Why on Earth should Insurance companies have to cover pre-existing conditions?

[thereisnospoon]

That's why we need single-payer. Check out the Canadian system. It's a good example.

A good example of rationed care. A good example of taxing the crap out of anything that isn't nailed to the floor to pay for bureaucracy?
Here's an example of your "good example"...
I have friends who live in the Toronto suburbs. One them hurt his knee playing in a hockey game. He went to his primary care MD who examined his knee, prescribed some pain killers and scheduled an MRI....EIGHT WEEKS LATER..Oh, the visit to the doctor was "free".
Now, about 10 years ago I was getting migraine headaches. I went to see my primary care doctor. He scheduled an MRI for me. Three days later I got a call from the Hospital giving me the all clear. Three days...Our insurance costs about $450 per month. Yes, we have a deductible. Who doesn't. The most expensive type of coverage is "first dollar".
Is the present system perfect? Far from it. Is a government run healthcare system a better idea? Hell no.
We have only to look to Western Europe. All of those nations struggling to keep afloat are doing so because of their social safety nets.
Do we eliminate these things? No. What is needed is to purge the rolls so that those who are gaming and defrauding the system are kicked to the curb. It is only then these systems can remain sustainable.

 

[thereisnospoon]

That's why we need single-payer. Check out the Canadian system. It's a good example.

YOU need. YOU Pay for it. The last thing this country needs is a government operated system.
Name one other thing our federal government does on time and within budget...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Single payer system offering a basic level of care regardless of income or health condition. Upgrade to a health insurance plan if you can afford it.

Be willing to accept the possibility it may come down to paying for it in taxes to the government rather than in premiums to insurance companies.

Some anti-government types will be hatin' on this idea.

Fuck 'em, I say.

We are already over taxed.
Just where do you think the money is going to come from to pay for this?
The SCOTUS ruled Obamacare is not commerce. It is a TAX.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You pay for insurance
And pay for insurance
Then when you need it, they drop you

Insurance companies set prices based on risk. The possibility of someone having an illness are already factored into that cost

Why should insurance companies be unjustly enriched?

You claim to be educated. Try digging a little deeper.

 

[Claudette]

No.

They should simply have to provide proof of being insured prior to buying a new policy.

The pre existing condition clause was actually a product of the greed of the consumer. Many would not buy health insurance unless they found they needed it. Such is why dental has the "6 month" clause...you cant use it for 6 months after you get a policy for emergencies such as root canal. Same as hurricane insurance. It does not go into affect for 30 days.

So it is simple....if you have insurance and want to change to another policy, the pre existing clause does not come into play.

Surely you don't think facts will get in the way of the lefty loons take on pre-existing conditions do you??

Do you have anything of significance you'd like to add? Some people aren't covered for a variety of reasons such as job loss or divorce. Their pre-existing condition shouldn't be covered when they find a new job or insurance?

Not my problem dude. The HC of someone else is their problem. Not mine or yours, or the taxpayers of America.

If they lost HC insurance then they can buy it just like other do. Cobra. Ever hear of it?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Um, no Canada is NOT moving toward the clusterfuck that is our health care system. My Canadian friends are HORRIFIED at our system. BTW, you can buy private insurance in England as well as France and the Scandinavian countries. In fact, I believe you can buy it in any country. But we know you think only the wealthy should be able to afford to go to the doctor.

Canadians are moving away from socialized medicine and toward private insurance because of the clusterfuck failure of their socialized medicine.....while our idiot Dimwits here in the US are moving us TOWARD that already-proven Canadian (&British) clusterfuck failure of socialized medicine.

Nice try, but the Canadian and British systems aren't equivalent. The fact that you mention them together proves nothing but your ignorance.

that's true.....the clusterfuck Brit system is even worse than the clusterfuck Canuck system....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Canadian system works pretty well. They're more satisfied with it than Americans have been under our system. Still to be determined if we'll like ACA. The major problem with the situation, as I see it, is that we've still got insurance companies involved. When you have a situation where everybody's going to eventually need benefits, it's going to be rife with corruption when the profit motive's on the line.

If you advocate we in the United States completely abandon the free market model that has worked for over 200 years in favor of a socialist health care system, you need to hear about Shona Holmes experience with the government health care system in Canada.
Holmes (see video below) was diagnosed with brain cancer, with her vision deteriorating rapidly, but was placed on the treatment waiting lists common to health care in socialist countries. While the average wait time for many procedures can run 18 months or more, Holmes actually made out pretty good by only having to wait 6 months for surgery for her brain tumor.
Rather than wait like a good little subject, she came to the States and got the health care she needed within three weeks. You know, the United States health care system liberals claim is so broken it must be replaced with a government system…you know, kinda like the one in Canada.
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/where-can-americans-go-for-treatment-under-govt-health-care/

The doctors would still be in a free market situation. Just the insurance companies would be out of the health business. What you've presented us with a bit of anecdotal evidence that runs counter to the experience of most Canadians. Tell me, what happens to Americans that can't afford insurance and don't have government health benefits? Why no stories about that?

