It is a rational argument, which I appreciate; but, it's extremely specious to assume that everybody is overweight, never takes preventative care, doesn't exercise, always eats fast food, only goes to the ER, buys name brand out-of-pocket *instead* of generic, sues their doctor when something goes wrong, takes illegal narcotics, smokes, excessively drinks, and abuses prescriptions.
In fact, I don't personally know anybody who can be classified under more than two of those genrealizations.
@cmatrix4761 What??? Even one of those classifications is sufficient to make one a burden on the system (requiring more care than one has paid into the pool). And any US healths stats demonstrate that for the majority of Americans, at LEAST one or even TWO of these classifications apply. That's why Obamacare doesn't actually do anything except spread liability for an insanely unhealthy population--because that's what the INDUSTRY paid democrats to do in '09.
@thereinliestherib If it were a matter of requiring one to pay in as much as they take out, insurance would not exist. Insurance companies spread risk over many different systems in order to make it possible to handle acute health issues while still being profitable.
And don't quote stats if you can't back it up with references - the most ridiculous thing people do to support their political argument is making up statistics.
@cmatrix4761 False. Every other form of insurance BUT health includes adjustment for personal risk; it keeps individual accountable for their own behavior, frees consumer choice, and allows people to be charged reasonable rates. With health ins. there is an opposite distribution of risk--the more risky pay LESS in proportion to their input. The industry loves your BS argument because in the aggregate, their revenues can only increase with an irresponsible population.
@thereinliestherib (cont.) As the population becomes more unhealthy, more risk is forced upon the pool, giving the regulatory leverage to demand higher rates, more mandates, and generous buying restrictions that force healthy people into pools and coverage that don't represent their risk level. And BS stats? Do you even know what the obesity rate is in America? Are you aware that the least healthy 5% consume appr. 70% of our HC expenditures??? And not the least bit for "accidental" ailments.
@thereinliestherib U really need to read better and check your facts; health insurance providers in the US are required by federal law to hedge their risk with other investments. The only exceptions are aggregate individual providers (of which you don't see many). And higher risk patrons *always* pay more into their health insurance - higher premiums and higher rates.
Let me guess - you get your insurance through your employer and probably don't even know if it's PPO, HMO or something else.
@cmatrix4761 You simply do not get it. I am currently uninsured--both because I'm a student, and because mandates prohibit me from buying catastrophic coverage, nor may I buy coverage according to my personal risk level (such as with ANY other form of insurance). And yes, when I recently had employer insurance, that insurance was far more costly than it should have been because of required coverage for wonderful things like obesity counseling and smoker/drug rehab.
@thereinliestherib And spreading liability and risk is exactly what insurance providers do - they take the burden of making acute payments and leverage the risk over different sectors in various markets. "Obamacare", as many douchebag politicial pricks call it, installs oversight into the system, making sure that companies spread that risk for everybody, not just a select few.
@cmatrix4761 What??? Spreading risk over everybody, under the pretenses of fairness, is anything but. The intent is solely to spread liability for an insanely unhealthy population among those who are of a much lower risk level. That's equivalent to a system of car insurance in which everyone is insured, the roads are filled with drunks and tweekers, and everyone is charged the same rate out of "fairness". The result: good drivers pay unreasonable rates to subsidize the idiots.
This is not the time for, go as you learn President. Unemployment is sky high, Iran is about to built the nuclear bomb, our national security is wide open, and you focus on pay-now coverage later health care? If you going the promise health care get it right! Coverage starts now, not next month, next year, or 5 years. We dont need pay now benefit later scheme. What the hell?
JESUS would want every American to have health insurance, illness to be treated, sick people not be discriminated against, and not be bankrupt by lack of health care. Thank you JESUS. I LOVE U. PRAISE THE LORD!
It is a rational argument, which I appreciate; but, it's extremely specious to assume that everybody is overweight, never takes preventative care, doesn't exercise, always eats fast food, only goes to the ER, buys name brand out-of-pocket *instead* of generic, sues their doctor when something goes wrong, takes illegal narcotics, smokes, excessively drinks, and abuses prescriptions.
