The stupidity of the democrats

[MikeWaters]

So now Obamacare will prevent insurance companies from denying insurance based on prior conditions, but will not require people to have insurance.

Actually they do require it, but the penalty for not having it is a $200 tax.

So instead of shoveling out thousands of dollars, I choose not to have insurance. I pay a $200 tax. Then I am diagnosed with cancer. I sign up for insurance and have my cancer treatment paid for.

Insurance companies are warning this will destroy the system. It's like getting to pay for auto insurance after you've had an accident.

Democrats, get this, are arguing that this won't happen. That people won't choose to "game" the system.

Incredible.

Wake me up when the grownups are in charge again.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

So now Obamacare will prevent insurance companies from denying insurance based on prior conditions, but will not require people to have insurance.

Actually they do require it, but the penalty for not having it is a $200 tax.

So instead of shoveling out thousands of dollars, I choose not to have insurance. I pay a $200 tax. Then I am diagnosed with cancer. I sign up for insurance and have my cancer treatment paid for.

Insurance companies are warning this will destroy the system. It's like getting to pay for auto insurance after you've had an accident.

Democrats, get this, are arguing that this won't happen. That people won't choose to "game" the system.

Incredible.

Wake me up when the grownups are in charge again.

I agree that is a bad formulation, but the only practical alternative that I see is to require people to catch up on all premiums they should have paid but didn't pay if they obtain insurance later (which was proposed during the campaign).

The issue above isn't at all different than how things stand right now, though, so to say it will destroy the system isn't correct either. Right now, many people don't get health insurance. Then they get really sick, they get treated (because it is illegal not to treat them), and they don't pay for the care at all. With a fine, at least there is some money flowing to the government. While I agree it isn't intelligent to argue people won't game the system, they are gaming it right now, and doing so with no payment to the government, caregivers or insurance providers at all.

[MikeWaters]

This is a way to shunt all the costs over to people who buy private insurance. Of course, they know that insurance premiums will skyrocket.

People will be outraged. They will demand an end to it. And then the govt. ride in with single-payer. Ta-dah. The end of private medical care, and full control of all of medicine by the government, with one plan to fit every person.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

This is a way to shunt all the costs over to people who buy private insurance. Of course, they know that insurance premiums will skyrocket.

People will be outraged. They will demand an end to it. And then the govt. ride in with single-payer. Ta-dah. The end of private medical care, and full control of all of medicine by the government, with one plan to fit every person.

All the costs are already shunted over to private insurance. Who do you think is paying for "free" hospital emergency room care for the uninsured right now?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

All the costs are already shunted over to private insurance. Who do you think is paying for "free" hospital emergency room care for the uninsured right now?

I've lived in two big cities. And both cities have a county hospital(s) along with a healthcare plan for the indigent which includes outpatient visits and medication.

I don't know what kind of ass-backwards places you have lived in.

Having said that, yes, private insurance, to some extent, does subsidize the indigent. But guess what (the part that Cali the liar conveniently leaves out), private insurance also subsidizes MEDICARE AND MEDICAID. Because medicare and medicaid pay so little that doctors would not be able to stay in business if that's all they took.

So what does the democratic plan do? IT INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF SUBSIDIZATION BY PEOPLE WITH PRIVATE INSURANCE.

If you think this is wrong, and you think you are being sold a bill of goods, DO NOT VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I've lived in two big cities. And both cities have a county hospital(s) along with a healthcare plan for the indigent which includes outpatient visits and medication.

I don't know what kind of ass-backwards places you have lived in.

Having said that, yes, private insurance, to some extent, does subsidize the indigent. But guess what (the part that Cali the liar conveniently leaves out), private insurance also subsidizes MEDICARE AND MEDICAID. Because medicare and medicaid pay so little that doctors would not be able to stay in business if that's all they took.

So what does the democratic plan do? IT INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF SUBSIDIZATION BY PEOPLE WITH PRIVATE INSURANCE.

If you think this is wrong, and you think you are being sold a bill of goods, DO NOT VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT.

