RDD_1210
Forms his own opinions
- May 13, 2010
- 18,981
- 1,817
- 265
Actually, the "rhetoric" is far from old, because it's still very much true. I understand that allowing people to buy insurance only when they become sick is bad business, and that's why you have open enrollment periods to stop such behavior. That's no excuse for insurance companies to actively seek out reasons to deny coverage to already existing customers based upon ridiculous pre-existing conditions.Actually, you need to understand the truth about insurance...
and dont jump donw my throat until you offer me the respect of reading what I am saying...
It is the greed of the people...the consumer...not the insurance companies....as is the reason for the "pre-existing" caluse...
People tended to not buy insurance until they needed it. Insurance was not worth the money for the 100 every 6 months visit for strep throat...but when something major came up? THEN they would buy insurance....and that is a losing prospect for an insurance company.
So get of the evil insurance company rhetoric...it is getting old.
So what is the fix?
We already have it in place.
Free healthcare for anyone who needs it at the ER.
Sorry it is not "luxurious" and "comfortable"......
But it is there.
You're smarter then this. So this "free" healthcare that anyone can get an ER....someone has to foot that bill. So who picks up that cost?
Who picks it up?
The American Taxpayer...as we have been for years without anyone complaining about it.
I dont mind my tax dollars going to welfare, ER healthcare and other "necessities" for the less fortunate.
I do mind it when the government decides to control it and take away liberties in an effort to implement it.
Without complaining about it? People have been complaining for years for their rising healthcare costs. It's a big part of why this legislation is needed. More and more people have been going without insurance because it's getting too expensive, but these people can still get stabilizing (and expensive) treatment in an ER. This cost is then passed along to the rest of us who are still paying for healthcare, which results in our costs going up, which forces more people to ditch their insurance and the cycle spirals out of control.
That's why providing subsidies to help the less fortunate actually purchase health insurance (from a private company, not a government takeover) makes fiscal sense as it's actually cheaper to go that route then to have them wait until their situation is dire and they turn to the ER for very expensive procedures.
One way or another we are all paying to help those that are less fortunate, the question is do we continue to pay ridiculous rates while they go to the ER or do we do the smart thing and help subsidize insurance coverage that keeps the costs down and they are getting treatment before the costs escalate out of control.