No, they would not. Obamacare regulates reimbursements. It also taxes the medical equipment industry. In effect, the federal government is mandating what medical professionals can charge for their services while ignoring the COST of said services.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The doctors would still be in a free market situation. Just the insurance companies would be out of the health business. What you've presented us with a bit of anecdotal evidence that runs counter to the experience of most Canadians. Tell me, what happens to Americans that can't afford insurance and don't have government health benefits? Why no stories about that?

Shouldn't that be the persons responsibility? I mean you can get a fulltime job.. Granted, I know Cobra is EXPENSIVE. I quit my job a few years back, had to get Cobra and it damn near broke me. But that goes along with I said about 3M. What else can you do besides suffer?

Why should it have to break you? It's something we all need eventually. Like an old M.D. boss of mine said once "there are no wins in medicine, we're just trying to get into overtime". That's why I laugh when people complain about "death panels". That's all the insurance companies are and they make you pay through the nose for the "privilege" of their service.

And the federal government won't?
With Obamacare my health insurance cost will go from the current $5000 per year to over $15,000 per year. And that is the Bronze level. Basic care. Which is nothing. So I will go from having insurance that covers us fully, to coverage that is three times the cost and covers next to nothing.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Some people seem to have a very strange view of what insurance companies do. They point to the problem of people who have a pre-existing condition, trying to sign up for new insurance, only to find the insurance companies won't pay for the the treatment for that pre-existing condition.

Of course they won't. That's not what insurance companies do. Whoever said they did?

Insurance is a gambling game where you bet on what will happen in the future. You "bet" that you will get sick or injured, and the company "bets" that you won't. If you get sick or injured, the company pays you the stipulated amount (paying for a portion of your medical treatment etc.), and if you don't, you pay them (premiums). The purpose is to shield you from the "shock" of suddenly and unexpectedly getting hit with huge medical bills... which is why you agreed to the contract.

A pre-existing condition cannot be insured against. It's like betting on the outcome of a horse race that's already been run - there is no "chance" involved, and no "unexpectedness" to the outcome (any more). Or like trying to get car insurance after wrecking your car.

Insurance companies are in the business of selling security - the assurance that you won't be suddenly bankrupted by huge medical bills, rehab bills etc. in the future. They do it by insuring huge numbers of people and getting them to each pay relatively small amounts (their premiums) each. They and their clients all know that most of them will never incur the huge medical bills they are worried about. But since no one knows which few people WILL incur them, they are all happy to pay the premiums, for the knowledge they won't have to pay the huge amounts if they turn out to be the unlucky ones.

Insurance companies sell safety from FUTURE possible disasters. And that's all they sell. Asking them to cover pre-existing conditions, is like asking a submarine designer to design a supersonic jet - it's got nothing to do with his business or his area of expertise, and he never volunteered to design jets in the first place, for good reason.

If you want to set up some kind of universal pool to pay for pre-existing conditions, fine, go ahead. But why drag insurance companies into it? It's got nothing to do with their areas of expertise, and they never volunteered to do it in the first place - for good reason.

Here's a better question, why do we need insurance companies at all?

Good point. There should be no profit motive in the providing of insurance. All the profit motive does is encourage the companies to find every way possible to collect as much as they can in premiums and pay out as little as possible in benefits.

That's the goal of Obamacare. As profits dry up, insurance companies will drop their insureds and stop writing coverage. The end result is single payer. A disaster.
Only our single payer will NOT be "free". There will be new government mandates for behavior because without them, the single payer system would quickly go broke.
We will see our Constitutionally guaranteed rights eliminated for "the common good".

 

[ScreamingEagle]

No.

They should simply have to provide proof of being insured prior to buying a new policy.

The pre existing condition clause was actually a product of the greed of the consumer. Many would not buy health insurance unless they found they needed it. Such is why dental has the "6 month" clause...you cant use it for 6 months after you get a policy for emergencies such as root canal. Same as hurricane insurance. It does not go into affect for 30 days.

So it is simple....if you have insurance and want to change to another policy, the pre existing clause does not come into play.

Surely you don't think facts will get in the way of the lefty loons take on pre-existing conditions do you??