In fact, I don't personally know anybody who can be classified under more than two of those genrealizations.
cmatrix4761 1 year ago 2
@cmatrix4761 What??? Even one of those classifications is sufficient to make one a burden on the system (requiring more care than one has paid into the pool). And any US healths stats demonstrate that for the majority of Americans, at LEAST one or even TWO of these classifications apply. That's why Obamacare doesn't actually do anything except spread liability for an insanely unhealthy population--because that's what the INDUSTRY paid democrats to do in '09.
thereinliestherib 10 months ago
@thereinliestherib If it were a matter of requiring one to pay in as much as they take out, insurance would not exist. Insurance companies spread risk over many different systems in order to make it possible to handle acute health issues while still being profitable.
And don't quote stats if you can't back it up with references - the most ridiculous thing people do to support their political argument is making up statistics.
cmatrix4761 10 months ago
@cmatrix4761 False. Every other form of insurance BUT health includes adjustment for personal risk; it keeps individual accountable for their own behavior, frees consumer choice, and allows people to be charged reasonable rates. With health ins. there is an opposite distribution of risk--the more risky pay LESS in proportion to their input. The industry loves your BS argument because in the aggregate, their revenues can only increase with an irresponsible population.
thereinliestherib 10 months ago
@thereinliestherib (cont.) As the population becomes more unhealthy, more risk is forced upon the pool, giving the regulatory leverage to demand higher rates, more mandates, and generous buying restrictions that force healthy people into pools and coverage that don't represent their risk level. And BS stats? Do you even know what the obesity rate is in America? Are you aware that the least healthy 5% consume appr. 70% of our HC expenditures??? And not the least bit for "accidental" ailments.
thereinliestherib 10 months ago
@thereinliestherib U really need to read better and check your facts; health insurance providers in the US are required by federal law to hedge their risk with other investments. The only exceptions are aggregate individual providers (of which you don't see many). And higher risk patrons *always* pay more into their health insurance - higher premiums and higher rates.
Let me guess - you get your insurance through your employer and probably don't even know if it's PPO, HMO or something else.
cmatrix4761 10 months ago
@cmatrix4761 You simply do not get it. I am currently uninsured--both because I'm a student, and because mandates prohibit me from buying catastrophic coverage, nor may I buy coverage according to my personal risk level (such as with ANY other form of insurance). And yes, when I recently had employer insurance, that insurance was far more costly than it should have been because of required coverage for wonderful things like obesity counseling and smoker/drug rehab.
thereinliestherib 10 months ago
@thereinliestherib And spreading liability and risk is exactly what insurance providers do - they take the burden of making acute payments and leverage the risk over different sectors in various markets. "Obamacare", as many douchebag politicial pricks call it, installs oversight into the system, making sure that companies spread that risk for everybody, not just a select few.
cmatrix4761 10 months ago
@cmatrix4761 What??? Spreading risk over everybody, under the pretenses of fairness, is anything but. The intent is solely to spread liability for an insanely unhealthy population among those who are of a much lower risk level. That's equivalent to a system of car insurance in which everyone is insured, the roads are filled with drunks and tweekers, and everyone is charged the same rate out of "fairness". The result: good drivers pay unreasonable rates to subsidize the idiots.
thereinliestherib 10 months ago
Nice
LtSurge659 1 year ago
This is not the time for, go as you learn President. Unemployment is sky high, Iran is about to built the nuclear bomb, our national security is wide open, and you focus on pay-now coverage later health care? If you going the promise health care get it right! Coverage starts now, not next month, next year, or 5 years. We dont need pay now benefit later scheme. What the hell?
yesilike101 1 year ago
JESUS would want every American to have health insurance, illness to be treated, sick people not be discriminated against, and not be bankrupt by lack of health care. Thank you JESUS. I LOVE U. PRAISE THE LORD!
noformstyle 1 year ago
@noformstyle
JESUS wouldn't jail people either rich or poor. PRAISE THE LORD!
yesilike101 1 year ago
@noformstyle If Jesus intervened, we wouldn't need health care. What the hell is he waiting for, dammit?!?!?!
cmatrix4761 1 year ago 3
Truly impressive!
mberneis 1 year ago 5