Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What to Do with the Uninsured (Let's establishes the principle of personal responsibility)
National Review ^ | 8/12/2009 | John McClaughry

Posted on 08/13/2009 5:34:34 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 08/13/2009 5:34:35 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Personal responsibiity? What’s that?

Just gimmme my handouts, celebrate my bad behavior, and shut the —— up!

/s


2 posted on 08/13/2009 5:36:02 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The purpose of health insurance?

Health insurance is a financial tool with the purpose of protecting us from financial harm.

Health insurance is designed to protect our credit ratings and to keep us out of bankruptcy court.

Those who have no assets do not NEED health insurance, in many cases.

Access to health care has very little to do with health insurance!


3 posted on 08/13/2009 5:38:01 AM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

it may be illegal to fine citizens for not buying insurance....


4 posted on 08/13/2009 5:38:10 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

what do they do to people who cant pay the fine?


5 posted on 08/13/2009 5:43:40 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

Another cash for clunkers program!


6 posted on 08/13/2009 5:44:50 AM PDT by Dr. Ursus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Ursus

hahhahaa...


7 posted on 08/13/2009 5:45:37 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

You know, that is an area of concern that deserves its own TV advertising:

“Would you RATHER negotiate with a hospital, and work out a payment plan, or would you RATHER negotiate with the IRS?

Would you rather have the option of bankruptcy court, if you can’t pay a medical bill, or would you RATHER deal with the IRS?”

(Make no mistake, the IRS is given the power to enforce many of the “premium” mandates, in the House Bill.)


8 posted on 08/13/2009 5:47:46 AM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

It violates the Contracts Clause of the 13th Amendment. RE: Reynolds vs The United States. Which established the “wheel of servitude” is violated when the government coerces a citizen into entering into a contract.


9 posted on 08/13/2009 5:49:58 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
two neighbors live next door to each other.

One works 80 hours, saves his money, pays his bills and others.

The other studies Zero's polices and is given 100,000 of dollars in Mortgage relief and continues on his merry way.

Why does neighbor a get punished for success , Mr. Zero?

10 posted on 08/13/2009 5:51:44 AM PDT by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: scooby321

I agree with your theory and take it a step more by saying to those who say I am being selfish:

I do not wish to pay your mortgage; college education; credit card debt; vehicle purchase; and or health care.

The entire notion of “responsiblity” seems to have been over written by politicians who want to feel good by giving away my hard earned assets.


11 posted on 08/13/2009 6:14:53 AM PDT by Mouton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; xzins; Dr. Eckleburg; blue-duncan; wmfights; Forest Keeper
I probably use about $300 worth of healthcare a year and between me and my employer we pay about $12,000 a year in health insurance premiums. I pay it because I have a fear that I may contract some life threatening illness and if I don't have health insurance at that point, then I could face bankruptcy.

But under this plan by Obama, if I were to drop my insurance altogether I would be fined $1000 a year. That's about $95 a month? Big deal. But the savings would be more than 10 times that amount.

Now here's the clincher. If I were to suddenly contract some life threatening and expensive illness, under Obama's plan, I could immediately apply for insurance AND NOBODY COULD TURN ME DOWN! So I get a $200 test which tells me I have prostrate cancer or I need a lung transplant and THEN I get insurance and get the treatment for free. So after I come down with this expensive medical condition I would pay maybe $3000 a year for this medical insurance (because Insurance companies are prohibited from charging a newly enrolled cancer patient any more than they would charge a non-smoking marathon running vegetarian.) And then after my condition stabilizes, I just cancel my policy until the next life threatening condition befalls me.

Frankly if this passes I am seriously considering telling my employer to just drop my insurance and give me the money he is paying into the system and I will pay the fines.

If I can manage to stave off serious illness for the next 10 years, then I can bank about $120,000 which should cover my health insurance premiums for the next 25 years should I come down with some condition which I personally could not afford to pay and feel the need to be insured again.

Ah, the law of unintended consequences.

I suspect that if this measure passes the number of "uninsured" will triple. I will voluntarily join the ranks of the "uninsured" because under the Obama plan the uninsured really are just as "insured" as those who are stupid enough to actually choose to pay health care premiums.

This unbridled ability to get coverage for your pre-existing conditions is like being able to buy auto insurance AFTER you crash your car and AFTER some lawyer hands you a summons.

Ain't America great?

12 posted on 08/13/2009 6:25:04 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Here is a question: my wife has a chronic illness (MS). Right now, if I were self-employed, I could not get health insurance for her at any cost. And her illness, though chronic, is probably smaller compared to other folks’ (people who have advanced Parkinsons’, etc).

