Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 14:24:58 GMT
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/22/17033588/trump-obamacare-preexisting-conditions"Republicans weren’t able to repeal Obamacare in Congress. Now the Trump administration appears to be settling for the second-best thing: weakening Obamacare’s insurance regulations, changes that will hurt Americans who are older and sicker while benefiting the young and the healthy. The Health and Human Services Department published new rules Tuesday that widen access to “short-term” health plans, a small subset of insurance products that are meant to cover short gaps in insurance coverage. The Obama administration aggressively regulated these plans, allowing insurance companies to sell them only as 90-day options. The Trump changes allow insurance companies to sell the skimpier plans for a year, encouraging many more people to buy them and use them as a more regular source of coverage. Officials are also considering allowing insurance companies to extend them further.... For example, it hasn’t intervened in I daho, where regulators recently told insurers they can simply disregard many of the Affordable Care Act rules and sell new “freedom plans” that discriminate against sicker enrollees.Typically, you’d expect the federal government to get involved — to step in and enforce federal law when a state refuses. But when pressed by a reporter on this issue Tuesday, HHS Secretary Alex Azar demurred." As soon as the laws allow options for plans w/exclusions and/or higher rates for pre-existings, the insurance companies can go back to making pre-existings coverable only at completely inaccessible rates, And we can go back to people w/o access to healthcare turning up at the ER to treat any condition AND going into medical bankruptcy to pay the bill when it comes.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Feb 25, 2018 15:37:30 GMT
And so many thought ACA would cause people to die with 'death panels'...
dt and friends need no panels, people will die without insurance, many homeless!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 12:47:02 GMT
They won't give up until their buddies in the insurance industry no longer have to pay for your expensive drugs and treatments.
BUCKLE UP AND VOTE THESE ASSHOLES OUT!
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 8, 2018 13:40:12 GMT
Obama care is a nightmare. Everyone I know has had their insurance rates triple. Anything that dismantles this nightmare is ok by me.
Just an example: I have a friend who goes through Obamacare for his insurance. He pays full price no subsidies. In 2017 his premium was $447. In 2018, his premium went to $589. He just received notice that in 2019 his premium will go up to $897. Why? Because of all the people the insurance company has to pay out for. He can't afford this and won't have insurance come 2019. Never since Obama care has been enacted has he even met his deductible.
In effect, people with pre-existing conditions feel that their need trumps (excuse the pun) the needs of everyone else. Why should my friend have to be priced out of the insurance market just so that others can get high-cost care? The really stupid part is that should he ever become ill, he can simply purchase insurance to obtain his own high cost care. So, the insurance market will lose his premium dollars for years but when he becomes a liability, he can just get coverage and have it paid for. This is why the insurance market is floundering and it's exactly what Obama wanted; the insurance industry to fail so that he could enact a single payor system. Talk about stealthy.
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,374
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jun 8, 2018 14:39:25 GMT
ACA is far from perfect. But it is just utterly wrong that someone with a preexisting condition may not be able to get insurance. I understand if someone finds out something is wrong with them and then tries to get insurace - but the truth is that preexisting condition loopholes make it easy to deny insurance when someone switches jobs, or loses a job and insurance and then can't get insured. This is a huge problem, and can easily affect any of us at any point in life. I can even understand if you're upset about having to cover someone who's ill because of "lifestyle" choices (not that those can always be defined), but the preexisting condition clauses can be applied to things that are clearly no one's fault - think about the child with Type I diabetes, for example. It's just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 8, 2018 14:41:52 GMT
ACA is far from perfect. But it is just utterly wrong that someone with a preexisting condition may not be able to get insurance. I understand if someone finds out something is wrong with them and then tries to get insurace - but the truth is that preexisting condition loopholes make it easy to deny insurance when someone switches jobs, or loses a job and insurance and then can't get insured. This is a huge problem, and can easily affect any of us at any point in life. I can even understand if you're upset about having to cover someone who's ill because of "lifestyle" choices (not that those can always be defined), but the preexisting condition clauses can be applied to things that are clearly no one's fault - think about the child with Type I diabetes, for example. It's just wrong.
