precisely chanel!
Insurance mandate: Should the healthy pay for irresponsibility?
- Thread starter RationalAltruis
- Start date
precisely chanel!
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
Big house and 2 cars? No, but all Americans should have access to shelter and not have to fear going hungry each day. Same as healthcare. Americans should not have to suffer if they are sick and can't afford a doctor, should not have to worry they will lose their house because they became ill or had an accident.
The US is the wealthiest nation on earth. All other industrialized nations understand the value of healthcare, why should we settle for less?
Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,276
- 1,283
- Banned
- #43
If everyone had healthcare and would be treated why would you need any bullshit like you suggest here?
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
The government forces me to protect myself by taxing me to fund defense, law enforcement, the courts, food safety, workplace safety, clean water, clean air, truth in advertising, banking regulation, and on and on.
Let's not pretend that mandating something has suddenly appeared magically out of nowhere.
And btw, once the People authorized the formation of a government via a supreme law of the land known as the Constitution, yes, they did give the government the authority to allow or disallow many many things.
Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,276
- 1,283
- Banned
- #45
Healthcare is a life and death issue , why do some LIE to pretend its a luxury?
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
No, an ID card will serve the same purpose
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
I suspect an alarmingly large number here probably don't believe that education should be compulsory.
Lots of things are life and death issues. But that doesnt mean the FedGov needs to fund every single one of them.
And no I dont believe in compulsory education either. Look at the idiots on this board that the system has produced. And those are the ones who can at least manipulate a computer.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
Why should "I" pay for someone elses kid to be educated?
Shouldn't these ignorant lowlifes save up the money to educate their own kid? If they would rather spend their money on plasma TVs, Escalades and Ipods than their kids education, that is their problem not mine
American Horse
AKA "Mustang"
Here is a possible way to take care of the problem of pre-existing conditions outside of the “Assigned Risk Insurance Pools” (ARIP) of the individual states:
There should be a declaration of an “open season” for applying. During this “open season” everyone gets insurance as a part of the whole pool with the same rates as the whole pool. There would be a 3 or 4 or 6 month sign-on period, say from January to April or January to June. Or there could be sign-on period dating from one’s birth-date, which might make more sense. If they signed up during their “open-season” they would have the same rate for any deductible as any other person in their group.
There might need to be certain“defined” categories for plans so that people could decide according to their individual needs, and these ought to be standardized without regard to state lines. The way of handling state mandates so as to preserve that aspect of state sovereignty would be that any policy that deviated from the mandate in any state in which the insurance was applied for would have to show which mandates were not included or covered. Some other conditions might need to be made or required to show proof of responsibility like a bond paid to the ARIP if the insurance company was newly beginning to operate in.
Anyone applying within the prescribe sign-on period would get the pre-determined rate for their age group. Age groups might be in periods of 5-year increments (18-23; 24-29; 30-35; etc.)
If they failed to sign-up during their sign-on period they would have to wait one year, and then they would pay a 10% (or 15% or 20%) charge for that failure to do so, which would be paid to the insurance company whose policy they purchased late. that’s because they would be adding to that company’s increase in risk.
Every additional year they put off purchasing insurance there should be some additional charge, so that it would be in their best interest to sign-on as early as possible.
If they put off purchase until the price had doubled they could only purchase health insurance through their state’s ARIP. In states in which ARIPs are not existent, they would have to do so. I don’t know what free market mechanism could be used to do that, but one (rather weak one) would be that the health costs in those states would exceed their neighboring states, and the politicians would come under fire for their lack of taking care of business and suffer the political consequences.
Here are some others to consider along with a lot of the other ideas already posted here to get everyone into the system and away from the faulty employee/employer structure which dominates presently:
A good way is a Tax Credit – which means a 100% direct refundable VOUCHER - to people below some certain minimal level of income based on nothing more than the filing of their 1040 form. A 1040 form could be submitted even if that party had no income at all. This mechanism would have value beyond “insurance” per se because it would seduce people who work under the table and report no income to re-evaluate that modus operandi and get into the system and pay their fair share. When their income went higher, the cost of the credit would be re-captured to the US Treasury.
