive, but guess what happens when people have to pay out of pocket for preventative care? They don't do it. Guess who is on the hook for the consequences of that bad decision? The insurance company. This is but one of many adverse incentives that we have to deal with.

 

[dblack]

It makes no sense to funnel money through insurance when you can pay for what you need out of pocket and avoid the overhead. Additionally, people paying for their own health care is the missing link in keeping prices down. The more we avoid insurance, the better.

It does for exactly the reason I posted. Preventative care is preventative. Would your insurance rather pay for $4 blood pressure pills or a quadruple bypass?

I'm talking about what makes sense for the consumer, not for the insurance company. For the consumer, paying for things out of pocket will always be cheaper than financing it with insurance.

Not that all cost sharing is wrong, and the trend towards high deductible plans has been going on for years.

Not sure what you mean about the cost sharing, but high-deductible plans are the way forward. Or were. Unfortunately, ACA loaded them up with requirements that make them far more expensive than the used to be.

No, it does make sense for the insurance company. Do you know what the price difference between a bypass surgery is versus antihypertensives?

What are you talking about? Paying for things out of pocket is better that financing them with insurance. It's makes far more financial sense to have high deductibles and low premiums.

What requirements did the ACA load them up with? Oh yeah, they have to pay for medications and hospitalizations. Crazy stuff, right?

Medications, "wellness visits", massage therapy, etc, etc ... all shit I'd rather pay for out of pocket. But, thanks to ACA, it gets loaded onto what used to be inexpensive, high deductible plans. You still get the high deductible, but they plans are no longer inexpensive because they've been loaded down with regulate bloat.

A few weeks back I went to get a prescription filled. The cost was $40 for a tube of skin cream that will last, at most, two months. When I balked the price, the pharmacist smiled and said, "That's actually just your co-pay. The full cost is $389." - this is the kind of insanity create by using insurance for normal expenses. No person in their right might would pay $389 for a tube of skin cream. And no insurance company would pay for that if they weren't required to do so by horseshit regulation.

So, while catastrophic hospitalizations make sense for insurance coverage, paying for medications with insurance is crazy stuff indeed.

Massage therapy is not a mandated requirement. Wellness visits are screening for serious conditions, without which something small may go unnoticed that results in catastrophe down the road.

I see the point went flying over your head. Neither are expensive and can be financed more effectively without insruance.

No insurance has to pay for the skin cream if it's below your deductible. My insurance doesn't cover prescriptions until I've shelled out thousands from my own pocket. That's not a product of government mandates, that's just the insurance you chose. Don't get mad at the government because of your choices.

Wrong. Prescription coverage is required in my state. And ACA mandates my employer to play the insurance scam. This is all a direct consequence of regulation. I'm sure the pharma company selling the $389 skin cream is on your side though.

Prescription coverage is required, but it is not required that they pay for anything until you reach your deductible, which can be up to $8k.

That has exactly no bearing on the discussion.

Sure, preventative care isn't necessarily expensive, but guess what happens when people have to pay out of pocket for preventative care? They don't do it.

Then they are stupid. We shouldn't make stupid laws just to protect stupid people from their own stupidity.

Guess who is on the hook for the consequences of that bad decision? The insurance company. This is but one of many adverse incentives that we have to deal with.

Yep. That's one of the risks of running an insurance company. But we shouldn't be passing laws to protect insurance company profits.