It’s not simply a matter of covering someone else’s cost. It’s being priced out of the insurance market all together and being unable to afford insurance yourself because the costs now reflect the cost of insuring somebody else
|
|
casii
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,461
Jun 29, 2014 14:40:44 GMT
|
Post by casii on Jun 8, 2018 14:48:26 GMT
I'm continuously disgusted by the completely lack of empathy for those who suffer through no fault of their own. I've had 2 former students who have had glioblastomas. If it weren't for the ACA, they wouldn't have had health insurance. For every anecdotal story of how someone's premiums have gone insane, there is a counter story. If the government had focused on fixing what was wrong with the ACA instead of purposely sabotaging it, we could care for more of our citizens instead of only the totally solvent, incredibly healthy ones who know everything.
|
|
|
Post by delilahtwo on Jun 8, 2018 14:52:16 GMT
Obama care is a nightmare. Everyone I know has had their insurance rates triple. Anything that dismantles this nightmare is ok by me. Just an example: I have a friend who goes through Obamacare for his insurance. He pays full price no subsidies. In 2017 his premium was $447. In 2018, his premium went to $589. He just received notice that in 2019 his premium will go up to $897. Why? Because of all the people the insurance company has to pay out for. He can't afford this and won't have insurance come 2019. Never since Obama care has been enacted has he even met his deductible. In effect, people with pre-existing conditions feel that their need trumps (excuse the pun) the needs of everyone else. Why should my friend have to be priced out of the insurance market just so that others can get high-cost care? The really stupid part is that should he ever become ill, he can simply purchase insurance to obtain his own high cost care. So, the insurance market will lose his premium dollars for years but when he becomes a liability, he can just get coverage and have it paid for. This is why the insurance market is floundering and it's exactly what Obama wanted; the insurance industry to fail so that he could enact a single payor system. Talk about stealthy. Did you even read what you wrote? When Obama was president, before Trump started changing this for the insurance industry, your friend's premium was $447. Trump got into office and started dismantling Obamacare and his insurance premiums started going through the roof. Obamacare was working for your friend, now that Trump is in office, it's not working as well..... do you see a connection there at all?
|
|
|
Post by PolarGreen12 on Jun 8, 2018 15:03:03 GMT
Obama care is a nightmare. Everyone I know has had their insurance rates triple. Anything that dismantles this nightmare is ok by me. Just an example: I have a friend who goes through Obamacare for his insurance. He pays full price no subsidies. In 2017 his premium was $447. In 2018, his premium went to $589. He just received notice that in 2019 his premium will go up to $897. Why? Because of all the people the insurance company has to pay out for. He can't afford this and won't have insurance come 2019. Never since Obama care has been enacted has he even met his deductible. In effect, people with pre-existing conditions feel that their need trumps (excuse the pun) the needs of everyone else. Why should my friend have to be priced out of the insurance market just so that others can get high-cost care? The really stupid part is that should he ever become ill, he can simply purchase insurance to obtain his own high cost care. So, the insurance market will lose his premium dollars for years but when he becomes a liability, he can just get coverage and have it paid for. This is why the insurance market is floundering and it's exactly what Obama wanted; the insurance industry to fail so that he could enact a single payor system. Talk about stealthy. Did you even read what you wrote? When Obama was president, before Trump started changing this for the insurance industry, your friend's premium was $447. Trump got into office and started dismantling Obamacare and his insurance premiums started going through the roof. Obamacare was working for your friend, now that Trump is in office, it's not working as well..... do you see a connection there at all? THIS!!!! I applied for marketplace insurance at the end of 2016 when I was laid off. I was able to get medical, dental, and vision for for 2017 at $230.00 a month. It was a lifesaver when I found out I had cancer. When I applied to renew for 2018 it was $780 a month. So I have been without since January. Thankfully my workplace finally will have insurance effective July 1st, but its not the best and my employer isn't contributing much to the premiums. But it's still more affordable than $780!
|
|
|
Post by mikklynn on Jun 8, 2018 15:03:54 GMT
O.M.G. This is seriously my worst nightmare. I am currently working to carry health insurance, due to DH's cancer. I can't retire while this idiot is in Washington. I'm too afraid of what our costs might be on another plan.
|
|
|
Post by delilahtwo on Jun 8, 2018 15:07:42 GMT
ACA is far from perfect. But it is just utterly wrong that someone with a preexisting condition may not be able to get insurance. I understand if someone finds out something is wrong with them and then tries to get insurace - but the truth is that preexisting condition loopholes make it easy to deny insurance when someone switches jobs, or loses a job and insurance and then can't get insured. This is a huge problem, and can easily affect any of us at any point in life. I can even understand if you're upset about having to cover someone who's ill because of "lifestyle" choices (not that those can always be defined), but the preexisting condition clauses can be applied to things that are clearly no one's fault - think about the child with Type I diabetes, for example. It's just wrong.
