- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Rush on pre-existing ...it's not insurance, it's welfare
Posted on 2/27/20 at 6:45 am to Machine
Posted on 2/27/20 at 6:45 am to Machine
quote:
i really don't give two shits what you call it, as long as american citizens have access to affordable health care
They did before ACA, they just didn't want to give up any of their luxuries to do it.
0
Posted on 2/27/20 at 6:47 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Spreading the risk and sharing the resources is exactly the purpose of insurance.
If it were about risk mitigation, they would only offer policies that covered catastrophic situations, and would be much more affordable.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:02 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:Nope. Insurance only works by excluding high risk people, thus making stochastically rare events economically affordable to the underwriter.
Spreading the risk and sharing the resources is exactly the purpose of insurance.
You’ve described a mutual company—which were once popular but far less affordable that risk-based insurance. They’ve been almost non-existent in the medical insurance field since the 1960s.
quote:You left off priced according to risk.
Insurance is a contract that transfers the risk of financial loss from an individual or business to an insurance company.
By your definition a casino is selling insurance and the gamblers are all sharing the risk.
quote:Nope. Has nothing to do with “pooling”. You’re confusing underwriting an actuarial risk with collectivism.
The company collects small amounts of money from its clients and pools that money together to pay for losses
quote:I already knew what collectivism was.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
This post was edited on 2/27/20 at 7:10 am
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:11 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Nope. Has nothing to do with “pooling”. You’re confusing underwriting an actuarial risk with collectivism.
This is how insurance works.
quote:
Insurance is a contract that transfers the risk of financial loss from an individual or business to an insurance company. The company collects small amounts of money from its clients and pools that money together to pay for losses
No amount of your uninformed bullshite will change that fact.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:37 am to Zach
So the right wing position is to take the side of insurance policy exclusions on moral grounds? Denying access to medical care on moral grounds? So when you are fired from a job and move to a new employer due to a layoff or downturn, the new employer’s insurance package doesn’t have to pay for your ongoing treatment for a year on moral grounds? So if it’s life preserving medication, you just have to go bankrupt or die because the moral ground is to ensure insurance company profits?
The programming is complete. If Rush told you that blue was red you’d start commenting on the beautiful red sky.
The programming is complete. If Rush told you that blue was red you’d start commenting on the beautiful red sky.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:57 am to Zach
It needs to be renamed,” assurance.”
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:59 am to Eurocat
quote:
autism - something no insurance company covered before ACA
Why must you commies lie? It’s like you think anyone will believe anything you say. Bernie is just another example. Stop lying.
Autism was covered inside the terms of the insurance contract.
Only individual plans would possibly exclude autism due to a PEC clause.
Stop fricking lying.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:02 am to TBoy
quote:
So when you are fired from a job and move to a new employer due to a layoff or downturn, the new employer’s insurance package doesn’t have to pay for your ongoing treatment for a year on moral grounds?
Another fricking lie. Group insurance doesn’t have PEC clauses.
Stop fricking lying. WFT is wrong with you people?
The educated elite...lol
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:02 am to Eurocat
quote:
has a kid born with serious autism - something no insurance company covered before ACA.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:03 am to SavageOrangeJug
Jug I love ya buddy but he’s right.
He and I have been in this business for a long time. You aren’t far off but taxing authority is correct.
He and I have been in this business for a long time. You aren’t far off but taxing authority is correct.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:04 am to SSpaniel
Progstains lie too much. It’s crazy.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:53 am to roadGator
quote:
Group insurance doesn’t have PEC clauses.
Stop lying.
There are no PEC exclusions in employment provided because they are prohibited by federal law. Before the amendments to HIPAA these exclusions were common.
Now, to ask you to double stop lying because the OP's and Rush's suggestion is that protections against PEC exclusions is "theft" or some kind of "handout." That is complete bullshite. If I pay my premium into my health insurance but then have to move to a different policy because of a job change, haven't I given premium to my previous insurer for the coverage? Yes I have. The same can be said for everyone who has to move to a different package. The same insurance companies which would deny coverage for one year for "newcomers" would pocket the premium, and pay no more benefits, for those who left for another insurer. The PEC exclusion was a windfall for insurers due to the turbidity of insureds caused by nothing more than the shifting job market. PEC exclusions are theft by insurers.
This post was edited on 2/27/20 at 8:56 am
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:58 am to Eurocat
quote:
Semantics. I don't see how that changes the argument.
