(lost track of who wrote what)
But if you repeal ALL government mandates, you'll wind
up with lots of policies that appear to cover everything
a consumer might want, but are actually full of loopholes
so that the insurer need not pay for standard treatments.
That seems the opposite of
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Either it will have a higher premium to cover pre-existing
conditions, or it only covers things not caused by the pre-existing
condition.
That is not how health status insurance works. It is insurance against
an
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
The people outside the boundary are not my responsibility. They are not
my people. Furthermore, they don't participate in my moral economy.
The status of the poor in my country has an immediate effect on me. I
may be
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
So insurance could charge someone with type II diabetes more, but not
someone with type I diabetes. You could charge more to people who,
smoke, are over weight, who don't exercise, or who practice un-safe sex.
You
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Lance A. Brownla...@bearcircle.net wrote:
The analogy between auto and health insurance fails in one regard: Most
of the time, a 5x increase in auto insurance premiums is a direct result
of decisions by the covered person. Many of causes for increases in
Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:21:45 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
Another good reason for heath status insurance
John, you realize what you are arguing, don't you
On 18/08/2009, at 12:11 AM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
What you are searching for is akin to trying to find an even prime
number.
It's really easy to find one...
...but then you go looking for another...
Charlie.
But There's One, So There Must Be Another Eventually Maru
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to directly subsidize those
who cannot afford to pay health insurance premiums, and leave the
insurance market to function rationally.
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:03, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Either it will have a higher premium to cover pre-existing
conditions, or it only covers things not caused by the pre-existing
condition.
That is not how
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market,
You call it interference, I call it participation.
Well, at least you don't try to hide your bias.
Dave
___
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:11 AM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
There is a reason why there isn't affordable long term insurance.
Yes, government interference and people who would rather spend other
people's money for their own insurance.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Of course that's how it works. It's in the interest of insurance
companies not to pay out. Your shilling for corperations is amusing,
but not based in reality: insurance allways takes into account risks.
No,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Dave Landdml...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market,
You call it interference, I call it participation.
I'd agree with forced participation.
Here's an example of
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to directly subsidize those
who cannot afford to pay
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:11 AM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:21:45 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Of course that's how it works. It's in the interest of insurance
companies not to pay out. Your shilling for corperations is amusing,
but not based in reality:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:57, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
No, considering pre-existing conditions is not how health status
insurance works. It
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:57, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to
Hello all --
I didn't mean to drop out of this, ummm, 'discussion', but I lost the email
I intended to respond to over the w/e. What can I say? I turned 61 and had
to put a 9 year old cat down due to cancer -- not a good day until Charlie
reminded me 61 is a prime number! Cheered me right up.
On 17 Aug 2009 at 17:06, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
No, considering pre-existing
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
And in most cases, the likelyhood of you developing those conditions
is dependent on pre-existing conditions!
I have not seen any evidence that suggests this. There are a large
number of conditions that can result
Do you think you're fooling anyone with this schtick?
I hope not. It is certainly not my intention to fool anyone.
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:32 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
Actually, a health insurance market without government interference
would be a lot more consumer-driven than the current system, which
is why I mentioned it. In nearly all cases, if there is to be a
Howso?
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
Is health care so unimportant that it deserves no regulation?
We are starting from different worldviews, I think. I believe in
freedom for people to make agreements with each other as they choose
-- that is my starting
Did someone say John's been on this list for 10 years? Did I misread
that??
I told John many of us had been. Maybe that got mangled. Maybe by me. :-)
Dan M.
myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft® Windows® and Linux web and
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
On 8/17/2009 11:09:15 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Jo Anneevens...@hevanet.com wrote:
And there I rest my case on the tone thing.
I wrote that as clearly and as
The Atlantic has a thoughtful article by David Goldhill on health care
and health insurance reform. It is long, but I think well worth
reading. I've also included below a few paragraphs that I thought were
particularly interesting.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200909/health-care
|
At 02:51 AM Sunday 8/16/2009, John Williams wrote:
The Atlantic has a thoughtful article by David Goldhill on health care
and health insurance reform. It is long, but I think well worth
reading. I've also included below a few paragraphs that I thought were
particularly interesting.
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Ronn!
Blankenshipronn_blankens...@bellsouth.net wrote:
I'm only a little way into the article, but I take it Semmelwies is no
longer mentioned in the medical school (or pre-med) curriculum?
