Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Isn't that what insurance is for? If you paid for a catastrophic policy that covered transplants on 100 year old and you need a transplant at 100, then what's the problem? If you get really sick that's what it's there for, isn't it? What insurance should not be covering is doctors visits, routine checkups, etc.
If I wreck my car to the tune of thousands of dollars my insurance covers it. They don't cover oil changes and yearly inspections because that would drive the cost of car insurance through to roof.
Extending life beyond the 100 year marker is an anomoly. Just how long did you wanna live, Zoom-boing? Why should insurance set aside huge dollars for your heroic care at that advanced age and deprive the young of access to ordinary preventive care?
This seems to me the very height of selfishness...and hubris. You live to 103 on your own steam, great. You need millions of dollars of heroic care to live that long, pay for it in cash or die.
We all die. I dunno why we have the fixation with long life that we do, and I see no reason to steal from the young to fuel it.
If I've paid the money for a catastrophic policy and my doctor and I think it's a go (I can't imagine this, just putting it out there), then why shouldn't my insurance cover it?
If doctor's visits and yearly checkups and mamograms weren't covered (comparing it to routine maintenance on your car), don't you think the cost of health insurance would come down? Don't you think doctors would then be forced to compete with each other and prices would come down? If I could shop around for a better doc at a better price, I would. I can't do that now; I have to shop around and go to whoever takes my insurance. Seems backwards to me.
fwit, I'm planning on living to 100 all on my own. heh
Extending life beyond the 100 year marker is an anomoly. Just how long did you wanna live, Zoom-boing? Why should insurance set aside huge dollars for your heroic care at that advanced age and deprive the young of access to ordinary preventive care?
This seems to me the very height of selfishness...and hubris. You live to 103 on your own steam, great. You need millions of dollars of heroic care to live that long, pay for it in cash or die.
We all die. I dunno why we have the fixation with long life that we do, and I see no reason to steal from the young to fuel it.
If I've paid the money for a catastrophic policy and my doctor and I think it's a go (I can't imagine this, just putting it out there), then why shouldn't my insurance cover it?
If doctor's visits and yearly checkups and mamograms weren't covered (comparing it to routine maintenance on your car), don't you think the cost of health insurance would come down? Don't you think doctors would then be forced to compete with each other and prices would come down? If I could shop around for a better doc at a better price, I would. I can't do that now; I have to shop around and go to whoever takes my insurance. Seems backwards to me.
fwit, I'm planning on living to 100 all on my own. heh
Why not? Because 9 times out of 10, the patient either does not want the care or cannot consent to it -- we have a strong bias in favor of "doing everything" in this country that is inhumane and insensible when it comes to the very aged.
Few people wanna circle the drain for a decade or more, but modern medicine makes that possible.
We are so irrational about death in the US.
Forgive me, but just how much did y'all want to spend to keep 100 year olds alive?
That's a personal decision and one that should not be made by the government or their "death panels". This is a decision that should be made between a doctor and his patient. Not the doctor and the government.
If I've paid the money for a catastrophic policy and my doctor and I think it's a go (I can't imagine this, just putting it out there), then why shouldn't my insurance cover it?
If doctor's visits and yearly checkups and mamograms weren't covered (comparing it to routine maintenance on your car), don't you think the cost of health insurance would come down? Don't you think doctors would then be forced to compete with each other and prices would come down? If I could shop around for a better doc at a better price, I would. I can't do that now; I have to shop around and go to whoever takes my insurance. Seems backwards to me.
fwit, I'm planning on living to 100 all on my own. heh
Why not? Because 9 times out of 10, the patient either does not want the care or cannot consent to it -- we have a strong bias in favor of "doing everything" in this country that is inhumane and insensible when it comes to the very aged.
Few people wanna circle the drain for a decade or more, but modern medicine makes that possible.
We are so irrational about death in the US.
That should be between the doctor and the patient, not the government or the insurance company and if I've paid for the catastrophic coverage for myself, then I should be able to get it.
I've never heard of a 100 year old getting a transplant, have you? I find this particular scenario unheard of. Just arguing that if that's what I can afford then why shouldn't I be able to receive it if both patient and doctor agree it's worth doing?
Do you think routine maintenance should be covered under insurance? I don't.
good gawd, Lefties are some scary people.
Not only do they not care about killing their own children, they call that a (woman's choice).
Now they advocate letting yours and mine grandma's and grandpa's just die off, what good are they anyway.
They might as well just build OVENS and gas the Old bags.
good gawd, Lefties are some scary people.
Not only do they not care about killing their own children, they call that a (woman's choice).
Now they advocate letting yours and mine grandma's and grandpa's just die off, what good are they anyway.
They might as well just build OVENS and gas the Old bags.
Speaking of gasbags....
good gawd, Lefties are some scary people.
Not only do they not care about killing their own children, they call that a (woman's choice).
Now they advocate letting yours and mine grandma's and grandpa's just die off, what good are they anyway.
They might as well just build OVENS and gas the Old bags.
Speaking of gasbags....
No one is calling for killing the elderly, but why should we spend millions to buy some old person a few more months or even years of crappy life? Can anyone explain to me how this makes sense...and yet we are conflicted about whether to even feed the young?
This country's conservatives strike me sometimes as completely out of touch with reality.
Forgive me, but just how much did y'all want to spend to keep 100 year olds alive?
That attitude, right there, is why people in the government SHOULD NOT be allowed to have panels deciding such things!!!!
Sure, baby, sure. So let us deprive a five year old of the care needed to prevent a dihibilitating illness so some old man or woman can live another three weeks.
good gawd, Lefties are some scary people.
Not only do they not care about killing their own children, they call that a (woman's choice).
Now they advocate letting yours and mine grandma's and grandpa's just die off, what good are they anyway.
They might as well just build OVENS and gas the Old bags.
Speaking of gasbags....
No one is calling for killing the elderly, but why should we spend millions to buy some old person a few more months or even years of crappy life? Can anyone explain to me how this makes sense...and yet we are conflicted about whether to even feed the young?
This country's conservatives strike me sometimes as completely out of touch with reality.
when this first surfaced back in Oct 09 or there about, why didn't they, the admin., explain it?
I think folks are spooked by an incentive being provided as to conversation along these lines, 'terminal' illness, what to do, not to do, hey I would hope my doctor would say: let me say a few words on what you or your wife etc. has and what can and cannot be done and what you are looking at down the road , even if the road is narrow and short.
The consternation is driven by the sneakiness involved and because this conversation and impetus to have one is built into a huge regulatory creation/expansion gov. prgm. that has as one of their primary goals; cost reduction.
That attitude, right there, is why people in the government SHOULD NOT be allowed to have panels deciding such things!!!!
Sure, baby, sure. So let us deprive a five year old of the care needed to prevent a dihibilitating illness so some old man or woman can live another three weeks.
Why does it always have to be one or the other with you?
We could take care of both.....that is IF we don't let the government control the entire thing.
Sure we need reforms but we don't need the same people who run the DMV to run our Insurance.
when this first surfaced back in Oct 09 or there about, why didn't they, the admin., explain it?
I think folks are spooked by an incentive being provided as to conversation along these lines, 'terminal' illness, what to do, not to do, hey I would hope my doctor would say: let me say a few words on what you or your wife etc. has and what can and cannot be done and what you are looking at down the road , even if the road is narrow and short.
The consternation is driven by the sneakiness involved and because this conversation and impetus to have one is built into a huge regulatory creation/expansion gov. prgm. that has as one of their primary goals; cost reduction.
Trajan understands people very well!!!
And they didn't explain it because they know the citizens of the United States are smart enough to not willfully and knowingly give the government that kind of power.
Sure, baby, sure. So let us deprive a five year old of the care needed to prevent a dihibilitating illness so some old man or woman can live another three weeks.
Why does it always have to be one or the other with you?
We could take care of both.....that is IF we don't let the government control the entire thing.
Sure we need reforms but we don't need the same people who run the DMV to run our Insurance.
Really? We "could" do this because why? Money is made of silly putty? Have you looked at the population age stats lately, PLYMCO_PILGRIM?
And BTW, if we "could" do both well, how come we never have?
Why does it always have to be one or the other with you?
We could take care of both.....that is IF we don't let the government control the entire thing.
Sure we need reforms but we don't need the same people who run the DMV to run our Insurance.
Really? We "could" do this because why? Money is made of silly putty? Have you looked at the population age stats lately, PLYMCO_PILGRIM?
And BTW, if we "could" do both well, how come we never have?
You need to look before you leap. We do both RIGHT NOW under our current system.
when this first surfaced back in Oct 09 or there about, why didn't they, the admin., explain it?
I think folks are spooked by an incentive being provided as to conversation along these lines, 'terminal' illness, what to do, not to do, hey I would hope my doctor would say: let me say a few words on what you or your wife etc. has and what can and cannot be done and what you are looking at down the road , even if the road is narrow and short.
The consternation is driven by the sneakiness involved and because this conversation and impetus to have one is built into a huge regulatory creation/expansion gov. prgm. that has as one of their primary goals; cost reduction.
Trajan understands people very well!!!
And they didn't explain it because they know the citizens of the United States are smart enough to not willfully and knowingly give the government that kind of power.
Because I am so much better off if the person making my health care decisions is relying on a bottom line profit rather than on government regulations?
Uh huh. Not feeling this so much, PLYMCO_PILGRIM.
Trajan understands people very well!!!
And they didn't explain it because they know the citizens of the United States are smart enough to not willfully and knowingly give the government that kind of power.
Because I am so much better off if the person making my health care decisions is relying on a bottom line profit rather than on government regulations?
Uh huh. Not feeling this so much, PLYMCO_PILGRIM.
Please don't put up a strawman and knock it down when responding to me, its lame.
Since we are on the strawman thing right now let me try.
The governments regulations will be to reduce the bottom line to an extent that goes further than what insurance companies currently do in search of profits leaving EVERYONE with less care. So you want people to have less care then they do now.
Man strawmen make arguing so much easier.
Forgive me, but just how much did y'all want to spend to keep 100 year olds alive?
That attitude, right there, is why people in the government SHOULD NOT be allowed to have panels deciding such things!!!!
Sure, baby, sure. So let us deprive a five year old of the care needed to prevent a dihibilitating illness so some old man or woman can live another three weeks.
Because I am so much better off if the person making my health care decisions is relying on a bottom line profit rather than on government regulations?
Uh huh. Not feeling this so much, PLYMCO_PILGRIM.
Please don't put up a strawman and knock it down when responding to me, its lame.
Since we are on the strawman thing right now let me try.
The governments regulations will be to reduce the bottom line to an extent that goes further than what insurance companies currently do in search of profits leaving EVERYONE with less care. So you want people to have less care then they do now.
Man strawmen make arguing so much easier.
It is my contention that a for-profit health insurance industry is bad for the nation.
