Health Care

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
If you consider having your options losing them when your private insurer's policy changes for whatever reason. :shrug:


SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.

(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

(2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS- Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.

(3) RESTRICTIONS ON PREMIUM INCREASES- The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific grandfathered health insurance coverage without changing the premium for all enrollees in the same risk group at the same rate, as specified by the Commissioner.

(2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS- Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.:

(3) RESTRICTIONS ON PREMIUM INCREASES- The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific grandfathered health insurance coverage without changing the premium for all enrollees in the same risk group at the same rate, as specified by the Commissioner.
 
randomJACKASS

randomJACKASS

Banned
Yes Prof I have to admit sometimes I tune some of this shit out because it depresses me how stupid so many of us are and how we buy up the insurance company's bullshit like it was the best thing since sliced bread. I suppose I didn't read enough and clearly enough. I have never heard of any country whose citizens so consistently vote against their best interest.

The whole political system is what is broke, and the one thing I actually agree with Gonz about is tort reform, but then how are you going to get a bunch of lawyers to vote for anything that doesn't put money in their pocket?
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
My position exactly, RJ. I'll assume you remember my opinion of almost all politicians, but I'll reiterate. Almost all politicians started out as lawyers. Naturally, they need to have a good basis in law to become lawmakers. The problem being that in any court of law, at least one of the two lawyers is deliberately misrepresenting the facts. Professional lying, I call it. Here's the sticker .... unsuccessful lawyers tend to not make the money necessary to run for office. Therefore, you've got a bunch of people running your country who's biggest job requirement is successful professional lying.

That's my major beef with the entire democratic republic system. The ones most likely to win positions aren't necessarily the best ones for the job, but the best salesmen.


The ObamaCare proposed, to me, looks like a blanket-sized bandaid over a gaping wound. It's not going to heal it. Just cover it and let the infection grow unseen, .... until you have to cut off the limb.
 
Gato_Solo

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Professur said:
My position exactly, RJ. I'll assume you remember my opinion of almost all politicians, but I'll reiterate. Almost all politicians started out as lawyers. Naturally, they need to have a good basis in law to become lawmakers. The problem being that in any court of law, at least one of the two lawyers is deliberately misrepresenting the facts. Professional lying, I call it. Here's the sticker .... unsuccessful lawyers tend to not make the money necessary to run for office. Therefore, you've got a bunch of people running your country who's biggest job requirement is successful professional lying.

That's my major beef with the entire democratic republic system. The ones most likely to win positions aren't necessarily the best ones for the job, but the best salesmen.


The ObamaCare proposed, to me, looks like a blanket-sized bandaid over a gaping wound. It's not going to heal it. Just cover it and let the infection grow unseen, .... until you have to cut off the limb.
Click to expand...

He won't understand, prof. He's been brainwashed. Of course, he'll say the same about me, but you and I are both long-term recipients of government health care. The really sad thing is that people don't understand their choices until they lose them, and then its much too late.
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
Yes, it does. I've spoken out about it any number of times, hence my position on Monarchy. but some people seem bent on giving the gov't more and more and more power and control instead of resolving issues themselves.

That's my only position on the proposed health care reform. If you guys can't influence corporate insurance, what makes you think that gov't insurance will do what you want? Can anyone here honestly say that any gov't satisfied them 100%?


Name me one example anytime where gov't stepped in to replace a corp and things were better, cheaper and more efficient. One.
 
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
spike said:
I don't see anything there about losing your options.
Click to expand...


It says that any change in coverage either by you or your insurer will terminate your policy coverage and you will have to accept mandatory coverage either government healthcare or a private policy the terms of which will be dictated by the czar of the Insurance Exchange.
 
spike

spike

New Member
Professur said:
Name me one example anytime where gov't stepped in to replace a corp and things were better, cheaper and more efficient. One.
Click to expand...

I guess the simplest thing to do would be to look at how much more efficient government run healthcare systems are than the US system. The US spends twice as much for inferior care.

Also our post office stamps are pretty cheap.
 
spike

spike

New Member
Cerise said:
It says that any change in coverage either by you or your insurer will terminate your policy coverage and you will have to accept mandatory coverage either government healthcare or a private policy the terms of which will be dictated by the czar of the Insurance Exchange.
Click to expand...

I don't see where it says that.
 
spike

spike

New Member
Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. This report—an update to two earlier editions—includes data from surveys of patients, as well as information from primary care physicians about their medical practices and views of their countries' health systems. Compared with five other nations—Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom—the U.S. health care system ranks last or next-to-last on five dimensions of a high performance health system: quality, access, efficiency, equity, and healthy lives. The U.S. is the only country in the study without universal health insurance coverage, partly accounting for its poor performance on access, equity, and health outcomes. The inclusion of physician survey data also shows the U.S. lagging in adoption of information technology and use of nurses to improve care coordination for the chronically ill.
Click to expand...

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Con...omparative-Performance-of-American-Healt.aspx
 
catocom

catocom

Well-Known Member
the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance,
Click to expand...
that's debatable, but I'm busy atm
I might try to dig up some stuff later, but it seems things have changed in the last 10-12 years on some stats in a negative direction.
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
Spike, once again, that's statistics. Without knowing what questions were asked, how they were asked, and of whom they were asked, they're useless. One comparison I'd like to see, and never do, is the world figures for development of new treatments. The US might or might not lack in the application of techniques, but who do you think leads in developing them ... South korea?
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
randomJACKASS said:
I have never heard of any country whose citizens so consistently vote against their best interest.
Click to expand...

Most likely, that's because you've been brainwashed (indoctrinated) into believing that it is the effort of others to do what's best for you. Personal responsibility in the main ingredient in liberty. Get up, get out & take care of yourself. The results will amaze you.
 
catocom

catocom

Well-Known Member
yep, I saw just the other day where they are signing up new guinea pigs, er.....um, I mean voluteers.
:evilgrin:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top