I think that the guidelines Goldhill refers to are more systematic and
One thing that is often discussed in reference to health insurance is
that if someone is unexpectedly afflicted with a chronic condition,
their health insurance premiums will usually increase drastically.
Health insurance for someone diagnosed with a chronic condition might
go from $2,000 a year
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to consider some
other system.
Patrick
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:24 PM, John
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Patrick
Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to consider some
other
John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Patrick
Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
I'd guess that Patrick is expecting health insurance
to have health status insurance already built into it.
One would think the whole point of health insurance is to provide you
with health care (more precisely, the funds
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
It does strike me as a kludge, though. To continue
your example of car insurance, I don't believe that
anybody markets insurance against having your car
insurance premiums rise dramatically.
I do not think there is a as
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Patrick Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
But if I do fall ill, for the insurer to raise my rates rather than
provide the agreed-upon care seems like dirty pool.
That is only true if
On 16 Aug 2009 at 14:08, John Williams wrote:
New ideas can be difficult to get used to. Perhaps they could be
bundled together for those who prefer it. But it would be a bundle --
the two types of insurance are fundamentally different, since one pays
a lump sum or equivalent (like life
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Many people won't go for checkups if they have to pay out of pocket,
and they will ignore dangerous conditions for too long.
Did you read the article, or just the excerpts I posted? This was
discussed in the
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
And immediately you're creating the concept that as aoon as anything
happens, your insurance will go up, because the risk to the insurer
that you'll not be paying them anymore has been pushed to another
party.
I
On 16 Aug 2009 at 14:44, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Many people won't go for checkups if they have to pay out of pocket,
and they will ignore dangerous conditions for too long.
Did you read the article, or just
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Yes, you're simply refusing to accnowledge the actual results of the
policys proposed...
What exactly am I refusing to acknowledge?
to be charged (as their status insurance can be cancelled,
Health status
On 16 Aug 2009 at 15:52, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Yes, you're simply refusing to accnowledge the actual results of the
policys proposed...
What exactly am I refusing to acknowledge?
That you'd simply once
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
, so if you're a bad
health risk or have prexisting conditions you're very unlikely to be
able to get status coverage at a deacent price or at all in the first
place,
That is not the way health status insurance
On 16 Aug 2009 at 16:30, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
, so if you're a bad
health risk or have prexisting conditions you're very unlikely to be
able to get status coverage at a deacent price or at all in the first
John Williams said the following on 8/16/2009 5:08 PM:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
It does strike me as a kludge, though. To continue
your example of car insurance, I don't believe that
anybody markets insurance against having your car
insurance
Lance A. Brown wrote:
John Williams said the following on 8/16/2009 5:08 PM:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
It does strike me as a kludge, though. To continue
your example of car insurance, I don't believe that
anybody markets insurance against having
John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare
Jo Anne said the following on 8/12/2009 9:04 PM:
Also, when we had a H.S.A., it expired after a
year. We had to use everything in the account within the year or it was
gone. You have to look deep into your crystal ball to decide exactly how
much heath savings you need each year.
Jo Anne,
On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:30 PM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
Compassion, folks. IAAMOAC.
And remember .. http://xkcd.com/386/ .. because it's always, *always*,
true. :D
When you mention that we want five debates, say what they are: one on
the economy, one on foreign policy, with
Actually, I believe that the US WWII generation did more to improve
healthcare around the world than any nation in the history of the
world, especially when they were riding the gravy train in the 1950's
and 60's. (US medicine and transportation of food surpluses probably
did more to
On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:19 PM, John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Dave Landdml...@gmail.com wrote:
Other than various charities, there isn't a world government (i.e.,
a mutually agreed-upon means by which people can pitch in to help
each
other out) through which I can
OK, group, those of you who've been acquainted with me over the years know I
believe in communication above all. I believe John has a right to express
his opinion. If I sound crankier than usual, it's because I am. This
debate is one of the most important we can have in this country right now,
[Lance] wrote:
Jo Anne, did you have an HSA or a health care flexible spending account?
Flexible spending accounts have a pre-selected amount of pre-tax
dollars set aside that you can then spend on non-covered medical
expenses. Those funds expires at the end of the calendar year. I
thought
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com wrote:
My generation has become noticeably stingier as our balance of trade swung
around from crazy black to very red, starting with Nixon. Now it appears
some do not even think we can care for our own people
Our own people? Who
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:31 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
It is ethical to take wealth from some people in order to help other
people with less resources, but only if all of those people are in the
same political boundary?
