ShempMcGurk wrote: > --- In [email protected], Bhairitu <noozg...@...> wrote: > >> off_world_beings wrote: >> >>> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> --- In [email protected], Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>> >>>>> It looks like we voted for the right man for the job when we voted >>>>> for Obama. Super-big high-five to the O-man. >>>>> >>>>> Ted Kennedy's smiling down on us all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Ted Kennedy is royally pissed because Obama sacrificed >>>> the public option (while pretending to still be for it).>> >>>> >>>> >>> It is WAY better than any Public Option. It insures millions more, and >>> in time will cover anyone currently not covered. It is now illegal for >>> people to not have coverage, but just like in the past, the Democrats >>> made it illegal for hospitals to refuse someone, and so local, state, >>> and federal funding HAD to cover the treatment costs. As it should be. >>> NOW everyone who is not insured has to have insurance, but THEY do not >>> have to pay a penny if they cannot afford it - it is subsidized by the >>> tax payers now. >>> >>> Those who can afford it, but do not want health insurance of any kind >>> (like Willyltex for example, if he was ever self-employed), it will >>> simply be like a tiny insignificant tax on them that they won't even >>> notice, and they will have to put up or shut up, just like in Britain. >>> And the British like their system, and the health insurance tax (which >>> is seperated out on payroll checks) is the LAST thing they would >>> complain about on their paycheck deductions. >>> >>> I saw this is what Obama was doing a long time ago, and these rules will >>> never be repealed, even if Republicans gain in the Fall --- which they >>> won't. >>> >>> This is a GREAT day for America. This is a watershed moment for America, >>> and due to its influence, for the world. The Neocons and Fundies are >>> dead in the water. Change has come. >>> >>> OffWorld >>> >> I think health insurance should be like car insurance: if you use >> alternative and preventative medicine to keep yourself healthy you >> should get a tremendous break on your bill. You get one for being a >> safe driver on auto insurance so why not health insurance? >> > > > > In one sense insurance companies already do that; in another sense, they > don't. > > If you have a group insurance policy through work, you'll pay the same rate > as everyone else in your demographic group (age and gender) whether you are > sick as a dog or as healthy as Superman. > > If you have an individual policy you can not only be rated but have certain > pre-existing conditions excluded from coverage. And you can be declined for > coverage. You can't be declined under a group policy (although there may be > waiting periods for pre-existing conditions). > > Life insurance of course rates people and declines them as well. >
When I went off the COBRA and called the insurance company to set up a new policy the agent mentioned something about being overweight and I said, "I suppose everyone at Blue Cross is all fit and trim." Big pause on the other end of the line. "Well", she said, "if you aren't going to be using insurance that much then we have these higher deductible policies...." Hehe, wasn't going to trot out the cheaper policies unless I forced them to I guess. Now my question without having to wade through those horribly formatted PDFs of the bill is will I be forced to pay for a more expensive premium right away because they won't be allowing high deductible any more? I'll fight that. Or hey, maybe I can become a guru too and scam people to cover the extra for my insurance premiums. Maybe I can write a book on how to be a scam guru. That's the ticket! > > > > >> The problem >> would be the way the dumbed down way health insurance companies measure >> things. But the health insurance companies are crooks anyway and need >> to be regulated out of business or just provide "premium care" for the >> elite. >> >> And we need to get the AMA out formula too. >> > > > > > That point, for me, is the biggest bone of contention I have about the whole > thing. > > For all their talk about free markets, I never hear much from the > conservative side about breaking the AMA monopoly. > > And this should be something of concern for the kinds of folks that read FFL > because, I assume, we've all tried various forms of alternative medicines, > including Ayur-Veda. Well, for starters, let's let other "associations" > provide rules for western medicine as well as the AMA (which can control > supply of doctors) as well as putting alternative medicines and practitioners > on a par with those licensed under the AMA. > It's easy for "organized medicine" to call a lot of stuff quackery because they can trust the public won't know any better. I have to laugh at how many things 30 years ago was considered "quackery" but now a part of mainstream medicine. >> Let's help people who may >> not come from a line of doctors become one if they are interested. >> Groups like the AMA lobby to keep the entrants into medical schools down >> so the cost of medicine is high. >> > > > Precisely! (I actually wrote what I did above before I read this by Bhairitu). > > Bhairitu, you are talking like a true free-marketer! > > You should go to the Ludwig Von Mises site; they've got great articles on the > AMA monopoly. > Just read a post on another forum by someone whose dad is a retired doctor and appalled at the young doctors these days who only seem to be in it "for the money." He was one of these country doctors who even did house calls. And he made plenty of money at that but it was the practice of medicine that was important for him. > >> Let's expose this fraud. There are >> all kinds of things that could be done to reduce the cost of health >> care. But dummies with health care benefits from work run to the doctor >> if they even have the sniffles. People need to learn that is not what >> it is for. >> >> > > ...and now you're sounding like Rush Limbaugh (I mean that as a complement) > because he talks a lot about how health insurance should NOT be paying for > doctor's visits and all that but for catastrophic coverage. > Reading some other forums many feel that way (regardless of their political outlook). I saw it when I was a manager at my company because I would find out someone was not in that morning because they went to the doctor to get a shot for their cold. People with deductibles that don't cover those little visits are more likely to be discrete about using their insurance. > By the way, there are many in the insurance industry that want to see high > deductible insurance policies made available but, apparently, the government > makes it difficult for such policies to come into existance. I'm not up on > it enough to know the reasons why, but high deductible healthcare policies > may be the wave of the future. We just need to keep bitching regardless of what side the aisle you're on. I do like single payer as it would be the best deal for me but I also don't think people should be forced to buy from a private company either.