It’s not simply a matter of covering someone else’s cost. It’s being priced out of the insurance market all together and being unable to afford insurance yourself because the costs now reflect the cost of insuring somebody else
And here's the deal. Let's say you have 100 people. Five of them have pre-existing conditions. Forty of them are incredibly healthy. The other 55 are somewhere in between. Let's say it costs $10,000 per year to take care of all 100 people (remember 40 of them use no dollars at all). Let's also say the ones with pre-existing conditions cost more than the others, they use $5000, or half of the money. For shits and giggles, let's say the patients with pre-existing conditions can't get coverage and the healthy ones choose to not buy coverage as they really don't need it (they forget about car accidents and other causes of needing health care). So 55 people buy coverage for $5000 at $91 each (pretending the insurance companies aren't making money, we are just covering costs). What happens to the ones with pre-existing conditions? Well, they get sicker, go to ER, die sooner. What happens to the ones with no coverage at all? Some end up in hospital because of a car accident and go bankrupt. Or a mass shooting and go bankrupt. Now let's pretend that everyone buys insurance and pre-existing conditions don't increase your insurance costs. Healthy people HAVE to buy insurance because let's face it, you never know when bad things will happen (much like home owners insurance, car insurance etc.) It costs everyone $100, a little more for the not-so-sick, a lot more for the healthy and the more sick, those with pre-existing conditions get covered too. The end result? Those 5 with pre-existing conditions have much better quality of life as well as a longer life. The healthy ones don't go bankrupt when something unexpected happens. Life continues on as usual for the rest. I don't see a down side here. The reality is that the percentage of healthy people is actually higher than that and in the end, insurance costs drop if every single person buys insurance. Because insurance will not only cover the sick, who use it, but also the healthy, who will only use it occasionally.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 15:27:57 GMT
Those who think the ACA was a bad bill don’t know what they are talking about. When you look at all the components it actually was pretty good. It gave the people the health coverage they needed. Even though they might not realized it. Minimum coverages, no policy limit, and no pre-existing illness exclusions.
The problem was in the individual markets and the fact they didn’t anticipate the number of sick people that would want coverage. THAT is why some had big spikes in their premiums and THAT is why some areas lost markets. Sick people.
As to those “lies” about premiums, if you like your plan & doctor.
1. In theory if there are more healthy premiums mixed with sick premiums it averages out lower. In some areas there were more sick premiums than healthy premiums so it didn’t work out as theorized. Given time it could have.
2. The “you can keep your plan” only applied IF the insurance companies didn’t change any of the terms and conditions of that plan. T&C can be something as simple as changing a deductible. And changing the T&C is what many of the insurance companies did to push people into the new plans that cost more.
3. Same thing about if you like your doctor you can keep him. That only applied if the company continued to offer a plan that included your doctor.
If you are wondering why President Obama didn’t FORCE the insurance companies to keep “your plan” or “your doctor” in place it’s because that is not what our government does to businesses. Besides they already agreed to removing limit caps and the pre-existing condition exclusions. And even before the ACA, insurance companies were always changing their plans so the plan and doctor you had today could be gone tomorrow.
The irony of this was just before the election I read an article that said the individual markets/premiums were starting to stabilize.
Which meant that what ailed the ACA could have been fixed pretty easily.
But what we are going to have now is chaos. Less choices, higher premiums, and substandard coverage.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 15:33:14 GMT
ACA is far from perfect. But it is just utterly wrong that someone with a preexisting condition may not be able to get insurance. I understand if someone finds out something is wrong with them and then tries to get insurace - but the truth is that preexisting condition loopholes make it easy to deny insurance when someone switches jobs, or loses a job and insurance and then can't get insured. This is a huge problem, and can easily affect any of us at any point in life. I can even understand if you're upset about having to cover someone who's ill because of "lifestyle" choices (not that those can always be defined), but the preexisting condition clauses can be applied to things that are clearly no one's fault - think about the child with Type I diabetes, for example. It's just wrong.
