- 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: Pre existing conditions
Posted on 5/8/17 at 1:14 am to AjaxFury
Posted on 5/8/17 at 1:14 am to AjaxFury
Charity should cover those who cannot afford.
Are you kidding me? Do you know what rheumatoid arthritis, epilepsy, multiple scleroris, autism and psoriasis treatment costs per year? There is no way charity or a church will take this on.
Are you kidding me? Do you know what rheumatoid arthritis, epilepsy, multiple scleroris, autism and psoriasis treatment costs per year? There is no way charity or a church will take this on.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 2:43 am to Eurocat
in Iowa there is one person, ONE, that is currently costing 1 million dollars a month to treat for Wellmark in Iowa. He/she suffers a rare genetic disorder and it is directly responsible for 10% of Wellmark's premium increase this year. One person.
Charities rely on people's generosity or subsidization to function. And they have never been sufficient to pick up the slack for something like a Medicare or Medicaid. I mean think of how much is spent on Medicare and Medicaid to take care of the poor and old? Or the VA? Now try and imagine how you provide the 100's of billions annually that will be needed to take care of that group if we "get the government out of healthcare."
And then there is the problem of dispersion. How do you get enough charity hospitals everywhere in the country that needs them? Especially in a country where often it is some of the more rural areas that are impoverished and in need of that care. And what happens when that charity hospital gets 1 or 2 of those million dollar patients?
I certainly think there are better ways to handle the problems then we are. But just hoping we can make up those billions and billions needed annually and in the right dispersion, if only we would get the government out the way, is pretty hard to imagine.
A for-profit system is always going to want to avoid potential land mines like the million dollar patient(or the less extreme but still problematic outliers). Unless you regulate the system in a way that they can be sustained in good health but not allowed to discriminate. Clearly the current arrangement is not sufficient.
But since unfortunately the severity of health issues do not align perfectly with people's incomes, there is always going to be a lot of shortfall, in terms of inability to get needed care or coverage based on what a for-profit system can bear, and a charity system can realistically do.
People that are too sick and too poor for an insurer to insure, People that have one catastrophe and run through their lifetime limits(a common policy staple pre-ACA). Or just people that fall on hard times, or another recession hits, and lots of people can't maintain coverage and then end up in the pre-existing condition pool. And yes, those assholes who ruin it for the rest of us because they aren't responsible and rather buy tickets to Hangout fest and go on a party cruise instead of maintaining insurance.
Charities rely on people's generosity or subsidization to function. And they have never been sufficient to pick up the slack for something like a Medicare or Medicaid. I mean think of how much is spent on Medicare and Medicaid to take care of the poor and old? Or the VA? Now try and imagine how you provide the 100's of billions annually that will be needed to take care of that group if we "get the government out of healthcare."
And then there is the problem of dispersion. How do you get enough charity hospitals everywhere in the country that needs them? Especially in a country where often it is some of the more rural areas that are impoverished and in need of that care. And what happens when that charity hospital gets 1 or 2 of those million dollar patients?
I certainly think there are better ways to handle the problems then we are. But just hoping we can make up those billions and billions needed annually and in the right dispersion, if only we would get the government out the way, is pretty hard to imagine.
A for-profit system is always going to want to avoid potential land mines like the million dollar patient(or the less extreme but still problematic outliers). Unless you regulate the system in a way that they can be sustained in good health but not allowed to discriminate. Clearly the current arrangement is not sufficient.
But since unfortunately the severity of health issues do not align perfectly with people's incomes, there is always going to be a lot of shortfall, in terms of inability to get needed care or coverage based on what a for-profit system can bear, and a charity system can realistically do.
People that are too sick and too poor for an insurer to insure, People that have one catastrophe and run through their lifetime limits(a common policy staple pre-ACA). Or just people that fall on hard times, or another recession hits, and lots of people can't maintain coverage and then end up in the pre-existing condition pool. And yes, those assholes who ruin it for the rest of us because they aren't responsible and rather buy tickets to Hangout fest and go on a party cruise instead of maintaining insurance.
This post was edited on 5/8/17 at 3:01 am
Posted on 5/8/17 at 2:58 am to bamarep
quote:More or less the republican plan is just to let them die - amirite?
People with "pre-existing" conditions have been led to believe that their healthcare bills should be either paid by someone else or subsidized by the government. People that expect to buy "coverage" for something they know going in that they know they already have don't have a clue how the "insurance" business works.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 3:19 am to CelticDog
quote:
Free dog sled ride to ice floe. Get out on the ice now grandad. Bye.
And there it is. Get older and get ill and die. We don't care.
