next »

[Craig Stern]

What?
No, people don't say an insurance company has a magical pool of money and that's why it should pay for sick customers...

They say an insurance company should pay for a sick customer because that's their job, and that's the expensive, expensive service that they've been selling.

And they should give that service to those who have paid for it.  Like I said before.  That's one of the few things they did right in this bill.  It ought to have been passed by itself a long time ago.

But there's no reason why insurance companies should be required to pay when some shmoe they've never done business with before shows up at their door with a serious illness and demands that they cover him.

You seem confused about what this bill does. The bill requires everyone to get insurance, and for insurance companies to cover everyone. Everyone is paid for, one way or another (the government subsidizes health care for people who aren't covered by their employers, moreso for people with less income, and 100% for people whose insurance would total 8% or more of their household income). So that shmoe who shows up at the insurance company's door is paid for, one way or another. The insurance company doesn't lose out, and shmoe isn't forced to forego necessary medical care.

Or are you saying that insurance companies shouldn't be required to cover people with preexisting conditions? Because if that's your point, then I think you might have something wrong with your moral compass.

[Zenorf]

The general shmoe probably loses out in the long run since all these companies are about making profits. They can now up prices over time and in the slightly longer term the taxes will have to follow since more people are below the threshold that they pay for their own.

Whether the people are better off with this bill I can't say but I can definitely say that the bill was successfully turned into a Win Win situation for the insurance companies.

[drChengele]

Or are you saying that insurance companies shouldn't be required to cover people with preexisting conditions? Because if that's your point, then I think you might have something wrong with your moral compass.

I can't speak for Vanguard, but I think he was talking from an insurance company's point of view. I have encountered this sort of thinking before and it is utterly alien to me. Of course corporations are only out there to make a profit. That's why healthcare should not have anything to do with corporations, or at the very least should be regulated to prevent economic interest of insurance companies denying any citizen medical coverage on any grounds whatsoever.

These are peoples' wellbeing and lives we're talking about here. Corporate profits should not be a factor. Or rather, the system should not have the financially motivated corporate sector anywhere near health coverage in order to avoid these sort of inhumane outcomes.

This is not economically unfeasible and yet the US politicians seem to think it is, presumably because they haven't bothered to look at any country in the world outside the US. You'd think HMO CEOs would be starving to death the second they allowed a slightly larger percentage of people to get treated.

[Mipe]

The general shmoe probably loses out in the long run since all these companies are about making profits. They can now up prices over time and in the slightly longer term the taxes will have to follow since more people are below the threshold that they pay for their own.

Whether the people are better off with this bill I can't say but I can definitely say that the bill was successfully turned into a Win Win situation for the insurance companies.

Actually, the insurer will have to compete; if everyone can apply for insurance without getting denied, they will have to adjust prices and service to compete, because without pre-existing condition filtering they're going to get a lot of "ticking bombs" in form of sickly customers.

The one way to compensate for that is to attract more people. Enter the competition. Moreover, they will promote healthy lifestyle in order to ensure their customers don't go "boom" on their expenses.

So, this is a win-win situation for the society as well.

[SirNiko]

Or are you saying that insurance companies shouldn't be required to cover people with preexisting conditions? Because if that's your point, then I think you might have something wrong with your moral compass.

Everyone donates a little to the insurance pot on a gamble that if you're the one in ten that has a serious problem and need to cash out, there's enough money in there for everyone.

Would you feel differently if we talking about, say, extended warranties on VCRs? You walk into the department store ten months after buying your VCR, pay 20 bucks for the extended warranty, and then immediately inform them that the VCR broke two days ago and so they should replace it.

That's what it's like when you buy health insurance with a pre-existing condition.

I'm not saying it's not morally right to deny health insurance from a sick person (pre-existing condition or not) but it's dishonest if you only contribute to the pot when you need to cash out, and then act like it's the job of everyone around you to provide that care. You ought to be asking for it, not demanding it.

-SirNiko

[Mipe]

Come on, you can't compare technical and health services. Your VCR doesn't have basic human rights, while you do. If you fall seriously ill and don't have insurance, it is the society's responsibility to nurse you back onto your legs.

Do you really expect ER ambulance crew to cancel the rescue the moment they find out the victim is not insured?

[Ntero]

Or are you saying that insurance companies shouldn't be required to cover people with preexisting conditions? Because if that's your point, then I think you might have something wrong with your moral compass.

Everyone donates a little to the insurance pot on a gamble that if you're the one in ten that has a serious problem and need to cash out, there's enough money in there for everyone.

Would you feel differently if we talking about, say, extended warranties on VCRs? You walk into the department store ten months after buying your VCR, pay 20 bucks for the extended warranty, and then immediately inform them that the VCR broke two days ago and so they should replace it.