It’s not simply a matter of covering someone else’s cost. It’s being priced out of the insurance market all together and being unable to afford insurance yourself because the costs now reflect the cost of insuring somebody else
That is how insurance works. It always has. Talk to the people in the wild fire areas from this past October. They will tell you the same thing about their homeowners insurance. And not just the people who lost their homes. Premium hikes and that’s if they can even get coverage.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:34 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 15:44:05 GMT
We want the healthiest to have the cheapest premiums even if it means the sickest have no insurance at all due to the astronomical sums it takes for their care.
America.
(and forget about the fact that you can go from the healthiest to the sickest or most disabled in the blink of an eye - or a texting driver - or a diagnosis).
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Jun 8, 2018 15:55:07 GMT
@fred is absolutely right. Before the ACA went into effect, our premiums were already skyrocketing with double digit percentage premium increases year over year ANYWAY and that was without everyone having some type of decent coverage. We experienced it ourselves because DH and I have been self employed for the last 20+ years so with no employer contribution, we get to pay ALL of it so we saw how much the total bill would actually increase for our family every year. While the ACA wasn’t perfect, it was a start and it could have been improved upon vs. sabotaging it and setting the whole damn thing on fire throwing the entire health care system into complete chaos for everybody.
We all need to remember that the Republicans had *eight years* under Obama to put their collective heads together and come up with something else and now another year and a half under Trump with majorities in BOTH HOUSES and they still couldn’t come up with anything that was actually BETTER and that would get more people covered affordably. They could have done something but they DIDN’T. I’m absolutely going to remember that come November.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jun 8, 2018 16:03:21 GMT
and forget about the fact that you can go from the healthiest to the sickest or most disabled in the blink of an eye - or a texting driver - or a diagnosis Yep. Anyone who thinks 'it won't happen to me' has no idea. I'm healthy for the most part. But in the past 6 weeks I've had 2 ER visits, 3 urgent care visits and one hospitalization due to a pneumonia that won't clear up. The lung dr isn't sure it's really pneumonia since I'm too young to keep getting it. He's looking at various autoimmune diseases - although I have no symptoms of any of those. They've tested for so many things - one morning they took about 10 vials of blood, after taking 5 the night before. So far no real diagnosis. 7 weeks ago I would have said I'm totally well, perfectly healthy...and now (even though I'm feeling much better) it would be so easy for an insurance company to say I have a pre-existing condition and deny me coverage.
|
|
maryannscraps
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,728
Aug 28, 2017 12:51:28 GMT
|
Post by maryannscraps on Jun 8, 2018 16:09:56 GMT
Obama care is a nightmare. Everyone I know has had their insurance rates triple. Anything that dismantles this nightmare is ok by me. Just an example: I have a friend who goes through Obamacare for his insurance. He pays full price no subsidies. In 2017 his premium was $447. In 2018, his premium went to $589. He just received notice that in 2019 his premium will go up to $897. Why? Because of all the people the insurance company has to pay out for. He can't afford this and won't have insurance come 2019. Never since Obama care has been enacted has he even met his deductible. In effect, people with pre-existing conditions feel that their need trumps (excuse the pun) the needs of everyone else. Why should my friend have to be priced out of the insurance market just so that others can get high-cost care? The really stupid part is that should he ever become ill, he can simply purchase insurance to obtain his own high cost care. So, the insurance market will lose his premium dollars for years but when he becomes a liability, he can just get coverage and have it paid for. This is why the insurance market is floundering and it's exactly what Obama wanted; the insurance industry to fail so that he could enact a single payor system. Talk about stealthy. The point of insurance is to spread the risk over the population. Not just insure sick people. Your friend should consider himself lucky that he never met his deductible. Having a health catastrophe is not the same as winning the lottery. Since my husband would be uninsurable without pre-existing condition coverage, are you saying he deserves that? I'm pretty sure that his 50 employees wouldn't appreciate him losing his business to bankruptcy. Healthcare for all is important to the entire community, not just sick people. I refuse to go back to the old days when families were bankrupted by having a sick baby who was classified with pre-existing conditions.