I honestly don't believe you are this stupid. Instead, I think you're trying to say "Don't care. The rich and middle class oughta pay".
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:00 am to TBoy
quote:
The PEC exclusion was a windfall for insurers due to the turbidity of insureds caused by nothing more than the shifting job market. PEC exclusions are theft by insurers.
Actuarial tables are a windfall? Laughable. You don’t seem to understand the basics of insurance.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:08 am to CaTiger85
quote:
Actuarial tables are a windfall? Laughable. You don’t seem to understand the basics of insurance.
I can tell that this is in English words but it makes no sense.
The "actuarial tables" estimate group risk and premium requirements. What we are talking about is not estimating premium for individual policies, but whether preventing insurers from suspending coverage for ongoing medical care when an insured moves from one package to another is some kind of "theft" or "handout."
You may argue that allowing a new insured in a group policy impacts the group negatively when the new insured is already receiving ongoing treatment. But that statement does not take into account the positive effect on the group when an existing insured who receives ongoing treatment leaves the group. If these two common events are considered under actuarial analysis, it's a wash.
This post was edited on 2/27/20 at 9:10 am
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:08 am to TBoy
You simple mother fricker.
My statement was not a lie. Anyone can see it. I don’t listen to rush or give a frick about his opinion.
Again, PEC clauses DO NOT exist in group medical contracts. Why does that trigger you?
Clearly the insurance industry mystifies you for some reason. It really all comes down to math and actuarial tables. Insurance is for future risks not known ones. You can’t buy life insurance after you are dead. Why is this hard for people to understand?
What you commies want is for mommy gov to grow and take care of you. Noble? You people can do this without mommy gov but you are too fricking lazy, hypocritical and too dependent on mommy. Fund risk pools. Pay more on your own. Develop your collectives. I don’t wait for mommy gov to tax me on things that are important to me. I ducking get busy, invest time and money.
You grow mommy gov fricks can get bent. Lazy cheap bastards.
My statement was not a lie. Anyone can see it. I don’t listen to rush or give a frick about his opinion.
Again, PEC clauses DO NOT exist in group medical contracts. Why does that trigger you?
Clearly the insurance industry mystifies you for some reason. It really all comes down to math and actuarial tables. Insurance is for future risks not known ones. You can’t buy life insurance after you are dead. Why is this hard for people to understand?
What you commies want is for mommy gov to grow and take care of you. Noble? You people can do this without mommy gov but you are too fricking lazy, hypocritical and too dependent on mommy. Fund risk pools. Pay more on your own. Develop your collectives. I don’t wait for mommy gov to tax me on things that are important to me. I ducking get busy, invest time and money.
You grow mommy gov fricks can get bent. Lazy cheap bastards.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:11 am to roadGator
quote:
Again, PEC clauses DO NOT exist in group medical contracts. Why does that trigger you?
You are crazy. It is true that the law prevents PEC exclusions in employment policies under HIPPA. How is this "theft"?
That's the topic, smart boy.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:11 am to TBoy
quote:
If these two common events are considered under actuarial analysis, it's a wash.
Ok. It’s clear you don’t know how underwriting works.
Do you want to learn or are you so dug into your socialism position that it doesn’t matter?
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:12 am to TBoy
I never said it was theft. I corrected a couple of liars.
You were one of them. shite happens.
The OP didn’t mention theft. Point me to the theft reference in a 2 year old 9 page thread and I’ll see if I can tell what he or she meant.
Welfare is theft though. Taking from one and giving to another is generically, theft.
Just because you exist doesn’t mean you are entitled to anything I have. I already do lots of shite and spend lots of money on the poor and other causes.
You people want more and don’t want me doing that voluntarily. Frick you all.
You were one of them. shite happens.
The OP didn’t mention theft. Point me to the theft reference in a 2 year old 9 page thread and I’ll see if I can tell what he or she meant.
Welfare is theft though. Taking from one and giving to another is generically, theft.
Just because you exist doesn’t mean you are entitled to anything I have. I already do lots of shite and spend lots of money on the poor and other causes.
You people want more and don’t want me doing that voluntarily. Frick you all.
This post was edited on 2/27/20 at 9:17 am
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:16 am to roadGator
quote:
I never said it was theft.
So you disagree with Rush also. Good. We agree. For a minute I thought you were truly crazy.
Page 9 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News