Quoting from my earlier post
Better that insurance purchasers buy whole family policies with the children covered under their umbrella than having policies for each person, two adult parents and children individually. The cost of administration is lower, and simpler to the individuals involved. It could be a family policy with a mother and children, father and children, husband and wife, or husband wife and children. They all need to be able to inform the market by making purchasing decisions. and this way we can stay away from a single payor system which is devoid of competitive free market feedback to the marketplace.
.
There should be a declaration of an “open season” for applying. During this “open season” everyone gets insurance as a part of the whole pool with the same rates as the whole pool. There would be a 3 or 4 or 6 month sign-on period, say from January to April or January to June. Or there could be sign-on period dating from one’s birth-date, which might make more sense. If they signed up during their “open-season” they would have the same rate for any deductible as any other person in their group.
There might need to be certain“defined” categories for plans so that people could decide according to their individual needs, and these ought to be standardized without regard to state lines. The way of handling state mandates so as to preserve that aspect of state sovereignty would be that any policy that deviated from the mandate in any state in which the insurance was applied for would have to show which mandates were not included or covered. Some other conditions might need to be made or required to show proof of responsibility like a bond paid to the ARIP if the insurance company was newly beginning to operate in.
Anyone applying within the prescribe sign-on period would get the pre-determined rate for their age group. Age groups might be in periods of 5-year increments (18-23; 24-29; 30-35; etc.)
If they failed to sign-up during their sign-on period they would have to wait one year, and then they would pay a 10% (or 15% or 20%) charge for that failure to do so, which would be paid to the insurance company whose policy they purchased late. that’s because they would be adding to that company’s increase in risk.
Every additional year they put off purchasing insurance there should be some additional charge, so that it would be in their best interest to sign-on as early as possible.
If they put off purchase until the price had doubled they could only purchase health insurance through their state’s ARIP. In states in which ARIPs are not existent, they would have to do so. I don’t know what free market mechanism could be used to do that, but one (rather weak one) would be that the health costs in those states would exceed their neighboring states, and the politicians would come under fire for their lack of taking care of business and suffer the political consequences.
Here are some others to consider along with a lot of the other ideas already posted here to get everyone into the system and away from the faulty employee/employer structure which dominates presently:
A good way is a Tax Credit – which means a 100% direct refundable VOUCHER - to people below some certain minimal level of income based on nothing more than the filing of their 1040 form. A 1040 form could be submitted even if that party had no income at all. This mechanism would have value beyond “insurance” per se because it would seduce people who work under the table and report no income to re-evaluate that modus operandi and get into the system and pay their fair share. When their income went higher, the cost of the credit would be re-captured to the US Treasury.
Quoting from my earlier post
Better that insurance purchasers buy whole family policies with the children covered under their umbrella than having policies for each person, two adult parents and children individually. The cost of administration is lower, and simpler to the individuals involved. It could be a family policy with a mother and children, father and children, husband and wife, or husband wife and children. They all need to be able to inform the market by making purchasing decisions. and this way we can stay away from a single payor system which is devoid of competitive free market feedback to the marketplace.
.
Last edited:
The T
George S. Patton Party
It's a responsibility of the INDIVIDUAL. NOT the rest of Society.
Some of you need to get up off yer asses and learn this.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
Nah.
We'll just take all your money and give it to people who are spending it on beer and cigarettes and chicken wings and have free everything coming courtesy of you.
Racist.
The T
George S. Patton Party
Piss Poor Planning for Life. Those 'Chickens' are coming home to roost on your Dime. Then YOU can pay for them. Don't expect me to do so.
I take my liberty seriously. I can't help it if you don't.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Insurance companies assess risk all the time. They always have. That's what they do.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
Hell yea....screw em
Not having healthcare is poor planning on their part. Blew the money they could have spent on healthcare on beer, cigs and chicken wings. Americans are soooooo dumb. Why didn't Obama think of that chicken wing thing to fund healthcare?
Hell yeah!
Let's reward poor planning by bailing out not just companies but individuals that engage in bad decision making and we'll punish the prudent by taxing them to pay for it all. That'll encourage people to act prudently. Right?
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 309,772
- 267,889
- 3,615
Right you are Rabbi
These morons shouldn't spend money for luxuries like rent, heat and food when they could be paying off a $15,000 doctors bill. Its poor planning on their part
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
-
-
Was St. Malachy a genuine Christian Psychic or Prophet?- Started by DennisPTate
- Replies: 0
-
-