And what about a premey born with serious health issues, throw that person on the ice floe with the old folks and bye to them too?
Maybe you should use the human chattel to do medical research on them prior to discarding ala the Nazis. Then you would have at least a use for the human lives you are discarding. Try to get some value.
And by the way, grandad is spelled granddad. Educate yourself, but I understand your GED didn't cover spelling.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 3:53 am to ApexTiger
Problem is people drop and add insurance when they need it again. In louisiana the average obamacare coverage is 4 months. No one should be made to buy insurance, but dont expect to be able to pick up whenever you want with full coverage. BUT, if you keep insuarance and move from one coverage to another, it should continue to be covered.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 5:32 am to ApexTiger
As it is we are spending too much on healthcare for people that put themselves in bad situations or people who abuse hospital visits. The first thing we need to do is clean that shite up and put those savings towards assisting those who just got fricked by the genetic lottery and didn't eat themselves sick.
I don't think private charity is going to Cover the costs fully and some form of public assistance will be needed, which I'm fine with but we have to rig the system so that there is personal accountability first.
I don't think private charity is going to Cover the costs fully and some form of public assistance will be needed, which I'm fine with but we have to rig the system so that there is personal accountability first.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 6:17 am to axd9142a
quote:
Let them die (Oh! I am just quoting Republican's in congress.
Gotta a link for that?
Or you just bolivating from the mouth?
Whose alter are you? rexx?
One of the ways we can address those poor souls with pre-existing conditions is to re-allow states to have 'high-risk' pools.
33 states had these type 'risk-pools' before obama-fraud outlawed them.
Give generous tax incentives to doctors, providers, nurses, pharms, medical supply companies...to treat these people.
We can even allow these people write off 100% of their medical expenses on their federal and state tax returns.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 6:19 am to ApexTiger
I think it is unfair I cannot buy homeowners insurance that covers fire after my house has burned down.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 6:33 am to Eurocat
quote:
If a person has a verifiabkle pre-existing condition put him on Medicare. Simple, end of story.
You mean Medicaid. I think?
Posted on 5/8/17 at 6:34 am to bonhoeffer45
Link on that Wellmark story? Jesus Christ that's jaw dropping.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 6:38 am to skinny domino
quote:
More or less the republican plan is just to let them die - amirite?
People are literally dying in the streets, right?
You do realize that all pre-existing conditions are not life threatening. In fact, most probably are not. But that flies in the face of civil discourse in which a solution can be found. So let's just tell everybody we will have people "literally dying in the streets!" Because, you know, before pre-existing conditions were required to be covered, I had to get a snowplow out to remove all the bodies laying in my driveway.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:04 am to DawgsLife
Remember, there were many LA posters who didn't think they would get "sick", & declined insurance.
Then the flood happened & surprise....they got "sick".
Wanted the govt to help them with that. I don't understand how some can't see their own hypocricy on healthcare views. Analogy works.
Then the flood happened & surprise....they got "sick".
Wanted the govt to help them with that. I don't understand how some can't see their own hypocricy on healthcare views. Analogy works.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:28 am to Eurocat
Funny because charity pays for congenital heart defects requiring surgery and necessary post op treatment, cancer treatment, and all sorts of other medical ailments. Hell there are entire hospitals whose operating budgets are made by nothing but charity. Amazingly they don't go under
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:31 am to ApexTiger
It's not insurance if you cover PEC, it's just welfare. If it must be covered, it should be a separate welfare program, not screwing up the insurance market.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:48 am to DawgsLife
quote:
People are literally dying in the streets, right?
Estimated 45,000 were a year in 2009 due to lack of insurance.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:49 am to Eurocat
quote:
Charity should cover those who cannot afford.
Are you kidding me? Do you know what rheumatoid arthritis, epilepsy, multiple scleroris, autism and psoriasis treatment costs per year? There is no way charity or a church will take this on.
The poverty rate of the elderly pre- and post-Medicare implementation is the best argument against their charity fantasy.
Before Medicare, 1 in 3 Americans over 65 live in poverty (approx. 35%). Now, it's less than 1 in 10 (10%).
Where was the charity then?!
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:50 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Where was the charity then?!
Where was yours? I'm sure you take a hefty salary cut to drive costs down in your field, don't you?
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:51 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Estimated 45,000 were a year in 2009 due to lack of insurance.
Link it.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 7:58 am to kingbob
quote:
charities should fill the void
That's a pleasant ideal situation, but in reality it's impossible due to the tremendous costs involved and the fickle nature of human charity. Kind of like a go fund me account for a new electrical grid or a flood control project
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News