Do you have anything of significance you'd like to add? Some people aren't covered for a variety of reasons such as job loss or divorce. Their pre-existing condition shouldn't be covered when they find a new job or insurance?

which is exactly why healthcare should not be attached to your job.....or your spouse.....or the government.....or the insurance companies (except for major medical)......all of these middlemen just get in the way and increase costs...

each adult should buy individual lifelong reasonable cost healthcare coverage for himself or herself and be covered anywhere he or she lives or works or doesn't work.....starting with pre-tax healthcare accounts would be a great start.....plus buying a low-cost major medical policy to cover a major accident or sickness to prevent bankruptcy....buying off the free market would help to lower the costs of healthcare dramatically....

 

[thereisnospoon]

that the government cannot run things is a myth.

usps

Works great. Reliable. Affordable. Employs tens of thousands of people.

Doesn't use a dime of taxpayer money.

Next.

Yep...Typical government hack answer. "Yes we're swimming in billions of debt but our system works great".

 

[thereisnospoon]

Single payer system offering a basic level of care regardless of income or health condition. Upgrade to a health insurance plan if you can afford it.

Be willing to accept the possibility it may come down to paying for it in taxes to the government rather than in premiums to insurance companies.

Some anti-government types will be hatin' on this idea.

Fuck 'em, I say.

I support government funding a tax exempt, non-profit organization to provide health care.

Utter stupidity.....Government cannot and does not fund anything. We the taxpayers fund the government.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why on Earth should Insurance companies have to cover pre-existing conditions?

They shouldn’t.

Which is why a single payer ‘Medicare for all’ health maintenance program should be implemented.

With every American afforded healthcare coverage under the single payer system – including pre-existing conditions – health insurance companies can go back to insuring health, selling supplemental policies to those who want and can afford them.

Single payer means just that. There are no available supplements. It's a captive marketplace.
Now, if it is an "opt out" system where an individual can go to the private market to purchase insurance and NOT have to contribute to the government plan, I am interested in looking at that.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Some people seem to have a very strange view of what insurance companies do. They point to the problem of people who have a pre-existing condition, trying to sign up for new insurance, only to find the insurance companies won't pay for the the treatment for that pre-existing condition.

Of course they won't. That's not what insurance companies do. Whoever said they did?

Insurance is a gambling game where you bet on what will happen in the future. You "bet" that you will get sick or injured, and the company "bets" that you won't. If you get sick or injured, the company pays you the stipulated amount (paying for a portion of your medical treatment etc.), and if you don't, you pay them (premiums). The purpose is to shield you from the "shock" of suddenly and unexpectedly getting hit with huge medical bills... which is why you agreed to the contract.

A pre-existing condition cannot be insured against. It's like betting on the outcome of a horse race that's already been run - there is no "chance" involved, and no "unexpectedness" to the outcome (any more). Or like trying to get car insurance after wrecking your car.

Insurance companies are in the business of selling security - the assurance that you won't be suddenly bankrupted by huge medical bills, rehab bills etc. in the future. They do it by insuring huge numbers of people and getting them to each pay relatively small amounts (their premiums) each. They and their clients all know that most of them will never incur the huge medical bills they are worried about. But since no one knows which few people WILL incur them, they are all happy to pay the premiums, for the knowledge they won't have to pay the huge amounts if they turn out to be the unlucky ones.

Insurance companies sell safety from FUTURE possible disasters. And that's all they sell. Asking them to cover pre-existing conditions, is like asking a submarine designer to design a supersonic jet - it's got nothing to do with his business or his area of expertise, and he never volunteered to design jets in the first place, for good reason.

If you want to set up some kind of universal pool to pay for pre-existing conditions, fine, go ahead. But why drag insurance companies into it? It's got nothing to do with their areas of expertise, and they never volunteered to do it in the first place - for good reason.

Why don't you educate us as to what insurance companies mean by, "Pre-existing condition". Hint, it's NOT the dictionary definition. This outta be hilarious.

If you are discovered to have heart disease and then are denied coverage for your heart disease, you then have an example of an insurer not covering a preexisting condition.
Or if a person goes skiing and breaks their ankle, the person cannot go buy insurance and expect the insurance company to pay for the repair of the broken bone.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Why on Earth should Insurance companies have to cover pre-existing conditions?

They shouldn’t.

Which is why a single payer ‘Medicare for all’ health maintenance program should be implemented.

With every American afforded healthcare coverage under the single payer system – including pre-existing conditions – health insurance companies can go back to insuring health, selling supplemental policies to those who want and can afford them.

Single payer means just that. There are no available supplements. It's a captive marketplace.
Now, if it is an "opt out" system where an individual can go to the private market to purchase insurance and NOT have to contribute to the government plan, I am interested in looking at that.

captive single payer systems never work because they wind up rationing healthcare....

which is why they wind up with "two-tier" health systems.....the clusterfuck government system and the private care system...

in Britain two thirds of those who can afford private care will skip the NHS and buy private care....

Britain?s NHS: No Fun and Games - John Fund - National Review Online

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why don't you educate us as to what insurance companies mean by, "Pre-existing condition". Hint, it's NOT the dictionary definition. This outta be hilarious.

