Trajan
conscientia mille testes
oh for god sakes...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Several things wrong with your statement.
1. No one seriously involved in the debate is suggesting the government make health care decisions.
2. Even if that were the case, if we use Medicare as stand-in for likely coverage, CAM would not be covered.
Correction.
You are not talking about it, but there are plenty of people who are quite serious about it, and lobbying congress to force insurers to cover those things. As usual, you think the world revolves around you. It doesn't, and never will.
You're mixing arguments again. Item 1 was referring to your claim about the government controlling health care decisions.
They told me that I have to buy insurance that covers office visits and routine testing, how is that not controlling health care decisions?
Correction.
You are not talking about it, but there are plenty of people who are quite serious about it, and lobbying congress to force insurers to cover those things. As usual, you think the world revolves around you. It doesn't, and never will.
You're mixing arguments again. Item 1 was referring to your claim about the government controlling health care decisions.
They told me that I have to buy insurance that covers office visits and routine testing, how is that not controlling health care decisions?
They told me that I have to buy insurance that covers office visits and routine testing, how is that not controlling health care decisions?
Haven't you claimed in the past to get coverage through a self-insured plan?
You're mixing arguments again. Item 1 was referring to your claim about the government controlling health care decisions.
They told me that I have to buy insurance that covers office visits and routine testing, how is that not controlling health care decisions?
If that's your standard for control, you're also living under a totalitarian regime that controls painting, because you can't buy lead paint.
If that's your standard for control, you're also living under a totalitarian regime that controls painting, because you can't buy lead paint.
If that's your standard for control, you're also living under a totalitarian regime that controls painting, because you can't buy lead paint.
That's not a valid analogy. If they forced you to buy lead paint, you might have a point. You see the difference, right?
Yes. And I also pointed out that, because of the PPACA, I can no longer buy the policy I have used for years. That is because the policy I had came no where near the minimum coverage requirements, and I am not politically connected enough to get a waiver.
What's your point?
That's not a valid analogy, unless you think having health insurance is harmful.
That's not a valid analogy, unless you think having health insurance is harmful.
I do! I've made that point here repeatedly. In my view getting away from the low-deductible group insurance model is the single most important thing we can do to counter health care inflation and bring balance back to the market.
You're right that your proposal would control health care inflation... by making services so expensive for the average person that they would die.
You're right that your proposal would control health care inflation... by making services so expensive for the average person that they would die.
Think about that. Are you really saying that people paying more of their health care bills out of pocket would make health care prices go up? Have you ever really thought about the way insurance affects the health care market?
No. Your proposal would reduce total cost, but that's pretty irrelevant to the person having to bear that cost out-of-pocket.
I think you're right and the point you're making addresses a concern I've had for some time.We're not going to have enough providers to go around, not if we add in 30 million new people plus a sizeable portion of our society growing older and needing more care. We just don't have the money, a lot of people are going to be denied access or have to wait for extended periods of time. I predict a lot of people showing up in ERs across the country.
That sounds great, but that's not how the numbers break down in the real world.
People don't shop for bargains because they lack incentives to do so. They don't shop for bargains because they don't want second-rate care.
Yes. And I also pointed out that, because of the PPACA, I can no longer buy the policy I have used for years. That is because the policy I had came no where near the minimum coverage requirements, and I am not politically connected enough to get a waiver.
What's your point?
Self-insured plans aren't subject to the qualified health plan requirements in the ACA, meaning they don't have to offer the essential benefits package you seemed to be referencing earlier. Perhaps you're not using the word the way the rest of the universe does?
As for political connections for annual limit waivers, you're the one who posted the GAO report that showed there was no political favoritism in the waiver process. Who could've guessed you didn't bother reading it?
That sounds great, but that's not how the numbers break down in the real world.
How do they break down? If anything, my numbers are modest. I'm reading articles that site average yearly premiums at much higher - $12,000/year, and the catastrophic polices somewhat cheaper with slightly lower deductibles than what I quoted. In any case, the numbers would have to be radically off - which I don't think you can prove - to discount the argument. Paying for health care out of pocket will increase incentive to hunt for bargains, and it will increase incentives for doctors to offer them. I know. I've been there. When you're writing checks for your own health care you DO ask how much? When you're not, you don't care.
People don't shop for bargains because they lack incentives to do so. They don't shop for bargains because they don't want second-rate care.
None of us want 'second-rate' anything. But we deal with reality. It's our delusional insistence on evading reality that's painted us into the corner we're in with health care. No bailout or mandate is going to fix that.
Yes. And I also pointed out that, because of the PPACA, I can no longer buy the policy I have used for years. That is because the policy I had came no where near the minimum coverage requirements, and I am not politically connected enough to get a waiver.
What's your point?
Self-insured plans aren't subject to the qualified health plan requirements in the ACA, meaning they don't have to offer the essential benefits package you seemed to be referencing earlier. Perhaps you're not using the word the way the rest of the universe does?
As for political connections for annual limit waivers, you're the one who posted the GAO report that showed there was no political favoritism in the waiver process. Who could've guessed you didn't bother reading it?
Whatever.
The company no longer offers the policy, and tells me, and everyone else, that is because of the PPACA. The news is also full of stories about insurers that have been selling similar policies no longer offering them. That means that I have to choose between every insurer in America lying to me, or you lying to me.
Guess who I believe.