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Jun 8, 2018 16:10:46 GMT
and forget about the fact that you can go from the healthiest to the sickest or most disabled in the blink of an eye - or a texting driver - or a diagnosis Yep. Anyone who thinks 'it won't happen to me' has no idea. I'm healthy for the most part. But in the past 6 weeks I've had 2 ER visits, 3 urgent care visits and one hospitalization due to a pneumonia that won't clear up. The lung dr isn't sure it's really pneumonia since I'm too young to keep getting it. He's looking at various autoimmune diseases - although I have no symptoms of any of those. They've tested for so many things - one morning they took about 10 vials of blood, after taking 5 the night before. So far no real diagnosis. 7 weeks ago I would have said I'm totally well, perfectly healthy...and now (even though I'm feeling much better) it would be so easy for an insurance company to say I have a pre-existing condition and deny me coverage. Agreed. My brother watched his fiancé go from secondary cancer diagnosis to dead in five weeks. She had been in remission from breast cancer for years and thought she was doing well right up until she suddenly wasn’t, and she worked at a hospital! Similar thing with a friend of mine last year. She had no prior cancer, was diagnosed in April and was dead by September.
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,377
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jun 8, 2018 16:31:52 GMT
ACA is far from perfect. But it is just utterly wrong that someone with a preexisting condition may not be able to get insurance. I understand if someone finds out something is wrong with them and then tries to get insurace - but the truth is that preexisting condition loopholes make it easy to deny insurance when someone switches jobs, or loses a job and insurance and then can't get insured. This is a huge problem, and can easily affect any of us at any point in life. I can even understand if you're upset about having to cover someone who's ill because of "lifestyle" choices (not that those can always be defined), but the preexisting condition clauses can be applied to things that are clearly no one's fault - think about the child with Type I diabetes, for example. It's just wrong.
It’s not simply a matter of covering someone else’s cost. It’s being priced out of the insurance market all together and being unable to afford insurance yourself because the costs now reflect the cost of insuring somebody else
Which is why insurance is stupid.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 16:44:55 GMT
It’s not simply a matter of covering someone else’s cost. It’s being priced out of the insurance market all together and being unable to afford insurance yourself because the costs now reflect the cost of insuring somebody else
Which is why insurance is stupid. One of the main reasons for any insurance is to transfer financial risk. If insurance is stupid what would you or anyone else replace it with?
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jun 8, 2018 17:24:01 GMT
Which is why insurance is stupid. One of the main reasons for any insurance is to transfer financial risk. If insurance is stupid what would you or snyone else replace it with? Thoughts and prayers, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by Zee on Jun 8, 2018 17:39:54 GMT
I'm not one to wish cancer on anyone, but I sure bet some of these assholes would feel different about pre-existing conditions if it happened to them or their children, etc.
No one feels one ounce of compassion for an uninsured driver that causes an accident. They feel everyone who drives should have insurance. If you made insurance actually mandatory and managed to control costs, like auto insurance, we wouldn't have to have contests over who should have to die first.
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,377
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jun 8, 2018 17:58:54 GMT
Which is why insurance is stupid. One of the main reasons for any insurance is to transfer financial risk. If insurance is stupid what would you or anyone else replace it with? Universal healthcare.
|
|
wasil
Full Member
Posts: 354
Location: Iowa
Aug 3, 2014 12:59:34 GMT
|
Post by wasil on Jun 8, 2018 18:24:19 GMT
Although we have always had insurance through my husbands employer, we benefited from the abolishment of the preexisting conditions clause and the life time caps.
Our insurance, deductible and out-of-pocket goes up every year. I don’t see that improving with anything that has currently been proposed by this administration.
My husband has been looking forward to an early retirement but now insurance may hold him back. We are both active and healthy but we each have some health issues that would be considered preexisting conditions. That could make getting an insurance policy that would bridge the gap between employment and Medicare difficult to impossible.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 3:28:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 18:41:13 GMT
One of the main reasons for any insurance is to transfer financial risk. If insurance is stupid what would you or anyone else replace it with? Universal healthcare. How would you pay for it? California looked into it and found they couldn’t come up with a feasible way to pay for it. That was for just 40M people. The feds would have to come up with a plan to pay for 320M. At some point we may get there but probably not in my lifetime because there is no magic wand to wave and make it so. There is a lot of truth in the saying “the devil is in the details”. Until then, the sensible plan would have been to fix the ACA, which could have been done, until they could figure out how to shift 100’s of millions of people to Medicare with bankrupting the country in the process.
