Announcement by Obama to allow insurance to continue to sell old policies...

[althor]

Man, I am really divided on this...

On the one hand, no doubt Obama straight up lied about it. I personally feel he knowingly lied about it.

On the other hand, if the insurance is crap and shouldn't be legal to sell, then it needs to be fixed.

IMO, one of the biggest problems with healthcare is the insurance companies. The one good thing happening with AHCA was that insurance had to provide a certain standard.

Just because they can fool some dolt into buying a subpar plan doesn't mean it should be legal to do so.

 

[beenthere]

I look at it this way.

Most all insurance whether it's health, homeowners, auto, personal liability, have their pro's and con's.

I can't afford to take the risk that someone in my family or myself could be liable for hundreds of thousands of dollars or more of medical bills because one of us faced a catastrophic accident or illness.

What I can afford is the annual premium I pay monthly, just like our mortgage payments on our primary residence.

No doubt the insurance companies are making a profit but they are also taking a risk for doing so.
What's very seldom mentioned is the expanding cost of medical care the insurance companies are forced to cover.
I read an article awhile ago on medical malpractice in the US, the average cost for a doctors malpractice insurance exceeds $70,000 a year and that's not taking into consideration the added MRI's, scans and other tests they have to run just to protect their ass in case of a potential lawsuit.

While I'm not a fan of insurance companies, like mortgage companies and banks, I see them as a necessary evil.
There is plenty of blame to go around concerning the high cost of health insurance, but it doesn't lie squarely on the insurance companies.

 

[greenlikemoney]

So, basically, this only goes to prove that Obamacare was half-baked idea.

Why didn't they just figure out a way ( without using tax dollars ) to insure his voter base and those people with pre-existing conditions instead of lumping the entire population into something that ( obviously from the enrollee figures thus far ) the majority did not want?

TOTAL FAIL

 

[greenlikemoney]

And BTW, where's Bucky and Cheeztoes today? We know they aren't working, probably still laying in bed watching MSNBC scratching their heads.

 

[beenthere]

So, basically, this only goes to prove that Obamacare was half-baked idea.

Why didn't they just figure out a way ( without using tax dollars ) to insure his voter base and those people with pre-existing conditions instead of lumping the entire population into something that ( obviously from the enrollee figures thus far ) the majority did not want?

TOTAL FAIL

It was all about centralizing government, the people didn't like it, still don't like it and the president got caught lying in an attempt to make them like it.

So yes, TOTAL FAIL

 

[canndo]

I look at it this way.

Most all insurance whether it's health, homeowners, auto, personal liability, have their pro's and con's.

I can't afford to take the risk that someone in my family or myself could be liable for hundreds of thousands of dollars or more of medical bills because one of us faced a catastrophic accident or illness.

What I can afford is the annual premium I pay monthly, just like our mortgage payments on our primary residence.

No doubt the insurance companies are making a profit but they are also taking a risk for doing so.
What's very seldom mentioned is the expanding cost of medical care the insurance companies are forced to cover.
I read an article awhile ago on medical malpractice in the US, the average cost for a doctors malpractice insurance exceeds $70,000 a year and that's not taking into consideration the added MRI's, scans and other tests they have to run just to protect their ass in case of a potential lawsuit.

While I'm not a fan of insurance companies, like mortgage companies and banks, I see them as a necessary evil.
There is plenty of blame to go around concerning the high cost of health insurance, but it doesn't lie squarely on the insurance companies.

Actually... it does.

Read Wendel Potter's book and let us all know what you think then.

 

[canndo]

So, basically, this only goes to prove that Obamacare was half-baked idea.

Why didn't they just figure out a way ( without using tax dollars ) to insure his voter base and those people with pre-existing conditions instead of lumping the entire population into something that ( obviously from the enrollee figures thus far ) the majority did not want?

TOTAL FAIL

Because of the very nature of insurance. I am not singleing you out here, but I am surprised at how few people actually understand the concept of insurance. there are a number of ways for insurance companies to "insure" they make money. they can configure the pool of memebers they insure to those who are least likely to ever need to be compensated for their loss. (in the auto insurance industry that is called redlining). They can place caps on their payouts, both yearly and lifetime. But one of the best ways is to simply make the pool gigantic. At any one time only a small section of the entire population is in need of medical care and even more relatively rare are incidences of very expensive treatments. The majority of all medical expenses occur in the last few months of a person's life.

