I know this will get all the claws out, but I am curious about the health bill.
By mommaj
@mommaj (23112)
United States
November 8, 2009 1:44pm CST
I just read about premiums. Do I understand that a 65 year old will not pay more than twice that of an 18 year old? The way the bill looks the rate of the 18 year old can be raised to the point the 18 year old won't be able to afford it because the insurance carriers are NOT going to lower the cost of the 65 year old.
If the reading of this bill is correct, I would like to suggest the government does not get involved in health care. All it is going to do is raise our taxes and raise our premiums. What is going on? I thought the legislation was meant to help.
Maybe more people should be eligible for medicaid or have county run health clinics. What is the big deal, especially compared to what the government is going to do?
1 person likes this
3 responses
tdemex
@kdhartford (1151)
• United States
8 Nov 09
I agree that this is not the final bill. I doubt that anything like the House version will be passed by the Senate. I think that your final statement is a bit naive. Our system is set up to avoid the tyranny of the majority. The minority has a lot to say about this and even a passed and signed bill is not the last act in this play.
@mommaj (23112)
• United States
8 Nov 09
I don't even want to talk about the politics. You are looking at a mirror image of Bush, just wrapped with smoother talking. I think we all need to remember, to the President, the presidency is a job and a social status as well as a way of life. What the president did in his personal life, or believed in, will spill over into the presidency. Obama has promised a lot of change. He even talked big about it. So far the only change he has made is raise the cost of vehicles, since it is harder to find an older vehicle. He gave money to the banks and the banks forgot what they were supposed to do with it. So, I am just wondering what the hopes of this health care bill is really for? Is it for the insurance lobbyists? If it will raise the cost of health care isn't the only benefit to the insurance company?
@speakeasy (4171)
• United States
8 Nov 09
The problem with both the House and the Senate bills are that they do not address the actual problems with our health care system. Every lobbyist out there has been hitting every button they can push; so, they can make more money off these bills than they were making before.
That is why they have things like "a 65 year old will not pay more than twice that of an 18 year old" going on. If you have half a brain, you know they are not really going to charge a 65 year old any less. They are going to raise the rates for the 18 year old. But, enough people will not stop and think about that; they will start telling their Congressmen to support the bill. And, insurance companies will make more money off of those 18 year olds who do not want to have to pay a fine for not having insurance while hospitals and doctors will have more people covered by insurance that they can bill.
Just like the clause that says that illegal immigrants will not be eligible for assistance in purchasing health insurance when the bill says that all that is needed to prove eligibility is one form of identification which will not be required to be verified. How many illegal immigrants are NOT using false forms of identification? This very careful wording has been gaining them the support of both those who support illegal immigration AND those who are worried about illegal immigrants continuing to "freeload".
They really need to address the actual problems with our current health care system before they set down to try to reform it. This bill will not do a thing about companies, hospitals and doctors that are charging 300% or higher markups on products and services. This bill will not stop these same companies, hospitals and doctors from fraudulently billing insurance companies and the government for unnecessary or nonexistant services and procedures. It will not rein in fraudulent malpractice claims or reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. If you can cut these basic costs; then, you can start to rein in the insurance companies and get them to lower rates and stop denying insurance to people with preexisting conditions. Plus, with lower costs, people without insurance would be better able to pay medical bills when they incur them.
But, both the voters and the lobbyists say they want health care reform; so, the current government is going to give it to them whether it makes things better or not.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
8 Nov 09
Speakeasy, how do you expect the government to be able to cut the price doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, etc. charge for their services? I do agree that they are all too high but the only power the government has over private business is to offer incentives to cut their prices. They can't force them to. I am in favor of tort reform, which should help to cut the cost of malpractice insurance, but it's not likely that the government would be able to rein in the big insurance companies.
1 person likes this
