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

To: CitizenUSA

Insurance benefits should be capped at the amount each individual paid in? Then what would be the point of taking out an insurance policy in the first place? And who gets the money left by people who die before collecting the money they paid in? Do you refund it to their survivors?

Do you see our whole medical system as the patient, the elderly as the disease, and health care reform as the cure?


76 posted on 06/18/2012 6:40:55 AM PDT by BykrBayb (Somewhere, my flower is there. ~ Þ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]


To: BykrBayb
Insurance benefits should be capped or covered per the agreement between the insured and insurer. Government should enforce the insurance contract, not spell out what it must contain or force companies to cover what they have not contractually agreed to cover. If, for example, I want to buy a policy that only covers catastrophic care, is portable everywhere I move, and is capped at $10 million total lifetime payout, then isn't that my private business?

As for money that has been paid into government entitlement programs, I'm afraid it's gone. Politicians have promised more than they can deliver. Those at the front of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security have reaped the benefits while passing (a goodly portion of) the bill down to those who are late to the Ponzi scheme.

Do I think beneficiaries should be able to pass down as inheritance what was collected from them and not paid out? No. Medicare and Social Security are taxes, not actual insurance programs. On the other hand, I do think government should try to take care of current retirees. If we don't alter course soon, I wonder if even that will be possible, because we might bankrupt the nation trying to keep paying what we cannot afford.

As for you final question, I don't see the medical system as the patient. I just don't think we should have a “medical system” per se. What we should have is freedom, the freedom of individuals to make their own health care decisions. In other words, my dream health care “system” is not really a system at all, more of a free market.

No. I also don't see the elderly as a disease. I'm almost one myself, and I have loved ones who are on these programs. I believe in taking care of loved ones and private charity for one’s neighbor. I can't afford to pay directly (out of my own pocket) for everything my retired family members get. That is why I accept the reality that programs can't be changed over night.

People have planned and lived their entire lives based on these entitlement programs, so choices they could have made earlier to better prepare were made based on a belief that government would be there. Now you have ridiculous situations like one retiree paying out everything he owns for his nursing home care, while a retiree in the next room gets the exact same care without paying anything. Why? Because the one person probably planned and saved so as to not be a burden on others, and the other planned...to be taken care of by others (taxpayers) at their expense.

Finally, health care reform IS the cure to the current mess. I do agree with that. Whether you agree or not, the economic facts are what they are. The nation has trillions in unfunded liabilities if it doesn't alter the terms and benefits of these big entitlement programs.

77 posted on 06/18/2012 6:27:16 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

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