Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Salvavida

“Primary their a$$es out. If the American people want health care as a right, they can ask for a constitutional amendment.”

A most simple statement that is so correct. It really cuts to the heart of the problem. It is harsh, but it is correct.

We have all rights that are not defined in the Constitution to be Federal. These rights are up to the individual states as applied by their state governments and do not have one damn thing to do with the federal government.

Personally I would like to see a system where people could opt in for catastrophic health care coverage. This would really not be that expensive compared to the total costs of health care. Individuals should be responsible for the day to day health care costs. This would then cause market forces to drive down the costs of health care on a day to day basis.

If they do not opt in for this coverage they lose. This seems unkind, but it is not. One must take some responsibility for their health. I do and I pay a lot for my health coverage. I would much rather pay for my normal expenses from my pocket and have insurance pay for catastrophic illness. I could dump my health plan and save a lot of money.


20 posted on 07/18/2017 3:00:00 PM PDT by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mudman, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist, CONSTITUTION WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: cpdiii
That's a good idea, but the problem is that little gray areas called

chronic conditions

and

precursors.

What if someone presents with ambiguous symptoms which might be a marker for an early cancer?

Do you forgo the tests to save money up front, and risk the person needing extremely expensive (and more likely futile) treatment later on, or do you pay up front for all the tests with a low likelihood of a true positive, to make sure you miss nobody.

Who pays for those tests? If the individual, then to save money, they are likely guaranteeing the insurance company has to pay for catastrophic later on.

Or someone with low grade MS. It might linger on for ten years or more without a flareup, or spiral downhill. Who determines the cutoff for the insurance company paying?

Then you have the issue of employer-provided insurance, and people getting downsized (secretly to save the company money on premiums)...

Finally, how does one allow insurance to reflect the true cost of lifelong extreme obesity, smoking, and the like? People push back pretty hard against not having "muh health care" irrespective of how many of their expenses they are causing...and if you jack up premiums for the overweight, how about for motorcyclists? Or for women in general who have far more health problems than men?

Just noting, these issues have to actually get addressed some how, with enough buy in for the bill to pass.

26 posted on 07/18/2017 3:30:29 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson