Do Conservatives know what health insurance is?

[The Derp]

I already told you insurance is a risk management tool that's what it is and always has been.

Risk to what? Not the insurance company. Risk to you. The insurance company is a middle-man who adminsters payment to your doctor from your premium pool after you've already received treatment. So what is the insurance company actually doing? Nothing other than pushing paper.

People pay for insurance as a hedge against risk that is all.

YES! Thank you! So if more people pay into the premium pool, what does that do to the risk? And how does having for-profit private companies benefit you in this regard?

 

[MaryL]

On Fox 'n' Friends, Brian Kilmeade lamented that healthy people pay for sick people.

That is literally what health insurance is.

Congrats to the not-presently-on-fire for paying for firefighters.

Did he say that? Or did he mean that people people with unhealthy lifestyle choices, their healthcare is dependent on those that are smarter, less indulgent, healthier and earn their keep?

 

[The Derp]

Or you can apply for a grant through a non profit. Not only will they pay medical expenses they will provide transportation. And you can get that information from your health care provider in lieu of a payment plan.

First of all, that's ridiculous. The totality of all charitable giving in the US (and that includes everything from what you described above, to the New York City Ballet) doesn't even come close to Medicaid's yearly budget.

So this fantasy that charity will somehow make up for the gap in Medicaid is unfounded, unsupported, and math-challenged.

 

[The Derp]

Did he say that?

Those were his exact words.

Or did he mean that people people with unhealthy lifestyle choices healthcare is dependent on those that are smarter, less indulgent, healthier and earn their keep?

I'm curious how you or an insurer would even know that someone was living an unhealthy lifestyle.

 

[MaryL]

Did he say that?

Those were his exact words.

Or did he mean that people people with unhealthy lifestyle choices healthcare is dependent on those that are smarter, less indulgent, healthier and earn their keep?

I'm curious how you or an insurer would even know that someone was living an unhealthy lifestyle.

Well, gosh, I don't know, smoking, being overweight, being sedentary and unemployed. Subtle little things like that.I don't want to slit hairs and trifle over details.

 

[Darkwind]

Unless you're some kind of sickly person, the lifetime cap on this would not kick in until after I was eligible for medicare.

BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THAT! That's the point. Yeesh.

Something I paid into My entire life.

Medicare is pay-go, meaning you're not paying for your Medicare, you're paying for the people currently on Medicare. So Medicare is healthy people (those under 65) paying for sick people (those over 65). It's insurance. Same principle applies to any insurance. This is what I'm talking about when I say you people don't know anything about this.

Again, you seem to have some kind of dense spot here. Do you turn the cost of your auto's oil change into your insurance company?

Car insurance is not health insurance. The two couldn't be more different. Firstly, cars are not something that every person needs, yet health care is. So you're comparing apples and oranges. When it comes to your health, you cannot predict what your needs are going to be. So that's why we have insurance.

The problem with higher deductibles higher premiums with government programs is that I have no market to shop around in.

The cognitive dissonance is strong with you. I don't think you even realize you're doing it. You say people should "pay their own way", but that's precisely what deductibles and co-insurance is. So you say people should pay their own way (aka "put skin in the game"), then say you oppose it in the very next paragraph you wrote! The deductibles aren't the government program...the deductibles are from the insurer, and the deductibles are what forces people to "pay their own way" as you said they should, but then said they shouldn't in the very next paragraph. I just want to point out that cognitive dissonance as it's the thread I can pull at to unravel your entire argument. You guys don't seem to know what you want at all. Maybe that's why after 7 years of screaming about Obamacare, Conservatives have yet to produce a replacement plan.

Prior, I could tailor an insurance plan based upon My consideration of what I needed and could find. With a large market, I have plenty of choices

So, do you understand why group plans for employers are so much cheaper than individual plans? Because group plans take all employees into account, pool all their premiums together, and broaden the risk pool which lowers the cost. What you're arguing for is the exact opposite of that...so you get fewer choices, not more, and you get them at a higher cost because you're fragmenting the risk pool.

his is called freedom.

The freedom to choose who reimburses your provider. You don't actually have freedom of choice for health care. Your "freedom" ends where the [profit margins for your insurer begin, which is right away. You cannot pick any doctor you want. You first have to pick an insurer and then you get to pick your doctor. So your freedomk is limited by the profit margins of the insurance company. Profit margins that are directly related to how much they reimburse your prvider. Shouldn't ot be the other way around? That you pick your doctor and the doctor gets reimbursed by some entity that does the actual, administrative reimbursement? Why does it matter to you who reimburses your doctor? It's not even a transaction you're a part of, as it happens after you get your treatment.

What the **** dude. You don't know that you'll draw breath tomorrow. You plan for what you can foresee and let the chips fall where they may.

Good grief.

Okay, you can't seem to grasp anything above "I want" so I'm done with his. I am not saying health insurance is the same as car insurance, I am saying you don't use either for routine shit that you can pay out of pocket.

