Featured Michelle Bachmann Repeal Obamacare Before It Literally KILLS

Avoiding answering about your dishonest post I see.

 

I think it is very insightful that Webdog and Brother Curtis see Obamacare for what it is, and Michelle for what she is, a poltical opportunist that has no chance of leading this nation. This is not an A or a B choice. Thinking outside the box comes up with a choice C, which is the correct choice.

 

That is step number 1, that's for sure!

Step number 2, is to remove the business tax incentive, that has made employers the third party between the individual and private insurance companies. Health insurance should be sold in a similar manner to auto insurance.

When I see phrases like "45 million uninsured Americans", I often wonder how many of them have vehicle insurance coverage? (This isn't said to start a debate about the differences between those types of coverage!!)

Thirdly, phase out Medicare to get the federal government out of the insurance industry. This said by someone who has Medicare.

Wonder how many younger folks realize that upon reaching 65 Medicare automatically becomes primary even if a person is working and has a good group insurance plan.

Wonder how many younger people realize that Medicare insurance premiums are deducted from Social Security checks.

Wonder how many younger folk realize the necessity exists to have decent insurance coverage, supplemental Medicare insurance is needed. Every month I pay TWO health insurance premiums.

If there was unfettered competition between insurance companies it is quite likely that I'd have better coverage at less cost than what I'm forced to deal with today. Then we wouldn't contantly be hearing about "45 million" from those supporting full governmental takeover of this aspect of our lives.

The government, itself, has put a goodly portion of the "45 million" in that position.

 

Lifting the ban on interstate insurance purchases would lower prices...for a while. Then the rush would be on amongst states to write legislation favorable to health insurance companies in a bid to get them to relocate to that state, bringing jobs and tax revenue.

The same thing happened in consumer credit card companies. South Dakota and Delaware passed laws raising the upper limit for legal interest rates companies could charge and the result was the relocation of most credit card companies to these two states.

Eventually the same thing would happen with health insurance companies with the result being a couple of states being home to the majority of companies and the loss of interstate competition.

 

I didn't place a dishonest post. That was your call. What's dishonest about the truth?

 

You made an accusation by a false assumption. Typical liberal debate tactic. Just because she disagrees with Obama care does not automatically mean she wants to prevent anyone from obtaining health insurance. It is also known as begging the question fallacy.

 

Typical radical conservative dodge. I'd like to see a workable alternative. Romneycare was successful in Massachusetts. What's the difference between the two plans?

 

Ok you need to address your false assertion.

 

So you support ObamaCare if it's controlled by the states? Who said anything about the military? I'm talking about people who have pre-existing conditions who either cannot get health insurance or it's so expensive they can't afford it.

 

"Pre-existing conditons" have always been a problem for insuance companies.

Healthy young people people helped fiance the insurance coverage for the unhealthy young and the older folks.

Healthy young people didn't want to pay for insurance without receiving immediate benefits from it. Thus, if they were not covered by a group plan, they wouldn't pay for insurance.

Until they developed a medical problem, that is. Contract with a company for a policy. Pay 1 premium of a couple hundred (at the time) and then file claims for thousands in medical expense. Thus, insurance companies started requiring a waiting period if you did not have continuing coverage from a carrier for a specified time period. To try to get people to go ahead and purchase health insurance for the same reason they buy auto or home insurance. Buy it, IN CASE you need it.

In an uninsured motorist wraps his car around a tree, shoud he be allowed to then buy insurance to repair his car? If an electrical fire destroys an uninsured home, should an insurance company be required to replace it with a policy purchased afterwards?

Ability to pay for insurance coverage is a separate issue. One of the many reasons why the cost is so high is explained when companies have to pay out thousands upon the receipt of a single payment of a few hundred.

It's a separate issue because for many because they receive medical treatment anyway. Case in point. I know a fellow about 22 yrs old at the time who suffered serious burns on his hand. Required treatment at a regional burn center. Just the hospital bill, when he was released, was over $50,000. He didn't have insurance. He didn't own anything except some clothes and such. He didn't have to pay a cent for that medical treatment. Someone else had to pick up his tab. I don't know how much via tax payers and how much via higher prices to others who do buy insurance coverage.

There's more, but I'm getting tired. It's after 11:00 pm here and I've been up since about 3:30 this morning.

Good night to all.

 

So you didn't support Romneycare either? That was basically the same as Obamacare. It was funny how Romney didn't ever mention that in the last campaign.