HeloDude Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 What even worse is that we in fact even NEED charity to pay for medical costs with the exception of a very few rare instances. Please explain further... (just want to make sure I'm following you correctly) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Please explain further... (just want to make sure I'm following you correctly) Healthcare should be cheap enough that anyone could afford a doctors visit, or even an ER visit for non life threatening injury. But we get the middlemen (insurance, government) that artifically inflate costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Healthcare should be cheap enough that anyone could afford a doctors visit, or even an ER visit for non life threatening injury. But we get the middlemen (insurance, government) that artifically inflate costs. Healthcare 'should' be as cheap (or as expensive) as the market dictates. Before Obamacare, nothing was forcing anybody to carry insurance and folks could just pay medical expenses out of pocket...in fact a lot of people did this very thing. I have a hard time believing that pure insurance was the problem as they just offer a service that someone either choses to buy or not buy. It was (and continues to be) the government regulation that was the problem. In a free society, there will always be inequality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Healthcare should be cheap enough that anyone could afford a doctors visit, or even an ER visit for non life threatening injury. But we get the middlemen (insurance, government) that artifically inflate costs. More government than insurance, I'll bet. When you have an organization that has no incentive to keep costs down, you create organizations willing to take advantage downstream by getting every dollar they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Healthcare 'should' be as cheap (or as expensive) as the market dictates. Before Obamacare, nothing was forcing anybody to carry insurance and folks could just pay medical expenses out of pocket...in fact a lot of people did this very thing. I have a hard time believing that pure insurance was the problem as they just offer a service that someone either choses to buy or not buy. It was (and continues to be) the government regulation that was the problem. In a free society, there will always be inequality. Insurance inflates that market - when they negotiate the rates with the providers. The providers, in order to get a more favorable negotaited rate, will inflate their costs. So when an individual without insurance seeks care they get the inflated cost without the lower negotiated rate. You can't honestly tell me the market dictates that two ibuprofen pills in a hospital is $50 when I can go to Wal-mart and buy a bottle of 50 for $5. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Here's a doctor doing it right- now if we could get the whole healthcare industry to follow this guy's lead we wouldn't need insurance or charity except in a few rare cases.https://neucare.net/pricing/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Insurers downgraded on ObamaCare fears Moody’s announced Thursday it was downgrading its outlook for health insurers from stable to negative based on uncertainty related to ObamaCare. The credit rating agency cited an unstable environment because of the healthcare law’s difficult rollout, and projected that insurers would earn 2 percent less than forecast in 2014. This isn't the big storm that is coming this summer/fall, but I believe it's a sign of what is to come. If the GOP led House has half a brain (not so sure these days), then they'll attach a provision to the upcoming debt ceiling extension that forbids the federal government from bailing out the insurance companies (or recouping any losses) from this mess, unless a new full vote on the bailout occurs. If the Dems in the Senate don't vote for it and/or Obama won't sign it, then they can be tied to supporting bailouts for the big insurance companies. Besides, if the program is as awesome as what we've been promised, then the insurance companies won't need any bailout money. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmacwc Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Yup, just wait until the employer mandate is actually enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-sized employers until 2016 The joke continues. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmacwc Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Cause that's in the constitution, lawlessness...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 It's a political move to limit the damage from the 2014 elections. Projections were 20 to 60 (depends on whose numbers you use) million losing their healthcare with notices going out in October which would certainly doom some Democratic Senators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpharatz Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Some of you might want to consider these three phrases that can quickly and painfully change your health insurance status. "Divorce decree" "your fired" or the ever popular " I quit" "pre-existing condition". A fully free market insurance industry would have all but the independently wealthy instantly bankrupt in the event of a medical disaster. Any ANG type flight surgeons or nurses care to chime in on this? ..................well boyz, the approach plate says it's 500 ft. wide Aaaaaaand looks like we're #2 behind that Cherokee........ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 A fully free market insurance industry would have all but the independently wealthy instantly bankrupt in the event of a medical disaster. Since when is it the government's job to make sure a citizen gets proper healthcare? Obamacare is just wealth redistribution all in the name of 'fairness' and 'the right thing to do'. It's easy for people to support theft from their neighbor when they're not the one being robbed and they are also not the one having to do the stealing. People will stay on the sinking ship as long as they're still serving free drinks. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Some of you might want to consider these three phrases that can quickly and painfully change your health insurance status. "Divorce decree" "your fired" or the ever popular " I quit" "pre-existing condition". A fully free market insurance industry would have all but the independently wealthy instantly bankrupt in the event of a medical disaster. Any ANG type flight surgeons or nurses care to chime in on this? ..................well boyz, the approach plate says it's 500 ft. wide Aaaaaaand looks like we're #2 behind that Cherokee........ Yeah, because people have so much trouble getting car, homeowner's, and life insurance without the government footing the bill. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Yeah, because people have so much trouble getting car, homeowner's, and life insurance without the government footing the bill. This. The equivalence would be people expecting their car insurance to cover a new battery, tire rotation, oil changes, car washes, etc...but to not cost more than they're already paying (actually they want it to cost less). Oh, and while they're at it...Obamacare would allow the equivalent of you being able to not have collision insurance, you then wreck your car into a tree, and then you can call and get an insurance program after the fact that replaces your vehicle. This is not how insurance works. The only way Obamacare could even 'somewhat' work would be to raise everybody's rates (because you don't have a choice now) to cover the increased risk pool/procedures that the insurance must cover and to raise taxes/fees to pay for the subsidies of poor people when their rates increase as well. I also love how the insurance companies will get a federal bailout if they don't make a certain profit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I still think the plan is to screw up the healthcare system to such a degree that the government will be the only entity that can wade into the mess and save something resembling healthcare thus creating a single payer system. Those that campaigned for the ACA said we needed to insure everybody yet there is still 15 million uninsured. They also said the current system was unacceptable and substandard yet are willing to delay the implementation for another year. We won a World War in less time and we put a man into space in less time that these guys had to develop a website and system that actually works yet they failed miserably despite the billions of dollars thrown at it. Government at its finest yet we have people who think we need more of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I still think the plan is to screw up the healthcare system to such a degree that the government will be the only entity that can wade into the mess and save something resembling healthcare thus creating a single payer system. I don't doubt that what you said is something very similar to the goal of the far left...but the actuality of it happening, hmm, I don't see the likelihood of it anytime in the nearer future (the likelihood of going to a single-payer, not the likelihood of Obamacare failing, which I think it will). Obamacare barely got passed when the Dems has large majorities in both houses, though these days, I think the Dems would have gone the nuclear-option (as they already have with appointments) if they had not been able to get the 60 votes in the Senate at the beginning. I don't see the votes being there anytime soon (5-10 years) to get to a single-payer system, even if things go south. I think what will happen is that Hillary will in 2016 and Obamacare continues to stay...unless...Obamacare fails horribly by early/mid 2016 and/or we have another massive recession and someone like Rand Paul wins in 2016 and has a GOP majority, and even then, who knows. Bad policy rarely gets rolled back when it's an entitlement issue. Usually it is increased, even by the Republicans. The left is now saying that it is good that people will be able to quit their jobs and keep their healthcare (not they didn't say anything about continuing to be able to pay for their healthcare). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xaarman Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I'm going to add some fuel to the fire but... Yeah, because people have so much trouble getting car, homeowner's, and life insurance without the government footing the bill. Ever tried getting health insurance with a pre existing condition? For your car insurance reference, it's like someone hitting you with a car, your insurance dropping you, and being unable to get any other company. The ACA has a lot of issues, but it has done good for some specific loved ones. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HossHarris Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 As long as you're all set .... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 The ACA has a lot of issues, but it has done good for some specific loved ones. Dude, I get it...honestly, I do. I don't envy anybody who has health problems or has family members with health problems. But seriously...why is it the government's job to force a business to give said family member something and then force taxpayers to cover the difference in cost? It comes down to what you think the government should be and should do. If all these people want to 'help other people', then why didn't they just do it of their own free will? The 40-45% of the population who support Obamacare could have raised millions (potentially billions) of dollars in order to help the less fortunate and they could have done so without forcing people to pay for someone else's misfortune. I know, I know...I'm 'heartless' or 'mean'. In reality, I hate forced charity, whereas politicians are very charitable with other people's money. If a church (or any other organization, religious or not, that people want to voluntarily belong to) that I voluntarily decide to go to has a member who is truly needing help, then the leadership of that organization can request money from its members to help pay for what needs to be done. What we have now is a bunch of politicians (on both sides) that campaign on how they will take money from those who have it in order to give to those who do not have it...in exchange for votes, because if they can't get elected, then they can't perform the wealth redistribution. Politicians want you to rely on the State, not to rely on each other. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I'm going to add some fuel to the fire but... Ever tried getting health insurance with a pre existing condition? For your car insurance reference, it's like someone hitting you with a car, your insurance dropping you, and being unable to get any other company. The ACA has a lot of issues, but it has done good for some specific loved ones. There's always some car insurance company out there, but you're likely to pay a lot more. That's how insurance works...if you have a pre-existing condition, you are a higher financial risk for the insurance company. I'm glad your loved ones are able to get the care they need under ACA, I'm just curious why you think your neighbors should have to pay for it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homestar Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 it's like someone hitting you with a car, your insurance dropping you, and being unable to get any other company. I think a better pre-existing analogy would be one's driving record. If you show up at GEICO with a horrible driving history and accidents I think it's fair that you pay higher premiums. The problem with health insurance is that it's used for routine care and not for catastrophic medical care. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xaarman Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 There's always some car insurance company out there, but you're likely to pay a lot more. That's how insurance works...if you have a pre-existing condition, you are a higher financial risk for the insurance company.I'm glad your loved ones are able to get the care they need under ACA, I'm just curious why you think your neighbors should have to pay for it.Sometimes, you just flat out can't get covered. This specific person rarely drinks alcohol, has never smoked and stays active (albeit not as active as a military member.)I'm not arguing that the ACA has it's flaws.... I don't believe that I should be paying for some fatty who smokes a pack a day and shits out 4 kids on welfare. Like most things in politics, it's the middle class that gets screwed.. those who make enough to not qualify for substantial subsidies, but get bent over backwards when it comes to premiums.However, not denying someone based on pre existing conditions, and then making it moderately affordable for them is something I am surprised is getting so much backlash. I wish the overall costs healthcare in America would come down and all this would be a moot point, but lucrative profit is what keeps the good ol' USA on the forefront of medical technology.I'm never going to be able to convince y'all that the ACA is fantastic (and I'm not saying it is,) but realize that it is helping some well deserving people in a good way. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HossHarris Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I'm sure happy that I can pay for that 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Sometimes, you just flat out can't get covered. So why didn't you, your family, and your community that you belong to (especially those who are liberal) take up a collection and pay for the medical bills? This is a serious question. If my brother needs help because things are out of his control and are negatively impacting his life, then my parents, and the rest of his siblings are the ones to help him out. You never commented on what I also said earlier--why didn't all those who support Obamacare take up a collection, or develop their own insurance company for high risk people to take care of the people you mention? However, not denying someone based on pre existing conditions, and then making it moderately affordable for them is something I am surprised is getting so much backlash. Why do you fault a business for acting within the terms agreed upon by the both parties (the buyer and the seller)? I'm sure the insurance company was not in breach of the fine print, else, you could easily take them to court. You either are ducking this point, or you truly don't understand how the system works if you think other people are not going to be paying for these 'reduced costs' and/or 'available coverage' for your family member. I have backlash against theft...call me crazy. ...but realize that it is helping some well deserving people in a good way. If a thug on the side of the road robs me at gun-point and then gives my property to some 'well deserving people', then I'm sure those said people will be helped in a good way and will definitely think the person who gave them the money. Again, you and your family, as well as whatever friends you all have, could have taken care of your family member's high medical bills...but you didn't, or at least you fail to do so now because she is 'getting help' from the government. This is all just another handout by the government funded by the taking of property from others. But I'm glad you feel good about it. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now