You're too ignorant or blind to even see the analogies.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Evidently demoquacks think it's a tax

 

[airplanemechanic]

LOL! So this is what I'm getting at! They reduce the bill, but what they reduced still must be paid. So what happens? Whatever the hospital reduced for you ends up getting passed on to those with insurance who see higher premiums as a result. Secondly, you're not getting any kind of discount when a hospital reduces a bill. In fact, you're probably paying exactly what the chargemaster at your hospital has determined what the cost will be. So the hospital says your procedure cost $50K, but they decide to charge you $30K...but that $30K is what the actual charge is. So you're getting a "discount" on an imaginary price so you don't question it. Only a sucker would think that's a deal.

I've had several friends work the processd and come out with a "fair" settlement.

LOL! "fair" for the hospital because that "discount" is what the chargemaster sets as the price anyway, that an insurance company already pays.

Dumb.

I'm going to interject my 2 cents here.

Health insurance is like anything else, if you can afford it, you get it and reap the benefits of it. If you can't afford it, you're not entitled to it, so you don't get it. You can also choose (or should be able to choose) not to buy it, and if you get sick and need health care, pay for it out of your own pocket. If you can't pay for it, oh well. You go broke.

Its exactly the same thing as car insurance that you use. You have to buy car insurance ONLY if you own a car. However, your plan limits can be set very low, but you can do a hell of a lot more damage than those limits. You're on the hook for the bill, just like you're on the hook for the medical bill. If you can't afford it, oh well. You go broke. It's a risk you take.

But its YOUR risk to take. I should not be forced to buy insurance because YOU can't afford your medical bills. That's redistribution of wealth. Very liberal and disgusting.

 

[The Derp]

Well, gosh, I don't know, smoking

OK, smoking is something they ask as you enroll.

being overweight

So what if you're not overweight when you enroll, but then you become overweight? And your weight isn't one of the questions an insurer asks of you before you enroll. Have you ever had health insurance before? Doesn't seem like it.

being sedentary and unemployed.

So how would an insurer know that before you sign up? How would the insurer even know if you're unemployed? And how is being unemployed a "poor lifestyle choice"? Like you chose to have your company lay you off because they're shipping your job to Mexico or giving it to a robot?

Subtle little things like that.I don't want to slit hairs and trifle over details.

So just as I suspected, you're full of shit. So apart from smoking and your age, the insurer has no way to determine the other things you are saying contribute to an "unhealthy lifestyle". So how in your mind does the insurer find that out?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They won't let you die. The operAtion is done then you make Rrangements for scheduled payments.

Right, wage garnishment. That's what "scheduled payments" is. So let's call it what it is. And every dollar you lose in wage garnishment is a dollar the consumer economy loses. And the consumer economy is 70% of our economy and where the growth happens.

And why should someone go broke or have their wages garnished for something entirely out of their control? That makes no sense.

And every dollar you lose in wage garnishment is a dollar the consumer economy loses.

Right, because the doctors, nurses, hospital employees, supplier employees don't get paid and contribute to the consumer economy. DERP!

 

[The Derp]

What the **** dude. You don't know that you'll draw breath tomorrow. You plan for what you can foresee and let the chips fall where they may.

Right...which is the point of health insurance. The point you seem to be simultaneously arguing for and against. That's because you don't fully grasp what health insurance is, what insurance companies do, and how what they do relates to your health care. So there could be this person you perceive as "sickly", yet you may incur more costs to treat your own medical issues than someone you judged as being "sickly" in any given year.

This is what I mean when I say you people don't know what you're talking about. You contradict yourself left and right, you exercise the worst cognitive dissonance I think I've ever seen, then you arrogantly bray and bleat you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't have a firm grasp on it.

So everything is ad-hoc and off the top of your head. You haven't given any thought to this. Instead you just react. That's why your posts are so easy to take apart.

Okay, you can't seem to grasp anything above "I want" so I'm done with his. I am not saying health insurance is the same as car insurance, I am saying you don't use either for routine shit that you can pay out of pocket.

That is what you were saying...you even make the connection in this very sentence!!! You say it's not the same as car insurance, yet you say it is the same in that you don't pay for routine maintenance in car insurance. So it is the same, but it isn't. And thus, your position is all over the place and belies a lack of understanding about this topic and that you haven't given it any real, serious thought. Choosing instead to do rushed, sloppy, reactionary work.

 

[The Derp]

Health insurance is like anything else, if you can afford it, you get it and reap the benefits of it. If you can't afford it, you're not entitled to it, so you don't get it. You can also choose (or should be able to choose) not to buy it, and if you get sick and need health care, pay for it out of your own pocket. If you can't pay for it, oh well. You go broke.

So it's real easy to say this when you're healthy and not incurring medical costs, but to force someone into bankruptcy for treatment of something out of their control makes no sense. It's ******* stupid, actually.