That's what it's like when you buy health insurance with a pre-existing condition.

I'm not saying it's not morally right to deny health insurance from a sick person (pre-existing condition or not) but it's dishonest if you only contribute to the pot when you need to cash out, and then act like it's the job of everyone around you to provide that care. You ought to be asking for it, not demanding it.

-SirNiko

But the pre-existing condition mechanics were being abused.  It was labelling insignificant past issues to block off issues that were not pre-existing.  While the general mindset is sound 'If you don't want to contribute, don't reap the rewards' it was being corrupted.  However, forcing people to now own insurance has replaced that.  Everyone does contribute, and as compensation for forced contribution, they can no longer be turned away.  Insurance Companies get rid of the sick guy turning up cause he needs money, and people get piece of mind that if they have insurance their health issues are covered.

[SirNiko]

Do you really expect ER ambulance crew to cancel the rescue the moment they find out the victim is not insured?

ER always has and always will take care of anybody first and foremost, and deal with the money afterwards. That was true long before this bill came up, and I think should continue to be true.

I don't consider health care a human right, nor do I think anyone has a right to demand the services or money of another, especially if that other person had no involvement to create the situation. Health care is a technical service with a cost. If it was me, you could expect I'd be on my knees begging, not upright making demands.

That's just my perspective as an engineer. I've been told before I think of things too objectively sometimes.

-SirNiko

[Craig Stern]

Everyone donates a little to the insurance pot on a gamble that if you're the one in ten that has a serious problem and need to cash out, there's enough money in there for everyone.

Would you feel differently if we talking about, say, extended warranties on VCRs? You walk into the department store ten months after buying your VCR, pay 20 bucks for the extended warranty, and then immediately inform them that the VCR broke two days ago and so they should replace it.

If everyone in the country, including me, were required to have a VCR warranty, then no, I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. That's the whole point of the way this law is structured: it's a social safety net. Everyone contributes so that when someone needs it, it's available to them.

[Dacke]

I've been told before I think of things too objectively sometimes.

That's not thinking more objectively

[Soulliard]

I don't consider health care a human right,

I simply cannot comprehend this statement. Health care may be the only thing separating someone from life and death. If health care is not a human right, than neither is the right to life itself.

As an aside, Americans are scary.

[Hangedman]

Well, I'm tired of all this shit, so I'm done with it for the next while.

All I want to say is if being charged exorbitant amounts for things beyond your control and supporting corporate abuse of citizens is American, I'm glad I'm not.

[Valter]

By the way guys, in case you didn't hear, the health bill got unpassed

Now it has to go through the Senate and the House again.

[tso]

well that's bullshit

[Bood_war]

Huh. Oh well. Geese though, I was gone for one day after I posted think and it grew by like 10 pages.

Guess I'm off the hook for posting my in-depth analysis of it, eh Chtulu32?

[Valter]

By the way, I think one of the greatest failings of the current American health care system is organ donation. People are not allowed to sell organs legally, and the result has been a massive waiting list that's only growing larger every day (with people in need of organs that have been waiting for months and even years).

I'm kind of irked that it hasn't even been addressed in the last year's chicanery.

[Soulliard]

The bill didn't get unpassed. It was signed into law, and that hasn't changed.

The separate reconciliation bill, which makes improvements upon the original bill (such as eliminating the Cornhusker Kickback) was slightly modified in the Senate from the bill that the House passed on Sunday. This means that the House has to pass it again, which it will be able to do without difficulty.

It's really not a big deal, since the changes were pretty minor.

[Valter]

Ah- looks like it was already resolved. Apparently two of the points broke some budgeting rules, or something. Anyway, they've been removed.

sorry for the confusion! (I guess I didn't expect any change in Congress to take less than six weeks)

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

By the way, I think one of the greatest failings of the current American health care system is organ donation. People are not allowed to sell organs legally, and the result has been a massive waiting list that's only growing larger every day (with people in need of organs that have been waiting for months and even years).

I'm kind of irked that it hasn't even been addressed in the last year's chicanery.

i agree with this, but i think it should probably be restricted to organs you can live without, and it should be proven that the donation was voluntary before the sale is allowed to go through. otherwise people will start getting killed for their organs, as i've heard happens often in china. if you sell a kidney on the black market, you can get thousands or tens of thousands for it, and they don't care where you got it.

[Valter]

Well, the main organ shortage I was talking about was the kidney shortage. The thing about kidneys is that you have two of them, and you can function normally with only one. Also, by making kidney sale legal or even subsidized, the government can make sure that the kidney you donate comes from, well, you.

Several other countries have successfully implemented kidney sales, and they no longer have a kidney donor waiting list (contrasting sharply with America's massive waiting list). I can't remember them off the top of my head, but if you want I'll dig them up.