Right now I have to stay employed by a company to get insurance to cover health costs.

What is a reasonable alternative to be able to pay for her medical care (when necessary) that would be viable to other Americans in the same boat (pre-existing, chronic, not likely to be cured)?

This is the sort of tough situation that, in the absence of a reasonable private sector solution, drives people to look to the gov for answers.

I think the answer is that health care is unaffordable due to two things: over-demand and fear of lawsuits. We need to remove the “go to the doc for every hangnail and only pay $20” fast-food approach - either make every standard office visit out-of-pocket or nurture a new type first-line care providers (not doctors).

As for tort reform - has it worked in any state? Are there any states that have tried and and seen health costs go down (rise more slowly) as a result?

Feel free to jump in on any point above. these are honest questions - I am just trying to think the issues through.


13 posted on 08/13/2009 6:30:04 AM PDT by Puddleglum ("due to the record harvest, rationing will continue as usual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

When I was born in 1946 my father wrote out a check to the hospital and doctor for not only my birth, but for my twin brother as well.

As we grew up mother would take us to the doctor and pay that bill each time by check.

The Doctor did not have malpractice insurance, the bills were actually given to and paid by mom. Each item was clearly priced, identified, and justified on the bill.

Most importantly, the doctor and hospital were not “terrified” by our out of control legal system.

Back then, the laws of supply and demand pertained and the price for medical care was fair and just.

What happened? A very simple answer...INSURANCE. Deep pockets were here to stay.

People pay outrageous amounts for insurance of all types. In turn, the “deep pocket” insurance companies pay legal and medical charges and suits without question and then force the need for the businesses and citizens of this country to “need” insurance to protect themselves against financial disaster. Insurance companies don’t have to worry about rising legal and medical charges and suits, they simply raise the cost for their product (plus a little extra kicker for extra profit) and force the public to pay for it.

It’s a loop...Insurance-doctors/lawyers-Insurance.

Why do you think Tort reform and term limits have not (and will not) occur? The answer is that our whole corrupt government is in on the take in one way or another. “One hand washes the other” and that what makes all insurance “robbery on the installment plan.”


14 posted on 08/13/2009 6:37:41 AM PDT by DH (The government writes no bill that does not line the pockets of special interests.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It seems pretty simple to me.

Once you’re able to take care of your family’s needs as your first responsibility,

if you think that someone else is in need and is deserving of help with their medical insurance premiums,

PAY THEM YOURSELF.

This concept INFURIATES libs that I’ve proposed it to.


15 posted on 08/13/2009 6:40:37 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

To quote Morton Blackwell, “you can’t beat a plan with no plan.”

If your goal is universal coverage (excluding illegals), then all you hvae to do is take a page from auto insurance and establish an “assigned risk” pool. Done.

Expand the tax credit that employers get for bying insurance for emplyees to individuals and to other kinds of groups — lodges, churches, etc.

Require that all companies offer catastrophic-only policies as well as comprehensive policies.

Allow the purchase of insurance across state lines.

Make HSAs work like IRAs.

Waive antitrust in just two areas: 1. Allow small businesses (even in the same field, such as all the hardware stores in a given area) to join together to buy insurance; 2. Allow hospitals in a given area to combine to purchase the most expensive kinds of equipment.

Limit damages in malpractice cases to a specific multiple (say two or three) of atual damages. (This lowers the cost of doctors’ malpractice insurance.) Also, implement loser pays laws.

What other ideas should we include?


16 posted on 08/13/2009 6:48:34 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

You’ve covered it.

Pretty much all those reforms were instituted by the state of Texas and it reduced the costs 30%, reduced insurance premiums 30%,

and caused insurance companies and DOCTORS to FLOOD into Texas.

Those points are what the GOP should be offering as the proven solution to the STATED problems that the ‘rats are trying to “solve”.

We know the truth though - they aren’t trying to solve anything, they are trying to CONTROL everything.


17 posted on 08/13/2009 6:51:20 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Great analysis.
However, there is still the problem of rationed care whether you were in the plan or just joined.


18 posted on 08/13/2009 6:53:29 AM PDT by super7man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: super7man
However, there is still the problem of rationed care whether you were in the plan or just joined.

Yeah, but under MY PLAN, I will have $120,000 in my own bank account which (knowing human nature as I do) should move me to the front of just about any rationing line. ;-)

19 posted on 08/13/2009 6:57:56 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Hospitals don’t have hit squads that go and kill people who don’t pay up. The IRS on the other hand...


20 posted on 08/13/2009 7:23:26 AM PDT by RAO1125 (Neoconservatism:Failed. Socialism:Failing (again). Next up: Libertarianism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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