It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Poll Shows Tremendous Support for Public Health Care Option

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 04:04 PM

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity

Sorry to tell you that what you described is the current system. The only solution i ever see from this particular group of posters is
"Let them eat cake"

Fortunately only a small majority of the US people are so small minded.

No, actually you're pretty misinformed. No offense of course.

No one gets approval from DC right now, lol. In fact, so many doctors give out medication like it's CANDY.

Actually you are dead wrong. Maybe they don't call DC but they do call the insurance companies to get approval before they provide anything but routine treatment. Pharmacies clear all prescriptions with the insurance companies before dispensing them. Get your facts right before commenting.

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 04:12 PM

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Leo Strauss

This interesting my daughters health insurance is blue Shield and she have this insurance due to her job.

They also have a lower version that is like you are talking about, you put money from your check into a pot and they match it monthly and when you need to see a doctor the money comes from that account.

I don't know if is a good idea actually is suppose to be for healthy people that doesn't have need to see a doctor on a regular basis.

Health savings accounts are not a different form of insurance. They simply allow you to put money away free of taxes in order to pay for deductibles, prescriptions, etc. For some people these costs are predictable so it makes sense. and it is usually the people with poorer health or who take a bunch of prescriptions that Health Savings accounts work. I personally think it makes more sense just to make all health related costs tax deductible.

I get so dang tired of people taking such strong positions about things they have no idea about.

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 04:22 PM

Originally posted by jjkenobi

What you are leaving out is that 77.9% of those who went bankrupt ALREADY HAD HEALTH INSURANCE. So adding another option for health care isn't going to help those who already had it and still went bankrupt. This "solution" isn't tailored to fix the actual problem. Only 2.8% couldn't get coverage because of a pre-existing condition. I would say that does not qualify as a valid reason to roll out a trillion dollar healthcare platform.

Also what is kind of shady is that they include gambling as a medical condition and count those towards the bankruptcies as well.

Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study (PDF)

Where does that PDF say anything about Gambling? The fact that people that did have health insurance stillgo bankrupt should set some bells off in your head that we do need serious reform. The fact that those with insurance are denied coverage for their pre existing conditions is a major factor in this. Just because you have insurance doesn't mean that they willcover your illness. This is something Obama wants to fix. The points you make disagree with your own conclusions.

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 04:58 PM
Only 2.8% couldn't get coverage because of a pre-existing condition.

That is BS its more like 25% or the policy you get cost 4 times more and has a excursion for the pre-existing condition.

Many vietnam vets bought health insurance only to find out that if the condition they got years later was linked to agent orange there insurance was cancelled when the company found they were agent orange vets.

in calif about 60% of the insurance complaints filed at the state department of insurance are about shady or outright illegal pratises by health insurance companies. heyMeanToYou.cfm

One of the other problems people in Calif are having is that many companies will not hire people with disabilities or health problems
because of the cost to the companies in health insurance.

This totally undermines the American with Disabilities Act and leaves these people unemployable and unable to even pay for health insurance.

In many of these cases these people were disabled in the workplace and had to change jobs only to find that no one would hire them because of the injuries they received in the workplace.

Also its a common practise by insurance companies to put people on a industry wide blacklist if they sue a insurance company of the illegal practise,

This means that if your insurance company illegally fails to pay a claim and you take them to court and win you get put on a black list and that company and other companies may refuse to sell you health insurance in the future.

This in one of the reasons many big companies during there pre-empolyment background checks will check on you health history and if you have ever sued anyone/company.

At the least the government will HAVE to set up a health care system for the disabled and people that can not work because of a workplace injury.

The insurance industry makes money by selling insurance to people that are well. If you then became sick and unable to work your normal trade/job they will try anything to unload you from your health insurance even to the point of making it imposable for you to find new work to pay for insurance.

Many Veterans at the VA hospital i go to HAD insurance till they became disabled (many with workplace injuries)and unable to afford insurance.

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 10:38 PM
The questions didn't seem like they were saying nationalized health care, they said public. So maybe there's a confusing.

Also, was this a poll to readers, or to the general public via telephone, etc.

new topics

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in