Posted on 10/05/2012 1:18:09 PM PDT by pgyanke
No. 1, declared Mitt Romney in Wednesdays debate, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan. No, they arent as Mr. Romneys own advisers have conceded in the past, and did again after the debate.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I’ve noticed on CNN today that they keep closing story’s to comment.
Great explanation. Thanks!
Car insurance companies are effectively the same. You will find it very difficult to get car insurance if you don't already have it.
The problem lies with how the insurance company quotes your premium, and I don't know the details in Obamacare, or what would be RomneyCare. Are they required to offer you the same premium they would offer to someone without a pre-existing condition?
To use the car insurance analogy: if I have an at-fault accident on my record, a new car insurance company isn't likely to offer me coverage for a reasonable premium. However, my existing insurance company is probably going to jack up my premium, too.
How does this work with health insurance? If I become seriously ill with a chronic condition, can they increase my premium?
See post #15.
Pre-existing conditions are covered (sometimes with limits) with Romneycare.
I do not know what debate Krugman was watching, in the one I watched the only specifics Romney gave on medical coverage plans were for the state plan when he was Governor. I am guessing Krugman got confused, but since he does not give much context of what “my plan” means in his quote of Romney, I can’t know for sure.
“insuring” a pre-existing condition isn’t insurance.
“insuring” a pre-existing condition isn’t insurance.
“Hello, Allstate? Yeah, my house is burning down right now, can I get some insurance?”
Thank you for clarifying kidd. That makes sense. I am relieved Romneycare did not have Obama’s definition of pre-existing coverage...which is insane.
Question for Krugman: Let’s say I total my car, then go to buy auto insurance. Can Allstate be forced to cover that preexisting condition?
Doesn’t Krugman have a saucer to go fly, somewhere?
As a site old-timer, you are probably aware that even the most hardcore self-proclaimed conservatives turn into “gimme gimme gimme” liberals when it comes to pre-existing conditions and health insurance.
What they want is to have their medical care - care that, with a pre-existing condition, has a well-known and predictable value - subsidized by somebody else. If you have diabetes and you will automatically require approximately $5,000 in medical care during the year for that diabetic condition, then your premiums should reflect this. Why they or anybody else think somebody else should pay for this is beyond me.
Tying medical insurance to employment and insulating the patient from both insurance and direct medical costs has been a disaster.
Group insurance in general is an enormous scam. I personally think that the relatively constant costs for health insurance - both a result of group rates and employer-linked insurance - have led people to do far less for their own health (including over-reliance of doctors).
There are two things most people don’t seem to remember. One, the human body has a very effective immune system. Two, you can take care of yourself.
The idea of insuring health was originally to level the costs associated with the possibility of the onset of a serious health issue.
It has since morphed into a quasi-discount pre-paid medical care plan.
You’re right, insuring a pre-existing condition isn’t insurance. It’s continuance of treatment. But at some point prior to the onset of the condition, it was insurance.
>> “There are two things most people dont seem to remember. One, the human body has a very effective immune system. Two, you can take care of yourself.” <<
.
Nah! - That personal responsibility stuff just doesn’t fly with the Bread-and-Circus crowd.
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.