It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The madness and redefinition of insurance

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

Dear beezer,

Don't be too hasty, David9176 may have a point. But he's being a little shy and not expressing the full glory of his solution. If we allow the government to tax us and then pay for all medical care for everybody according to government standards, there wouldn't be this argument, government would control it.

But this will pop up again in issues such as homosexuality, women priests, prayer where others can hear you, etc. David 9176's real idea is for the government to control all of religion. That would eliminate all these problems.

Imagine how wonderful it would be to have the government tell religions that they couldn't preach against homosexual acts? Better still, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright could prepare the sermons for distribution to the people who were licensed to attend church.

But there's no reason to stop David9176's idea even there. Certainly the evil oil companies should be controlled by the government, and those Wall Street bankers, and mortgage companies, and insurance companies, and the car companies (almost there). Dont forget mass transit systems, credit card companies, landlords.

I tell you the idea is thrilling!! Think how many problems can be solved if the government took them over!! I can see a bright future for this country, all due to the forward looking plans of David9176.

With respect,
]Charles1952




posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   


Control all religion? How is a public option controlling all religion? If anything, it takes the argument completely out of the equation as anyone can get insurance that fits their needs that an employer doesn't want to provide (based on their religious or moral beliefs). They way you want it, the employer's religious and moral rights trump that of the employee's religious and moral rights.

That's the real battle here IMO.

If you are so angry about the mandates...why aren't you protesting the insurance companies that wanted the mandates in the first place? That's the only way they would cut a deal to any kind of health reform.


edit on 17-2-2012 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 
Sir, you forget, I work for an aspect of the government. I am well aware of their standards.
Religion would be the least of it.

That level of control would invade the use of sugar, salt, nicotine, alcohol, red meat. That level of control wouldn't just stop with catholics.
Mandates would be more common than a weekend at Barney Frank's house!



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176


Control all religion? How is a public option controlling all religion? If anything, it takes the argument completely out of the equation as anyone can get insurance that fits their needs that an employer doesn't want to provide (based on their religious or moral beliefs).

If you are so angry about the mandates...why aren't you protesting the insurance companies that wanted the mandates in the first place? That's the only way they would cut a deal to any kind of health reform.

The government solution would be a one-size-fits-all. We're seeing just a hint with the "mandates" on catholic hospitals. With, I have to say, just deserts, since the catholic church was all for this 3 years ago.

I've never said things didn't need fixing.

But this kind of repair is akin to chemo to treat a nose bleed. Yeah, it'd solve the problem, and just create 2 dozen more.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


But you do ultimately realize that if more people don't have some kind of insurance, whether it be private or public, that costs will continue to explode?

What is your solution to this?



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by beezzer
 


But you do ultimately realize that if more people don't have some kind of insurance, whether it be private or public, that costs will continue to explode?

What is your solution to this?

Honestly?
Okay, lets take Obamacare off the table. Completely.
First?
Caps on medical lawsuits and malpractice insurance.
Second?
Open up interstate commerce, allow insurance companies across state lines, allow them to compete, let the free market pick the best coverage, not the government.

With these two options, you'd see hospital prices fall, (hospitals pay out huge bucks just for malpractice) so even people who didn't have insurance could afford whatever treatment they sought.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Insurance companies should never have to provide birth control pill, viagra or any other non-life-threatening care.
Likewise most of these checkups are unnecessary and a waste of insurance companie's money.
The doctor and the labs get a fee for their work, which they have plenty of without the checkups on healthy people.

I'm retired and on one of the retiree's plans. They have asked me to come in every 6 months for a "checkup".
I started putting it off to 9 months and then a year. If they insist on the 6 months I wait till a week before the appointment and then call up to say that I cannot make it and will call them when I find a convenient time, which may be a year later. And that's just to keep in touch so they don't lose my file or some such. This nonsense disrupts my schedule. When I have a problem I'll let them know.

When do we get to discuss auto insurance. I have a few things to say about that, and title to this thread does not specify health insurance, but it would seem at this stage to be off topic.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 

I grew up in a house where you only saw a doctor if the bleeding didn't stop or a bone was obviously broken.

Poultices are still used in my house.

There has been a slow, invasive creep towards going to insurance for everything from split ends to hurt feelings.

A shift has to occur, a growing up, as it were, to a time when we didn't run to mama for every cut and "owie" that happened.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
I just want to add, some things about insurance.

Auto insurance you have if you wreck your car. You don't call Alstate if you need gas, or to change your wiper blades.

Health insurance should have the same principles applied. You don't call your health insurance provider if you need your toe nails clipped or you need a condom.

Have we become that dependent on an agency/authority to provide for us?

Have we lost the ability to get birth control by ourselves?

Sometimes America really worries me.


#1I drive old cars -- I like really old cars 30 plus years old -- and yes state farm will pay to have gas delivered to me at the side of the road an I actually don't really have to pay a lot for insurance is really pretty cheap. Fun fact I pay 500.oo per year for insurance and 97cents per year of taxes for a 78 Rolls Royce and State Farm will deliver gas.

#2 strawman

#3 Birth control is important to society as a whole -- it is important. Birth control can cost 1000.oo per year - a lot of people make more or less than 10.oo per hour - walmart MickyDs etc. 10.oo is 20000.oo per year (before taxes sales tax gas tax property taxes etc) So birth control takes approximately 5% of their income. They can not negotiate prices and if they do work at someplace that provides insurance they are already paying 200 - 300 per month, which is probably two weeks pay.

People cannot see how this works sometimes America worries me too.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by spyder550
 



#3 Birth control is important to society as a whole -- it is important. Birth control can cost 1000.oo per year - a lot of people make more or less than 10.oo per hour - walmart MickyDs etc. 10.oo is 20000.oo per year (before taxes sales tax gas tax property taxes etc) So birth control takes approximately 5% of their income. They can not negotiate prices and if they do work at someplace that provides insurance they are already paying 200 - 300 per month, which is probably two weeks pay.
The situation isn't quite as bleak as you make it out to be for the poor. If a woman is making $10 per hour and is not on a state funded medical assistance program her birth control will be paid for completely, as in for free, by Planned Parenthood under their 4NOW program.
Family Size Weekly Income Limit

One person $418
2 people (you plus one) $565
3 people (you plus two) $712
4 people (you plus three) $859

So with a household of 4 people, she could be making $40,000 a year and still get free annual exams and birth control.

I think you'll have to come up with some hard information to persuade me that the poor won't be able to get birth control.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join