Mandatory Health Insurance part 3 - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-17-2012, 03:16 AM   #91
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Third, turning health care into a political football is reason # five hundred and forty three why health insurance should be bought by the individual and not acquired through their employer or government.
Indeed, the current employer-based healthcare system in the US was a fluke of combined unintended consequences.
__________________

__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2012, 07:21 PM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
That is a good reason, I think. Individuals choosing their own medical insurance policy without any mandatory policy forced upon them by their employer (or the government). Have the insurance companies offer a basic insurance of about $150/month which covers the basic things (for generic, medical necessary hospital admittance, visits to the GP, essential medication, etc.) with choices for additional coverage.
Have the insurance companies compete with each other, so the individual has an actual choice. It's still mandatory to be insured, but with competition costs can be lower (as well as the monthly premiums) and service will hopefully be important too.
Exactly, plus, high deductables will reintroduce free-market pricing for most medical purchases as patients shop around for price and hospitals, clinics and pharmacies compete for customers.

Too bad all this:

1) makes too much sense
2) takes power away from politicians and gives it to individuals (not popular right now)
3) could be so easily demagogued
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2012, 07:37 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
Sorry, Indy. You are mistaken.
Simply going by CBO estimates and when you figure in what CBO isn't allowed to like the "Doc Fix," the double accounting, the Medicare cuts that will never happen, the rosy tax revenue projections and the under estimate of how many Americans will lose their current health care coverage... I'm can still say with 100% certainty that... just like Soc Sec, Medicaid, Medicare, and every other federal entitlement passed in the past 100 years...

...Obamacare will cost many, many times more than originally estimated.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2012, 08:28 PM   #94
ONE
love, blood, life
 
digitize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas and around the Texas Triangle
Posts: 13,962
Local Time: 10:57 PM
How does one "have the insurance companies offer a basic insurance of about $150/month" while not mandating anything and keeping everything in the free market work, exactly? An unregulated health insurance market would probably be pretty oligopolistic.
__________________
digitize is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 02:40 AM   #95
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,863
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Exactly, plus, high deductables will reintroduce free-market pricing for most medical purchases as patients shop around for price and hospitals, clinics and pharmacies compete for customers.

Too bad all this:

1) makes too much sense
2) takes power away from politicians and gives it to individuals (not popular right now)
3) could be so easily demagogued
It's too bad that neither party is proposing this.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 07:18 PM   #96
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 05:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitize View Post
How does one "have the insurance companies offer a basic insurance of about $150/month" while not mandating anything and keeping everything in the free market work, exactly? An unregulated health insurance market would probably be pretty oligopolistic.
What do you mean with "not mandating anything"? I meant with "without any mandatory policy forced upon them by their employer (or the government)" that no employer should force you to buy insurance from company ABC or XYZ just because they have an arrangement with that company. However, "[i]t's still mandatory to be insured" so if you're not going with the option offered by the employer, you still have to choose another policy.

And how would "[a]n unregulated health insurance market [...] probably be pretty oligopolistic"? The market would maybe not be totally unregulated. And besides, anti-trust laws also apply to those insurance companies.
__________________
Popmartijn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 12:51 PM   #97
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Must be great to have a govt health plan like Dick Cheney's. I don't see how anyone with substandard or no health insurance would still be alive if they had his health problems.

Huffington Post

Health Care Mandate Will Affect Few, Study Finds



WASHINGTON -- Just 2 percent of the U.S. population would be subject to the aspect of health care reform at the center of a constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court this week -- the individual mandate, a study released Monday by the Urban Institute found. The analysis said 98 percent of Americans would either be exempt from the mandate -- because of employer coverage, public health insurance or low income -- or given subsidies to comply.

Including those who are subject to the mandate, but would get subsidies, increases the total number of people affected to 5 percent of the population, according to the Urban Institute, a non-partisan policy research organization based in Washington, D.C. (Some of those subject to the mandate who get subsidies would still need to dig into their pocket to cover the difference.)

Opponents of the mandate argue that it infringes on personal liberty by requiring the unwanted purchase of something from a private entity. Backers say the mandate is constitutional because everyone consumes health care services at some point, so it is reasonable to tax people who consume care without paying for it.

The Urban Institute study indicates that such a tax, or fine, would be levied on a small population.

Health care reform prevents insurers from discriminating against patients with pre-existing conditions and caps premiums that can be charged. The only way to accomplish such reform, backers say, is to require healthy people to insure themselves, rather than wait until they get sick.

The court spent Monday debating whether to delay a decision in the case, with the justices appearing to be intent on ruling this year.

