| Blogs > jiminycricket1 > My Blog |
|
Defining the Healtcare issue We need to quit beating around the bush.. we need to understand how people really feel. I giving three choices..... One, 2A and 2b, because in essence they are the same, and Three.. Specifically I am using pre-existing conditions, as a specific example...but it's really about all the healthcare issues 1. Should a person, who has pre-existing condition, pay all of the increase premium for that condition........Unless each State deems it necessary to contribute to that person specifically 2A. Should EVERYBODY pay a smaller increase to their policy to cover the additional cost of someone with any pre-existing condition... 2B. Should the Federal government subsidize the insurance company or the individual to pay the increase premium for any pre-existing condition. 3. Should the Federal Government, in essence move into the healthcare industry, and provide coverage for any pre-existing conditions For everybody . For me, personally, there is no right or wrong answer... Each answer has both it's positive and negatives... but that's me....I honesty don't know what other people think Maybe YOU can enlighten me....Which do you think is the appropriate action? |
|||
|
My belief is the best answer is 2A....For pre-existing conditions...And possibly 2B for other issues.. including providing a greater OPPORTUNITY for ALL to have coverage. Obamacare tried to do that..but two things stood in its way....First it was flawed and need "tweaking"... Second, and the most important...It required the MAJORITY cooperation of EVERYBODY, EVERY BUSINESS, EVERY POLITICAL PARTY and EVERY INSURANCE COMPANY....which doomed it.. Because, in this day and age, that wasn't going to happen So MY truth is....Like it is for EVERYTHING else NOW....including a Supreme Court Justice.. If we can't get a Bi-partisan vote for ANYTHING.. it's doomed. And if we can't get a bipartisan vote for anything.. we're doomed... So what we got to look forward too... What is going to be the most important bi-partisan vote this congress will ever need to take.....either way....is going to be on IMPEACHMENT. If the Republicans, in total, prevent it, and the Democrat, in total, support it... IT SHOULDN'T BE DONE......And We the People, will then be able to decide it, and do it ...WITH OUR VOTE. Not only Trump, but anyone we determine who's vote was only partisan. That could be Democrat or Republican. If they can't justify their decision.. Then we need to justify, not having them make decisions for US.
| ||
|
Well, obviously.. you don't understand the answers....... . 3. Is the FEDERAL government, in essence, taking over the healthcare insurance industry, for example like Medicare for ALL.. Your reason puts you in favor of # 1 as the STATE will run the High Risk Pool, not the FEDERAL government...And the Insurance Company will still decide.. what is a pre-existing condition.. What will require an additional premium.. NOT the government. So what will happen is the insurance gets carte blance to determine what is a pre-existing condition.. and the government gets to decide, if YOU as an individual, get to be subsidized...Now the problem with that is.. if you're not chosen by the government....... You just got yourself... a free insurance company proctology exam! So it's #1 you are in favor of.. From Cancer.... to too many colds. A hypochondriac... or as mental illness goes. All cards the Insurance Company holds And where it stops..... nobody knows
| ||
|
let me try to explain the answer.. that affect all the healthcare issue.. Redefining #1......Should person who has specific increased risk, or falls within a smaller insuring pool... Pay the increased premium... Examples.. would be gender specific, including homosexual or transgendered. Should an identifiable group such such as Blacks, immigrants, place or origin , whites who have light colored skin with sun exposure...and Family history...... play apart in determining RISK and Premiums? The increased risk... would include such thing such as pregnancy, Aids, specific cancer risks, exposure risks, family history risks, genetic risks, addiction risks, and mental health risks.. so redoing #1...to encompass other healthcare issues, beside the normal pre-existing conditions.. 1. Should identifiable individuals or groups....be responsible for any increased premium as result of their individual characteristic, or group association.......Unless each State deems it necessary to contribute to that person or group specifically. ********************** PS.... of course, being a man.. I sure can't understand why I would have to pay for pregnancy coverage.. I'm single, I can't get pregnant..Which is a fact....but the real problems is I don't even get laid! And beside that, as a man, I can tell you, I have already paid through the nose, (through one orifice or another) for the pregnancies. I've been involved with... LOL.. that's for LULU...that's my mansplaining.
| ||
|
Yes Maam, Let's not continue this.....It's already been way to enlightening for me.. I don't think I could stand anymore ENLIGHTENING!
| ||
|
Whenever I hear about US health insurance, it sounds extremely complicated. Seems like you have to do a lot of wading through the different companies and their policies. Are there at least free services to help people whose literacy level isn't up to par or have some mental/cognitive dysfunction preventing them from understanding the choices?......It seems like it would be pretty easy to fall through the cracks.
| ||
|
Whenever I hear about US health insurance, it sounds extremely complicated. Seems like you have to do a lot of wading through the different companies and their policies. Are there at least free services to help people whose literacy level isn't up to par or have some mental/cognitive dysfunction preventing them from understanding the choices?......It seems like it would be pretty easy to fall through the cracks. When health insurance became a National issue instead of STATE issue.. then Obamacare was designed to regulate the entire country.. make it all conform, and thus easier to understand in it's entirety. ....Level the playing field from STATE to STATE. For example.. The STATE of TEXAS.. and it's insurance regulation dept..and the ideas that they followed.. Texas is one of the riches States in America.. Yet on a per captita basis, had the LOWEST number of health insured people.. Why was that? The playing field for Texas was not level..... Obamacare was designed to level out the playing field for ALL states..
|
×
×