Clinton to offer health care plan, only $110,000,000,000 a year

Yeah... because the free market has done such a good job up to now! Everyone REALLY LOVES the current system. Most people can't say enough about how wonderful they think the current 'free market' system is.

What rock do some of you folks live under? Must be a large one.

Al

Yep, the big one, you know, the 3rd rock from the Sun.

In terms of disbelieve of all reality, let's see if we agree on the following:

- Access to healthcare is a right. Anyone who can pay for it should have access to it.
- Health insurance is a way to protect yourself in the event you become ill or have an accident. Health insurance itself is not a right, just like auto insurance is not a right.
- If government mandates health insurance (as in you have to have it), this will eventually lead to either the decrease of care, to contain costs, or much, much higher premiums due to adverse selection.
- I have an obligation to myself and my family. I will gladly help out the invalid, disabled, and poor ederly.
- I do not want to help out those who chose to stay at home, rather than work, when they are perfectly capable of working (a child at home is a reason to work, not stay at home).

I personally like guaranteed issue health insurance. People with problems should have a way to obtain some help, without having to declare bankruptcy. I know this is problematic, especially if you talk about adverse selection, but there is some middle ground that will work here. Guaranteed issue does not have to be inexpensive.

Currently, because of the way the system works, PPO patients in hospitals end up subsidizing those with government healthcare. This means we currently do not have a free-market system. If we did, PPO costs would actually come down, but then medicare/medical patients would go untreated. This does not improve if the government gets to insure more of us.

Dan
 
Looks like the Dem's are hell bent on making this "The Issue", yet it would seem like the "Move On" crowd wants "Iraq" to be the central issue. Seems to me as though the Dem's are trying to please one too many groups, are we seeing the beginnings of a split in the party? Republicans have to face this all the time, it is time the Dem's have issues they are willing to fight over with themselves. Let's face it, they have had some years of total unity, anything goes just elect a democrat, maybe we are seeing some serious flaws to this unity! Grant ya, that the media will not talk about it and any defectors will be treated worst than Nader was the last few times he broke away and ran.
 
Guaranteed issue health insurance is expensive for everyone, driving up costs for the healthy at the expense of providing coverage for the small percentage of the population who cannot qualify for coverage otherwise. Look at the handful of states where GI is the norm. Prices are double or more what a comparable plan would be absent the GI requirement.

Some 36 states have risk pools and all states have HIPAA provisions for those coming off group plans.

Designing a GI product is a no-brainer. Making it affordable is the issue.

No one wants to address this side of the issue.
 
Some 36 states have risk pools and all states have HIPAA provisions for those coming off group plans.

Which amounts to a form of guaranteed issue. The issue is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY - i.e DOING you homework , filling out forms, and not waiting until the last minute, etc., etc.,

The best system is to utilize risk pools - and if you want subsidize the pools heavier but you CAN NOT mix the high risk in with the general population it will never work long term - costs are unaffordable for all involved.

Look real close at those "guaranteed issue" states that think they are so politically correct they are HURTING their own public by making insurance UNAFFORDABLE for EVERYONE - but at least the public feels "warm and fuzzy" and "not offended" that someone is declined or waivered.
 
TX,
Good points on utilizing risk pools. I agree. The mechanisms are already in place. The HIPAA pools do need to be more affordable in some states which can be subisidied.

Keep in mind something. The Democrats have to pound their chest about Universal Healthcare. A lot of their base wants it. Republicans have to pound their chest about moral values and "fighting terror." Their base expects it. There are certain things candidates have to say to get elected. They all have to pretend their religious (and Christian if possible).

I think Hillary is far more of a centrist candidate than you all think. I would also calm down about the statement

"When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything."

That statement can be taken out of context. She could easliy mean the answer to anything on that particular topic. Try to maintain some objectivity SMAN. The Democrats are getting back in but it may not be as dangerous as you think. The biggest danger for us in Individual Health is the Guaranteed Issue factor.
 
The biggest danger for us in Individual Health is the Guaranteed Issue factor.

Correct and with Guaranteed Issue there is NO brokers or nominal commissions.

I still think state - by - state changes are more likely than an immediate federal change. We are talking some time for people to argue over this and the insurance industry has buckets of money to fight this also.

We are safe for 2008, and at least half of 2009 likely - maybe longer.
 
Correct and with Guaranteed Issue there is NO brokers or nominal commissions.

I still think state - by - state changes are more likely than an immediate federal change. We are talking some time for people to argue over this and the insurance industry has buckets of money to fight this also.

We are safe for 2008, and at least half of 2009 likely - maybe longer.


TXINSURANCE, check you PM. It's about wanting info on your life GA.
 
In Tennessee, Tenncare almost bankrupted the state in just a few short years. How is it that someone as "smart" as Hillary can't see the reality of her intended actions?
 
Back
Top