Its exactly the same thing as car insurance that you use. You have to buy car insurance ONLY if you own a car.

Not everyone needs a car, but everyone does need health care. So your comparison falls flat on its face. Maybe you should take those 2 cents and buy yourself some time to put actual thought into this. Because it's obvious you haven't.

But its YOUR risk to take. I should not be forced to buy insurance because YOU can't afford your medical bills. That's redistribution of wealth. Very liberal and disgusting.

But you cannot afford your medical bills either, which is why you have insurance. So Conservatives admit that health insurance is there to protect you from incurring high medical costs, but Conservatives oppose health insurance because it protects people from incurring high medical costs.

Cognitive Dissonance.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Forcing someone to buy "insurance" they don't want or need to pay for other people who can't afford insurance or medical bills is redistribution of wealth under the auspices of "insurance".

 

[The Derp]

Right, because the doctors, nurses, hospital employees, supplier employees don't get paid and contribute to the consumer economy. DERP!

LOL! It's adorable you think that money you pay your provider for treatment covers the salaries of those who perform the treatment.

Do yourself a favor and research what a "chargemaster" is.

I'll even get you started, because I'm such a nice guy:

 

[Darkwind]

What the **** dude. You don't know that you'll draw breath tomorrow. You plan for what you can foresee and let the chips fall where they may.

Right...which is the point of health insurance. The point you seem to be simultaneously arguing for and against. That's because you don't fully grasp what health insurance is, what insurance companies do, and how what they do relates to your health care. So there could be this person you perceive as "sickly", yet you may incur more costs to treat your own medical issues than someone you judged as being "sickly" in any given year.

This is what I mean when I say you people don't know what you're talking about. You contradict yourself left and right, you exercise the worst cognitive dissonance I think I've ever seen, then you arrogantly bray and bleat you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't have a firm grasp on it.

So everything is ad-hoc and off the top of your head. You haven't given any thought to this. Instead you just react. That's why your posts are so easy to take apart.

Okay, you can't seem to grasp anything above "I want" so I'm done with his. I am not saying health insurance is the same as car insurance, I am saying you don't use either for routine shit that you can pay out of pocket.

That is what you were saying...you even make the connection in this very sentence!!! You say it's not the same as car insurance, yet you say it is the same in that you don't pay for routine maintenance in car insurance. So it is the same, but it isn't. And thus, your position is all over the place and belies a lack of understanding about this topic and that you haven't given it any real, serious thought. Choosing instead to do rushed, sloppy, reactionary work.

I understand it far better than you do. I just don't assign wishful fantasy to what it is supposed to do.

/thread.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Do Conservatives know what health insurance is?

Do you? Because what we have in this country by and large is not health insurance, they are health care plans and that's why they are so expensive. Big difference

 

[The Derp]

Forcing someone to buy "insurance" they don't want or need to pay for other people who can't afford insurance or medical bills is redistribution of wealth under the auspices of "insurance".

First of all, you don't know if you will need it. Because you don't know what the next breath you draw is going to bring. Someone you perceive as "sickly" could in fact incur fewer medical costs than you do as a "healthy" person in any given year. Secondly, you pay for people when you pay your premium. Do you...do you think you are the only one enrolled in your health insurance plan? Or do you think you're enrolled with thousands, millions of others? So if someone enrolled in your plan incurs a high medical cost, you pay for that by way of your premium. And if you incur high medical costs, everyone else pays for that by way of their premium. It's obvious you don't know what health insurance is.

Why do you think group plans are cheaper per-patient than individual plans?

 

[The Derp]

I understand it far better than you do. I just don't assign wishful fantasy to what it is supposed to do.

You don't even know what it is supposed to do. The cognitive dissonance is strong with you.

 

[The Derp]

Do you? Because what we have in this country by and large is not health insurance, they are health care plans and that's why they are so expensive. Big difference

???? Health insurance plans, you mean? There's health care, which is your doctor performing a procedure on you, and there's health insurance, which serves as the mechanism by which your provider is reimbursed for performing that procedure.

Conservatives don't know or understand the difference.

 

[BlueGin]

Or you can apply for a grant through a non profit. Not only will they pay medical expenses they will provide transportation. And you can get that information from your health care provider in lieu of a payment plan.

First of all, that's ridiculous. The totality of all charitable giving in the US (and that includes everything from what you described above, to the New York City Ballet) doesn't even come close to Medicaid's yearly budget.

So this fantasy that charity will somehow make up for the gap in Medicaid is unfounded, unsupported, and math-challenged.

Um..hello...if you are low income you can get a grant from a non profit or charity care through the state to pay the balance owed that your healhcare provider ( usually crappy Medicaid/Medicare) denies.

I am not mathematically challenged. You just don't know what services are available to low income patients. Not my problem. Read up.