Posted on 02/09/2011 7:49:11 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Indeed. Whenever government decides to enforce car insurance requirements, illegals are rarely if ever targeted. It is always those of us who are legal citizens who are on the business end of the law.
You get it. Republican plans suck too.
Once upon a time, individual health insurance policies were underwritten very much like auto insurance:
Auto insurance is based on the Year, Make & model of the vehicle and health questionnaires and/or medical exams were required before issuing a policy.
Medical coverage excluded pre-existing conditions( prior damage), cosmetic surgery (custom paint jobs), pregnancy (reckless behavior) and old age (worn out brakes).
So there are some parallels.
the only thing i want to change on my health insurance that i can do with my auto insurance is have the ability to buy a plan over state lines. my homeowners, auto and motorcycle plans are all from out of state companies, and are much cheaper for it.
i’ve always wondered.. why doesn’t the requirement to buy your health insurance from your own state violate the interstate commerce clause?
And that will lead to just about every disease being described as 'caused by lifestyle'. The statistics behind most of the current disease-lifestyle links are pretty shaky. Even obesity can be caused by infection - do a search on infectobesity.
Or, doctors could refuse to deal with insurance altogether and have the patient do all of the dealing instead.
Probly the sane way to handle this is to first have Tort reform to protect well meaning providers. Second..Outlaw managed care completely. Third have a two tier system. Those who can afford it can buy real insurance and others get socialized medicine complete with rationing. Or charity care. I see no other viable alternatives. The corruption and fraud now is not ‘curable’.
I agree, but I think that the end result would be a "flattening" of policies, or "a-la-carte" options, either of which would be desirable.
For instance, thtough my company, I'm covered for all mental health issues, although I have absolutely no history of problems. I'm also covered for drug and alcohol addiction (again, not going to happen). I'm also covered for pregnancy. I'm not expecting that one, either.
If, and this is impossible due to stifling regulations within many states, but if I could go to an "a-la-carte" type plan and choose NOT to be covered for a number of ailments - in effect, self-insuring for them (a risk I'm willing to take) - the policy rates would necessarily go down.
For instance, Mrs WBill chose NOT to be covered for pregnancy (that's the one thing that can be opted out of in our state). Saved us thousands per year on her health insurance.
Another point. When HMOs first came out, they were very popular, and very affordable. It represented a quantum leap forward in health care coverage, and controlling costs. They offered several plans, with different levels of coverage, and at differetn rates. What destroyed the HMO were the state legislatures that “mandated” that these plans must include all these additional features, like second opinions, maternity, chiropractic, additional days in hospital...etc. etc...there’s a huge list...and the companies had to raise premiums through the roof..
They could, and some do..but that will be pure free market economics..I welcome it...
This is a doctor? Of what? Everyone knows that age- related changes contribute to declining health. Mortality rate of humans still 100%. If this is *your* doctor, please reconsider your choice. I sincerely hope this is satire, or maybe a doctor of bean plants.
This may not answer your question but may offer some insight.
1. Companies do price various insurance products for all 50 states. The catch is they must file what they offer (coverage and rates) with each State insurance regulator. That is a cost item that could be reduced.
2. A plethora of forms would be a problem, but it is a problem the free market could deal with by voluntary standardization. What insurance is accepted may become a moot point, but unless it is allowed, how would we ever know if it could work.
The barrier is a court decision (name escapes me) that made insurance regulation the sole province of the States, and hence the added cost for all the required filings.
“why not pay more in health insurance if you smoke?”
Check your policy.
Smokers DO pay more for health coverage.
I’m sent a renewal policy every year and one of the questions on the policy is “Do you Smoke?”
Why do you think that is?
Because rates are HIGHER for smokers.
why cant my health insurance be like my life insurance?
The tier system works well in Switzerland, where everyone purchases his own private health insurance, while the employer pays All accidents, whether on the job or on the slopes. So no need for all the expense to prove the accident was work related, no work mans comp legal industry.
The tiers are ward, semi-private, and private. Most middle class people have semi-private. Gee, medical care is better if you pay more! Just like everything else.
My health insurance doesn’t ask about smoking.
This is a totally false premise. NO state requires drivers to insure themselves. The only requirement is to obtain insurance for damage that a driver may do to OTHERS. This is a basic flaw in this analogy that most pundits miss.
Righto. Our whole system sucks. Wards are a lot cheaper. Swiss system sounds good.
Mine does.
I can’t imagine one company asking about the state of your ‘health’, including smoking, and one not asking.
Insurance companies will do everything possible to make you pay as high a premium as they can.
Personally, we don’t need mandated auto insurance (given that a significant portion of those already on the road do not purchase it, and we don’t need mandated health insurance.
If people wish to purchase it (BLUE CROSS), etc, then they can. If they do not, then they shouldn’t. Same with driving. Someone who drives cautiously, and doesn’t and cannot afford insurance should have the option of not paying for it.
That being said as tanstaafl, if there is an accident, you pay the full cost.
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.