Tuesday the court weighs the constitutionality of the individual mandate. HuffPost's Mike Sacks reports:

During today's two-hour argument -- twice as long as the 60 minutes the court usually allots each case -- the justices will pepper each side's superlawyers with questions that will give public hints of how they will ultimately decide the case by late-June.

The court's four Democratic appointees -- Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan -- are all expected to side with Solicitor General Donald Verrilli's primary argument on behalf of President Barack Obama's administration that the mandate falls within Congress' broad power to regulate interstate commerce. The inevitable consumption of health care services by the uninsured, Verrilli will argue, substantially affects the national insurance market by shifting costs to the insured and creating the problem of skyrocketing premiums that the Affordable Care Act was designed to solve.

Justice Clarence Thomas, on the other hand, need not break his six-year streak of silence at oral argument to reiterate his oft-written antipathy towards the New Deal precedents Verrilli's argument draws upon for support.

So while there is always a vanishingly slim chance that one or two of the liberal justices will surprise the public with some pointed questions for the solicitor general, it is more likely that they will try to win over their remaining four conservative colleagues by putting the screws into the challengers' lawyers.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:06 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Swan269's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: HawkMoon
Posts: 3,694
Local Time: 12:57 AM
I am all for the government taking over the Health Care system, I mean all of Europe does it and things seem to be working great. I don't ever hear from them complaining about there health care systems, hell Bono went to Germany to get his back fixed and didn't come to the US so we don't know how to do everything.

As far as I know, the US is the only country lame enough not to have a health care system where only the uber rich can get good health care and the rest of us can't even get band aids without having to get a second mortgage.

My step dad worked for the Veterans Administration for over 35 years and raves about how great the care was for our veterans. He worked with the budgets for hospitals and told me that nothing runs smoother than when the government handles these facilites. And talk about the efficiency, I mean clock work orange fellows!

I trust our government to do whats best for me, hell I elected these people right?

With smart intelligence, how I pray the supreme court does the right thing for real change in this ever evolving pursuit of utopia, which is the United States.
__________________
Swan269 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:13 PM   #99
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swan269 View Post

My step dad worked for the Veterans Administration for over 35 years and raves about how great the care was for our veterans. He worked with the budgets for hospitals and told me that nothing runs smoother than when the government handles these facilities. And talk about the efficiency, I mean clock work orange fellows!

I trust our government to do whats best for me, hell I elected these people right?
I don't know if you're being sarcastic there, seems like maybe? No offense to your step dad but I think the VA is terrible. Just knowing what I know about it from the care a family member has gotten there.

I don't trust the govt to do what's best for me, I've become very cynical about govt. But I do believe in universal/affordable health care. MA has had it for years, including a mandate, and it seems to be working fairly well.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 01:25 PM   #100
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:57 PM
Of course the VA has some problems, but for the amount of medical coverage they provide, and at the costs, it is very effective and efficient.

people that don't like it, can opt out and go provide, and pay those costs.

many people choose to opt out of government provided schools and go private
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 05:51 PM   #101
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Yeah, because every senior has an abundance of income and isn't living off VA benefits and Social Security.

There are plenty of senior veterans. And don't forget all the unemployed younger veterans.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 07:18 PM   #102
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Huffington Post

Health Care Mandate Will Affect Few, Study Finds

The analysis said 98 percent of Americans would either be exempt from the mandate -- because of employer coverage, public health insurance or low income -- or given subsidies to comply.
The reason this is false is actually given several paragraphs later:
Quote:
Health care reform prevents insurers from discriminating against patients with pre-existing conditions and caps premiums that can be charged. The only way to accomplish such reform, backers say, is to require healthy people to insure themselves, rather than wait until they get sick.
If you can't be turned down because of a preexisting condition -- why would anyone, if not mandated under penalty of law, pay hundreds of dollars a month when healthy rather than waiting until they actually needed health insurance to purchase it?
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 07:56 PM   #103
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Conservatives often make the best arguments for a single-payer system.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 08:51 PM   #104
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
The reason this is false is actually given several paragraphs later:


If you can't be turned down because of a preexisting condition -- why would anyone, if not mandated under penalty of law, pay hundreds of dollars a month when healthy rather than waiting until they actually needed health insurance to purchase it?
I don't see the connection between these two ideas to be honest.
__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 08:53 PM   #105
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Must be great to have a govt health plan like Dick Cheney's. I don't see how anyone with substandard or no health insurance would still be alive if they had his health problems.
That is one thing that really drives me nuts about this. The very same politicians ranting against this "evil healthcare" sure don't seem to mind taking that cushy healthcare for themselves. Apparently it's fine for them, but for anyone else? Nope. Scary. Taking away liberties, or something.
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com