Originally posted by CoderGuy
View Post
Huckabee opposes health insurance for people with pre existing conditions...
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by sgreger1 View PostSingle payer system: everyone gets adequate coverage. You get what you need when you need it. <---- great for most people and all poor people.
For those with money (like for example those who pay more for cadillac plans today): buy supplimental insurance. This allows you to go see a private doctor and get the higher level of care that comes with paying more.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by CoderGuy View PostOK, maybe someone has, and maybe we "are" on the right track (sort of)...
http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_ble...system/comment
This is exactly what i am talking about. Excelent link.
"In Switzerland, insurance companies must provide*basic*insurance to all recipients and cannot deny coverage on the basis of poor health. Premiums are not affected by*health status.*"Basic insurance"*is defined by government, which decides which drugs, lab tests, and devices will be covered. Deductibles and premiums are tightly regulated and cannot exceed*certain limits. Insur-ance companies cannot*profit from the basic plan, though they may profit from supplemental insurance."
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by raptor View PostTo add, Europeans already do this (have wealthier people buy supplemental insurance).
Everyone benefits. The poor and those who dont want to spend extra get adequate coverage, those who wish to buy higher quality coverage may do so. Win/win.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by CoderGuy View PostIt doesn't really make much sense for anyone to get worked up over this, it's not like we have any control or any ability to change it. Lots of drama for no return.
Comment
-
-
sgreger, the issue I have is using what Huckabee said as a way to make a case for single payer, the same thing he said about today's system and existing health conditions applies to single payer too, as far as insuring a burned house. If you agree with what he said, then logically you'd be for denying people coverage.
You did agree with him, and then go to supporting a system which would have the same problem. It's cool that you like single payer, but you shouldn't support analogies that attack the system you like in the same post.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Simplysnus View Postsgreger, the issue I have is using what Huckabee said as a way to make a case for single payer, the same thing he said about today's system and existing health conditions applies to single payer too, as far as insuring a burned house. If you agree with what he said, then logically you'd be for denying people coverage.
You did agree with him, and then go to supporting a system which would have the same problem. It's cool that you like single payer, but you shouldn't support analogies that attack the system you like in the same post.
I see what your saying. Its hard for me to explain. Ill take the hit for this one since i dont feel like typing out a confusing book-long explanation.
I still say hes not just being a heartless dick, he is pointing out a very serious flaw in the proposed plan.hes not a psycho or a cold hearted hater of sick people, he is just trying to figure out how this will be paid for in a way that works, something congress did not think of doing when writing it.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Simplysnus View PostHey coderguy, my wife wants to move to seattle, can you hook me up with a java gig?
http://www.bikini-baristas.com/bikin...s-seattle.html
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by CoderGuy View Post
Comment
-
Comment