You are expanding your argument beyond where you started. You began with the premise that there are lots of uninsured (not indigent, not those on Medicare or Medicaid, but uninsured) and that those people will remain uninsured under the new plan and choose to pay a fine rather than a premium. Then when they need healthcare, they will get the necessary insurance and get covered. Perhaps that is right. But that very same group of people right now get treatment at the emergency room when they need it, they pay no fine, they pay no premium to get on any government plan, and still get care. With respect to the group of people you are addressing in your original post, at least under the modified plan, they pay SOMETHING, whereas now they pay nothing. I already suggested a way to get them to pay even more. You ignored it and changed your argument.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

You are expanding your argument beyond where you started. You began with the premise that there are lots of uninsured (not indigent, not those on Medicare or Medicaid, but uninsured) and that those people will remain uninsured under the new plan and choose to pay a fine rather than a premium. Then when they need healthcare, they will get the necessary insurance and get covered. Perhaps that is right. But that very same group of people right now get treatment at the emergency room when they need it, they pay no fine, they pay no premium to get on any government plan, and still get care. With respect to the group of people you are addressing in your original post, at least under the modified plan, they pay SOMETHING, whereas now they pay nothing. I already suggested a way to get them to pay even more. You ignored it and changed your argument.

This is why Obamacare fails. Because its authors and proponents have no brains.

They see no moral hazard. They see no scenario where someone who WOULD HAVE BOUGHT INSURANCE now decides not to, to save money.

"Gosh, I can't imagine anyone trying to save tens of thousands of dollars by something like that."

The working poor can get treated in ERs. Of course. They can also get medical bills and bill collectors and ruin their credit ratings. Won't have to worry about that anymore under Obama.

Do an experiment. Call 5 hem/onc docs in your town, tell them you went to an ER and you were diagnosed with colon cancer. Say you would like an appointment, but of course let them know you don't have any insurance.

See what happens.

There have been working-poor type folks in the Dallas area that lived in the suburbs, didn't have insurance, and were diagnosed with serious illness. They actually lied, cheated the system to get free care in the Dallas County indigent system. But they got busted. I can't remember if it was criminal or civil, but essentially they agreed to pay the bills. Obamacare would be great for the entrenpreneur pulling in big bucks. Don't pay for insurance til you get sick.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

This is why Obamacare fails. Because its authors and proponents have no brains.

They see no moral hazard. They see no scenario where someone who WOULD HAVE BOUGHT INSURANCE now decides not to, to save money.

"Gosh, I can't imagine anyone trying to save tens of thousands of dollars by something like that."

The working poor can get treated in ERs. Of course. They can also get medical bills and bill collectors and ruin their credit ratings. Won't have to worry about that anymore under Obama.

Do an experiment. Call 5 hem/onc docs in your town, tell them you went to an ER and you were diagnosed with colon cancer. Say you would like an appointment, but of course let them know you don't have any insurance.

See what happens.

There have been working-poor type folks in the Dallas area that lived in the suburbs, didn't have insurance, and were diagnosed with serious illness. They actually lied, cheated the system to get free care in the Dallas County indigent system. But they got busted. I can't remember if it was criminal or civil, but essentially they agreed to pay the bills. Obamacare would be great for the entrenpreneur pulling in big bucks. Don't pay for insurance til you get sick.

Wouldn't it be more effective if you read what I wrote prior to going on another meaningless rant?

Sounds like all of your concerns would be settled if people had to pay back premiums they skipped (with interest) and received a negative credit rating for late payments.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Wouldn't it be more effective if you read what I wrote prior to going on another meaningless rant?

Sounds like all of your concerns would be settled if people had to pay back premiums they skipped (with interest) and received a negative credit rating for late payments.

Remember that originally the penalty for not having insurance was going to be $4000 per year.

So now you are saying the penalty could be tens of thousands of dollars? Not going to happen.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Remember that originally the penalty for not having insurance was going to be $4000 per year.

So now you are saying the penalty could be tens of thousands of dollars? Not going to happen.

Get off of whether it will happen and answer if you think that would be better.