So, they can't figure out how to insure just a segment of the population without taxation - that is the reason for the manditory enrollment or taxation.

This is all the Heritage foundation's idea, I still can't believe that the right is so against something that is, in effect a support to insurance companies - and (perhaps) a boon to individuals.


And one more thing - this "the majority did not want it" spiel is nonsense. Firstly, it is quite obvious that "the majority" doesn't even comprehend their current, pre-obamacare policies, and they have been indoctrinated through all sorts of means. People still believe there are death panels for god sake. Secondly. We know for a fact that the majority DOES want gun control of one sort or another, but you are not willing to grant them this - are you.

 

[ginwilly]

This is all the Heritage foundation's idea, I still can't believe that the right is so against something that is, in effect a support to insurance companies - and (perhaps) a boon to individuals.

An idea that was a counter to Hillarycare and quickly abandoned. Knowing it's a give to insurance and will make rich people richer makes me wonder why the left is so in favor of it.

 

[canndo]

An idea that was a counter to Hillarycare and quickly abandoned. Knowing it's a give to insurance and will make rich people richer makes me wonder why the left is so in favor of it.

The only way it became palatable to me was the regulation stating that insurance companies had to spend at least 80 percent of their income on health care.

We could never have gotten single payer off the ground. Imagine the outcry had we been rolling THAT out rather than this. There is no place for health care insurance in America any more - none. It contributes nothing to health or the welfare of the country save to the stock holders who do have other options should those companies ever be phased out of business.

 

[Harrekin]

The only way it became palatable to me was the regulation stating that insurance companies had to spend at least 80 percent of their income on health care.

We could never have gotten single payer off the ground. Imagine the outcry had we been rolling THAT out rather than this. There is no place for health care insurance in America any more - none. It contributes nothing to health or the welfare of the country save to the stock holders who do have other options should those companies ever be phased out of business.

Or you could've just gone Universal, like the other 95% of the civilised world.

Instead you get Fuckeduptheass-care, good choice, keep defending it.

 

[greenlikemoney]

Gun Control? Are you nuts? I'm going to need all the guns and ammo I have, I'm sure not giving them up to anyone just because some low/no information Liberal voters think it's a good idea.

 

[ginwilly]

The only way it became palatable to me was the regulation stating that insurance companies had to spend at least 80 percent of their income on health care.

We could never have gotten single payer off the ground. Imagine the outcry had we been rolling THAT out rather than this. There is no place for health care insurance in America any more - none. It contributes nothing to health or the welfare of the country save to the stock holders who do have other options should those companies ever be phased out of business.

Healthcare insurance tied to employment was one of those unintended consequences of FDRs wage freezes. It was a companies way to compete in other ways than pay. It was deemed a great idea and soon we gave subsidies to businesses to provide it. Subsidies are notorious for raising costs, see our university costs for an example, so our present system before the ACA was crafted by accident. Before that, the popular insurance was a good whole life policy that made money for retirement and catastrophic insurance covering major medical. The thought of insurance to pay for a doctor's visit was only a scam dream of insurance giants before FDR's wage freeze.

I'm thankful for Obamacare shining a bright light on how unethical some insurance companies operate, so it's got that going for it. I'm not sure it took this

to do it though.

 

[canndo]

Or you could've just gone Universal, like the other 95% of the civilised world.

Instead you get Fuckeduptheass-care, good choice, keep defending it.

the fact is that no one could have gotten universal passed either. Hell, maybe now we can, if this debacle continues much longer Reubs might be forced into accepting something else.

 

[beenthere]

Actually... it does.

Read Wendel Potter's book and let us all know what you think then.

Canndo, reading a book from a disgruntled former insurance company VP is not going to prove a thing my friend, it's just an opinion.

Anyone that foolishly lies the blame of rising healthcare costs on one part of the system has got their head up their ass.