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 8, 2018 18:47:56 GMT
Obama care is a nightmare. Everyone I know has had their insurance rates triple. Anything that dismantles this nightmare is ok by me. Just an example: I have a friend who goes through Obamacare for his insurance. He pays full price no subsidies. In 2017 his premium was $447. In 2018, his premium went to $589. He just received notice that in 2019 his premium will go up to $897. Why? Because of all the people the insurance company has to pay out for. He can't afford this and won't have insurance come 2019. Never since Obama care has been enacted has he even met his deductible. In effect, people with pre-existing conditions feel that their need trumps (excuse the pun) the needs of everyone else. Why should my friend have to be priced out of the insurance market just so that others can get high-cost care? The really stupid part is that should he ever become ill, he can simply purchase insurance to obtain his own high cost care. So, the insurance market will lose his premium dollars for years but when he becomes a liability, he can just get coverage and have it paid for. This is why the insurance market is floundering and it's exactly what Obama wanted; the insurance industry to fail so that he could enact a single payor system. Talk about stealthy. The point of insurance is to spread the risk over the population. Not just insure sick people. Your friend should consider himself lucky that he never met his deductible. Having a health catastrophe is not the same as winning the lottery. Since my husband would be uninsurable without pre-existing condition coverage, are you saying he deserves that? I'm pretty sure that his 50 employees wouldn't appreciate him losing his business to bankruptcy. Healthcare for all is important to the entire community, not just sick people. I refuse to go back to the old days when families were bankrupted by having a sick baby who was classified with pre-existing conditions. So what makes your husband's entitlement to coverage more compelling than my friend's right to get coverage? I refuse to vote for anything that will allow Obamacare and it's provisions to stand
|
|
|
Post by LiLi on Jun 8, 2018 19:04:54 GMT
So what makes your husband's entitlement to coverage more compelling than my friend's right to get coverage? I refuse to vote for anything that will allow Obamacare and it's provisions to stand That is exactly the point. Neither's need for coverage trumps the other. Everyone should have equal opportunities and capability to get quality healthcare/insurance.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Jun 8, 2018 19:35:28 GMT
The point of insurance is to spread the risk over the population. Not just insure sick people. Your friend should consider himself lucky that he never met his deductible. Having a health catastrophe is not the same as winning the lottery. Since my husband would be uninsurable without pre-existing condition coverage, are you saying he deserves that? I'm pretty sure that his 50 employees wouldn't appreciate him losing his business to bankruptcy. Healthcare for all is important to the entire community, not just sick people. I refuse to go back to the old days when families were bankrupted by having a sick baby who was classified with pre-existing conditions. So what makes your husband's entitlement to coverage more compelling than my friend's right to get coverage? I refuse to vote for anything that will allow Obamacare and it's provisions to stand That’s pretty much the whole reason for having universal healthcare. Everyone gets covered that way, and no one is more important than the next.
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,377
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jun 8, 2018 19:44:42 GMT
How would you pay for it? California looked into it and found they couldn’t come up with a feasible way to pay for it. That was for just 40M people. The feds would have to come up with a plan to pay for 320M. At some point we may get there but probably not in my lifetime because there is no magic wand to wave and make it so. There is a lot of truth in the saying “the devil is in the details”. Until then, the sensible plan would have been to fix the ACA, which could have been done, until they could figure out how to shift 100’s of millions of people to Medicare with bankrupting the country in the process. Yeah...I don’t have answers for you. I just find it RIDICULOUS that health insurance companies make billions, BILLIONS of dollars in profits every single year and yet so many people cannot even afford basic healthcare services. Whether it’s people who’s premiums are skyrocketing, or people that have crazy high deductibles (me) or people that don’t have any coverage at all. The insurance companies have been so successful at pitting us against EACH OTHER to distract us from the real enemy (themselves). We are supposedly the greatest country on earth. Then why are so many other countries so successful at providing healthcare for all of their residents? Don’t say it’s because they’re “smaller”. We could do this if we WORKED TOGETHER and stopped making excuses.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 8, 2018 19:55:25 GMT
The insurance companies are at fault for the raising of the rates—not the ACA.
Check to see—all the insurance companies MADE money and paid out dividends to their shareholders.
What trump is doing now is destructive to more people than the ACA has “hurt”. He ran on the promise that he “had a great plan” that would fix everything for everyone, and it was nothing more than another one of his thousands of lies (and he knew it too because the joke was on the American people—come to find out he had no plan).
Many insurance companies, doctors, nurses, other medical professionals are stating that trumps plan is going to harm so many.
What I see from the republican/conservative front is that they continue to be only concerned for those within their little bubble and no one else—as long as they are taken care of and have no increase they’re good, everyone else be damned.
|
|