By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 05 November 2009
Edit Thread
ckmlb said:
Kasz216 said:
ckmlb said:
 

 

People with prexisting conditions can get healthcare covrage.  It's just more expesnive.

That's how all insurance works.

If your more likely to be in a car accident, it's more expensive for you to get car insurance.

If it looks like your going to die sooner, it's more expensive for you to get life insurance.

If your house is in a more dangerous area it's more expensive for you to get house insurance.

Here is another question though.  Why should healthy people get insurance if you get charged the same for a prexisting condition?

Why, get healthinsurance now... when healthy, when I can wait until i actually need my health insurance to get it?

Additionally, that doesn't actually adress the issue on why healthcare insurance will cost more.  Your basically conceding the argument.

 

Why is the AMA supporting this?   Politics.  I mean, it's fun to note that they were against the very same plan up till aboute June of this year... and espiecally against ALL public healthcare options.

 

What they want is a public option that will insure everyone for near free so they can make more money since they often don't collect on uninsured people.  That an a uniform law for insurance forms.  Doctors spend like 15% of what they make in paperwork help.

I can say the same thing about why you are against healthcare reform, politics. You might be a right wing guy or a small government guy, either way your opposition can be mainly political too.

There was an initiative by Bachus to make health insuranc mandatory without the public option, is the AMA supporting that?

I don't think the life of somebody should be equated with car insurance and home insurance and such because many pre existing conditions are out of the control of the person, not like they were reckless and were born with a condition or got cancer before getting new insurance or something.

Also, health care companies use the smallest excuse to prevent coverage, did you know that achne was considered a pre existing condition that someone did not report to their health insurance provider and so they were dropped?

http://www.seiu.org/2009/08/womans-son-denied-coverage-because-of-acne.php

It's not... i've actually done research.  Unlike you... apparently since you seem to be taking numbers and talking points at face value. I always read everu sides of every policy debate like this from liberal, conservative, liberatiran, fiscal democrat.. you name it.  See what they have to say, and pick apart their research.

As for people getting dropped for ridiculious prexisting conditions like Acne.  Yeah you want a law about that... but your talking about a giant overhaul that will likely make things worse to fix one minor thing.

Also, it's not like house insurance and car insruance people are "reckless".

People can only afford houses some places... that are dangerous.  People who get in accidents aren't "reckless" there are numerous reasons why some people are ebtter drivers then others, often ones people can't control.

Government Healthcare is a good thing... if you find a way to do it right... for the country.

What this is, is nothign but a giant middle ground idea that NEVER works in politcs and screws things up.

I mean... we're basically trying to go with a modified version of the Massachutus plan... that hasn't worked...