Like I said, there is plenty of blame to go around, I just can't figure out why you people on the left never address malpractice or the medical industry's bloated wage liabilities?

 

[canndo]

Gun Control? Are you nuts? I'm going to need all the guns and ammo I have, I'm sure not giving them up to anyone just because some low/no information Liberal voters think it's a good idea.

you don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to call the majority of voters who did not want Obama care smart and informed while at the same time calling them uninformed when it comes to another issue. Both or neither - hence your argument that the majority of voters didn't want Obamacare, therefore we shouldn't have it fails.

 

[beenthere]

the fact is that no one could have gotten universal passed either. Hell, maybe now we can, if this debacle continues much longer Reubs might be forced into accepting something else.

The fact is my friend, this train wreck created by the democrats killed any hope of that for years to come.

 

[ginwilly]

you don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to call the majority of voters who did not want Obama care smart and informed while at the same time calling them uninformed when it comes to another issue. Both or neither - hence your argument that the majority of voters didn't want Obamacare, therefore we shouldn't have it fails.

lol good point. I guess we've all been guilty of this. The majority agreeing with us means we are right, the majority disagreeing means the majority is stupid and uniformed. It's like a Carlin skit.
[h=1]“Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?”[/h]

George Carlin quotes

 

[canndo]

Canndo, reading a book from a disgruntled former insurance company VP is not going to prove a thing my friend, it's just an opinion.

Anyone that foolishly lies the blame of rising healthcare costs on one part of the system has got their head up their ass.

Like I said, there is plenty of blame to go around, I just can't figure out why you people on the left never address malpractice or the medical industry's bloated wage liabilities?

Actually, so long as you demonstrate to me that you are unwilling to allow any information into your head that does not already conform to what you believe, no discussion is possible. Potter was not "disgruntled", and even if he was, this has always been the refuge of large companies seeking to protect the abuse fostered upon the public. Potter lays out a history of PR campaigns that spans decades and all of his statements can be checked out in other places. What you are saying is that no whistle blower has any credibility and eminating from that you imply that large companies, in this case insurance companies are completely trustworthy. Tell us the same about cigarette companies, upon whom the insurance companies based their approaches to the manipulation of the masses.

Malpractice is another issue. In most of the states in which tort reform was enacted, the premiums and costs rose just as quickly as in the states where no such limits are in effect. Furthermore, what you do when you seek to limit the individual from seeking a remedy on a level playing field with a large company is further reduce the rights of the individual. Why would you seek to do so?

Why would you want to use the government to pick "winners and losers", as I presume you don't like that sort of activity. Now you would place power in the hands of one group - insurance companes and health care providers while taking it away from lawyers and individuals, most of which have legitimate gripes and only a single course of legal action to be made whole.

I have often tried to expose a typical method the right uses to manipulate others. The reduction of all statements to... opinion. Such that everyone's opinion is equal and when it is made equal then you can call Potter's "opinion", one formed through years of experience, an expert opinion as no more or less valid than say, Rush Limbaugh's or Sean Hanity's. What that does, in effect, is place fact on par with idle chatter.

 

[canndo]

The fact is my friend, this train wreck created by the democrats killed any hope of that for years to come.

You may well be correct, but as i have repeated over and over again, the right has never, ever had any intention of doing anything of substance to change our current system. An attempt, no matter how futile, and even... unfortunately, no matter how detrimental is, in this case far better than doing nothing. And doing nothing is exactly what the right wishes to continue until only the richest have options at all.

 

[canndo]

Healthcare insurance tied to employment was one of those unintended consequences of FDRs wage freezes. It was a companies way to compete in other ways than pay. It was deemed a great idea and soon we gave subsidies to businesses to provide it. Subsidies are notorious for raising costs, see our university costs for an example, so our present system before the ACA was crafted by accident. Before that, the popular insurance was a good whole life policy that made money for retirement and catastrophic insurance covering major medical. The thought of insurance to pay for a doctor's visit was only a scam dream of insurance giants before FDR's wage freeze.

I'm thankful for Obamacare shining a bright light on how unethical some insurance companies operate, so it's got that going for it. I'm not sure it took this

to do it though.

I read the initial proposed bill, it wasn't nearly that big.