Another straw man. Developed countries put about
People on this list have argued for the advantages of a free market system
for health care and health care insurance. I have thought about it, and
decided to apply what we know from other markets that have considerable
less government intervention.
For example, big screen TVs. If you have the
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:50 AM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
People on this list have argued for the advantages of a free market system
for health care and health care insurance. I have thought about it, and
decided to apply what we know from other markets that
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that
everyone should have a chance to live and be healthy, then why not
focus on redistributing wealth
I think this WSJ article is free for anyone to read:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
but just in case you cannot read it, here are the 8 bullet points (and
a quotation) from Whole Foods founder John Mackey about The Whole
Foods Alternative to
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/08/consumer-drive-health-care-plans.html
Alex Tabarrok wrote:
|For about the last 10 years the United States has been experimenting
|with consumer driven health care plans. CDH plans typically combine
|a high-deductible insurance policy
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:32 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/08/consumer-drive-health-care-plans.html
Alex Tabarrok wrote:
|For about the last 10 years the United States has been experimenting
|with consumer driven
John Williams wrote:
I think this WSJ article is free for anyone to read:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
but just in case you cannot read it, here are the 8 bullet points
...
Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies
must
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that
everyone should have a chance to live and be healthy, then why not
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:15 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
John Williams wrote:
Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies
must cover.
...
Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what
health-care treatments cost.
...
Going by the present
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Lance A. Brownla...@bearcircle.net wrote:
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief
to go to a system that
will lower US life expectancy significantly (probably 5-10 years)?
Dan M.
NO. That is an acceptable side effect for greater freedom and economic
efficiency. Freedom isn't free.
I think it would be very reasonable to have real free market health
care. If that were our
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that
everyone should have a chance to live and be healthy, then why not
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare because of the belief that
John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:15 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
John Williams wrote:
Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies
must cover.
...
Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what
health-care treatments cost.
...
Going
John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Lance A. Brownla...@bearcircle.net wrote:
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute wealth to improve healthcare
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:26 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
How on earth is
the average consumer going to check that their policy is
NOT full of loopholes?
First, I'll point that I know of no system to ensure that there are
not loopholes or other problems with a product or service.
On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:31 PM, John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com
wrote:
John Williams wrote:
There are billions of people around the world with worse healthcare
than virtually everyone in the United States. If the goal is to
redistribute
Hello Group --
This discussion about health care is driving me a little crazy, as a retired
nurse. I agree with Dan, Nick, David and everyone else who sees the need
for some sort of universal risk pool. The one thing that irks me about
talking about high deductibles and health savings accounts
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
This is an old kind of argument that is usually used
to support not taking action. It asks How can you
worry about A, when B is so much worse?
That was a question, not an argument. And I am not being flippant. My
point is
John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:26 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
How on earth is
the average consumer going to check that their policy is
NOT full of loopholes?
...
As for how a consumer can decide what product or service is best for
them, I can think of several
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Dave Landdml...@gmail.com wrote:
Other than various charities, there isn't a world government (i.e.,
a mutually agreed-upon means by which people can pitch in to help each
other out) through which I can redistribute wealth from people in the
US to the people
Compassion, folks. IAAMOAC.
I agree with your points Jo Anne, and welcome hearing from you.
mail2web LIVE Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology -
http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE
I agree with Dan, Nick, David and everyone else who sees the need
for some sort of universal risk pool.
I'll be glib here and object to universal. What I think you really
mean is all US citizens, or perhaps all US citizens and non-citizen
residents. But see my question here about why we are not
Compassion and government are strange bedfellows. I'd prefer to
express my compassion without government.
I understand. But, since you expressed it as I am not my brother's
keeper, that's what most folks would call no compassion. You are free to
express itbut we are free to disagree.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:43 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
I understand. But, since you expressed it as I am not my brother's
keeper, that's what most folks would call no compassion. You are free to
express itbut we are free to disagree.
Why do we always
To: dsummersmi...@comcast.net, brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:43 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
I understand. But, since you expressed it as I am not my brother's
keeper, that's what most folks would call
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:08 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
Well, when you quote Cain as a fudmental moral position, you write words
that result in a straight reading of the text leading to that conclusion.
Which has now thoroughly been taken out of context, and
83 matches
Mail list logo