VERY VERY SIMPLE...
Two illustrations or examples for you!!

A) YOU are a smoker. I am not a smoker!
You lie on your application and say you are not a smoker!
I don't like because I'm not a smoker!
You get cancer as most smokers do. You file a claim for cancer treatment.
Insurance company checks with doctors and find YOU are a smoker!
They look on application and you lied when you said you were not!
This is called a "Pre-existing condition" dumb shit!
If you had been HONEST and said you were a smoker, they would have charged you more but still covered you dummy!
NOW you are SOL! EXCEPT now under Obama care.
They can't find out if you smoke or I don't smoke.
So guess what dummy... insurance company doesn't know if you or I smoke anymore so they raise the rates for both of us to smoker status!

NOW an even simpler example!!!
YOU fill out the application and when the question of mental health you say "fine".
I say fine on my application.
But you go into a voting booth pee on the floor are arrested and put into a crazy tank and then you file for insurance claim for the bruise on you head!
Company won't pay because "pre-existing condition" you are CRAZY!!!

Do you know understand "pre-existing condition"??? I don't think you do cause YOU ARE CRAZY!!!

You are either new or, stu....well, you know.

Pre-existing condition could be anything. If you had a cold a year ago, or the flu, or if you have hay fever. You entire family could be dropped. Suppose your son has an allergy and you get cancer. After taking your money, they could drop the entire family because your son had an allergy. Say your wife had a mammogram even though she wasn't diagnosed with anything. The list is endless.

All of this has been linked to ad nauseum over the past 5 years. Only someone new to message boards or someone determined to stay ignorant as possible could not know this. This was typical behavior by insurance companies that Obama put a stop to. Only ignorant turds cry about being protected.

And when I have to slap and spank people left and right to drive away the ignorance, those like "Harry" scream that no one likes me.

My philosophy is , "So what?". Who wants the admiration of the ignorant.

And you walked right into it, head up, so confident in your ignorance and stupidity.

And look at that. You have TNHarley THANKING for being, well, you know. Guess you have a "fan".

Linked? Where. How about you refresh our memories. Because I think you're full of shit.

 

[healthmyths]

Somehow cons can rationalize paying those salaries, as well as their high premiums, all in the name of free enterprise.

Not just in health care. 50 or 60 years ago, a CEO's pay averaged about 30 or 40 times the salary of the average worker. They paid more taxes. More people were employed.

Now they make 300 to 400 times the average worker or more. Republicans think if we can just pay them more and redistribute more wealth to them, they will "create jobs" because they are the "job creators". We just haven't moved quite enough money into their pockets. Oh, but it will happen. Just keep shoveling it their way.

A) He received $1.1 million in salary, $2.75 million in incentive pay, an additional
$2.3 million in pension value and other compensation of $299,838. a total of $6.1 million SALARY incentive and other compensations!
Being obviously IGNORANT as you read the above "Unexercised Options.. as a salary... it is NOT he has to pay out of his pocket to buy
that stock at a discount THAT's if he EXERCISES his options!

Idiot IT IS NOT paid out of operating expenses you dummy!!!!
His total salary deducted and paid out of operating expense is $ 6 million!

So according to this Personal income in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia the Median personal income for the population age 25 or older in 2005
is $40,000.. So this statement compared to Aetna "Now they make 300 to 400 times the average worker or more. " IS a gross exaggeration!
Divide $6 million by $40,000 and it is 150 times!

 

[AceRothstein]

Surely you don't think facts will get in the way of the lefty loons take on pre-existing conditions do you??

Do you have anything of significance you'd like to add? Some people aren't covered for a variety of reasons such as job loss or divorce. Their pre-existing condition shouldn't be covered when they find a new job or insurance?

Not my problem dude. The HC of someone else is their problem. Not mine or yours, or the taxpayers of America.

If they lost HC insurance then they can buy it just like other do. Cobra. Ever hear of it?

Sure, Cobra isn't an option for most people though.

I truly hope those that don't give a fuck about the health of others have to experience massive healthcare costs at some point in their lives.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's why we need single-payer. Check out the Canadian system. It's a good example.

Of why we shouldn't have single payer? Because, the last time I checked, Canada was moving allowing private insurance, not that you are going to let facts influence your delusional thinking.

Ohh other system like in France "allow" private health insurance as well.

Unless you are trying to argue that private insurance supplementing single payer is the best system in the entire universe I have no idea what the fuck you are trying to say here.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's why we need single-payer. Check out the Canadian system. It's a good example.

There is no real "Canadian System". Health care in Canada varies from province to province.

Really? They don't have a centrally planned one size fits all system? That is so going to disappoint the Obamacare idiots.