jbg Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 That's the argument for market based risk premiums. It may be that a 27 year old would pay $600 per year for health insurance, maybe $1000. But not the $9000 or so that "community rated" premiums cost. Thus he'd be covered for the unlikely but possible breakage of an arm. Which is how insurance works. The point I'm making is health insurance should be priced by the risk and likelihood of a claim, just the way auto or homeowners is priced. The policy should have a "tail" so that if there is a triggering event the carrier would have to maintain payment. But ongoing premiums should be based on the relative risk of the customers' demographic group. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
punked Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 The point I'm making is health insurance should be priced by the risk and likelihood of a claim, just the way auto or homeowners is priced. The policy should have a "tail" so that if there is a triggering event the carrier would have to maintain payment. But ongoing premiums should be based on the relative risk of the customers' demographic group. My understanding is that is how health insurance works. Quote
Bonam Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 My understanding is that is how health insurance works. Except that Obamacare, by forcing companies to insure people with expensive pre-existing conditions without being allowed to charge them much higher premiums, will make those companies have to raise premiums on everyone else. That is, the young and healthy will pay higher premiums to cover the costs of the old and unhealthy. Personally, I think young productive people already pay more than enough tax that gets transferred to everyone else, whether it's pensions, welfare, healthcare for the poor, bailouts of failed corporations, etc. We don't need laws that force us to pay private companies to do more of the same thing. I reject the notion that I am on the hook to pay for millions of retirees' healthcare who had decades of economic prosperity to save money for themselves but were too stupid or incompetent to do so. Quote
Smallc Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 Which is why Obamacare is the wrong idea. It should have been medicare for everyone. Quote
Shady Posted April 6, 2012 Author Report Posted April 6, 2012 Which is why Obamacare is the wrong idea. It should have been medicare for everyone. At least that would have been constitutional. The funny thing is, that during his primary campaign with Hillary Clinton. He criticized her for her plan of an individual mandate, and ran against her on that point. Quote
punked Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 Which is why Obamacare is the wrong idea. It should have been medicare for everyone. We finally agree. Quote
Smallc Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 At least that would have been constitutional. The funny thing is, that during his primary campaign with Hillary Clinton. He criticized her for her plan of an individual mandate, and ran against her on that point. Well, he's an idiot. Quote
Smallc Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 We finally agree. We probably agree on far more than you think. Quote
jbg Posted April 6, 2012 Report Posted April 6, 2012 Well, he's an idiot. We finally agree. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
BubberMiley Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 The individual mandate was not Obama's first choice, but there was a long precedent of right-wing Democrats and Republicans like Mitt Romney being all for it, so you take what you can get to pass through congress. But calling the president an idiot is also a good argument against it. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 The individual mandate was not Obama's first choice, but there was a long precedent of right-wing Democrats and Republicans like Mitt Romney being all for it, so you take what you can get to pass through congress. Sure...but then, that's Obama. But calling the president an idiot is also a good argument against it. He's weak, ineffective, and can't get anything that he sets out to do done. Maybe he's not an idiot, but he certainly isn't a good president. Now, one could argue that his inability to do things is partly because of racism..and one would probably be right. No matter, he's still an extremely ineffective president. Quote
Jack Weber Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 Sure...but then, that's Obama. He's weak, ineffective, and can't get anything that he sets out to do done. Maybe he's not an idiot, but he certainly isn't a good president. Now, one could argue that his inability to do things is partly because of racism..and one would probably be right. No matter, he's still an extremely ineffective president. He should have rammed the Public Option through,and let the right wing nutters in the Tea Party have a hissy fit trying to justify giving money to the cabal of money taking scum known as the Insurance Industry as being an act of freedom... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 He should have rammed the Public Option through,and let the right wing nutters in the Tea Party have a hissy fit trying to justify giving money to the cabal of money taking scum known as the Insurance Industry as being an act of freedom... That's right, he should have. That was the first step on his road to irrelevance. Earlier this year, I changed my mind and said that Obama would win reelection. I have again become less sure of that, though I still am leaning towards him winning because of a seemingly weak opponent. Quote
Jack Weber Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 That's right, he should have. That was the first step on his road to irrelevance. Earlier this year, I changed my mind and said that Obama would win reelection. I have again become less sure of that, though I still am leaning towards him winning because of a seemingly weak opponent. What a horrendous choice for voters down there.. Milquetoast 1 or Milquetoast 2... Cue Miss Saskatchewan and his/her "Well,we kicked your Kings ass a few years ago so who cares what you think!" blast any minute now... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
jbg Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 He should have rammed the Public Option through,and let the right wing nutters in the Tea Party have a hissy fit trying to justify giving money to the cabal of money taking scum known as the Insurance Industry as being an act of freedom... That's right, he should have. That was the first step on his road to irrelevance. In the U.S., without a supermajority in the Senate that's simply not possible. First of all Senators and Congressmen cannot be forced to vote on party lines. There are a number of Democrats who were, in the 2006 and 2008 elections, voted in from normally Republican districts that could not vote for such a bill and hope to be returned to office. Then, when Scott Brown shockingly won the Senate from Massachusetts as a Republican, about as likely as a cat barking or a male getting pregnant, the Democrats lost their 60 votes for the bill in the Senate. Thus Obama had no way of "ramming through" the Public Option.Earlier this year, I changed my mind and said that Obama would win reelection. I have again become less sure of that, though I still am leaning towards him winning because of a seemingly weak opponent. You should not underestimate Romney. He as good appeal to independents and women. In the U.S., with certain unimportant exceptions we vote by whole states. The states that matter are Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and New Mexico (and maybe Wisconsin and New Hampshire). The other states are flatly Democratic or Republican and unlikely, absent a landslide, to go any but their expected direction. Right now, Romney would appear to have the edge in most of the "swing" states. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 In the U.S., without a supermajority in the Senate that's simply not possible. He could have made it happen. He was so close to a supermajority, it wasn't even funny. He failed, because he's weak, and despite his speaking ability, is far from persuasive. From that failure on, the Republican lunatic fringe smelled blood, and they've kept him from getting anything done though his entire term....and it's his own damn fault. Quote
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 Oh, and you shouldn't overestimate Romney, either. Quote
jbg Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 He could have made it happen. How? He was so close to a supermajority, it wasn't even funny. He failed, because he's weak, and despite his speaking ability, is far from persuasive. From that failure on, the Republican lunatic fringe smelled blood, and they've kept him from getting anything done though his entire term....and it's his own damn fault. In the U.S. getting that 60th and/or 61st Senate seat is maddeningly difficult and you usually have renegades inside the caucus once it gets that big. Think what happened to the Mulroney and Diefenbaker majorities. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 How? By convincing people to join his side. He doesn't seem capable of that. Quote
jbg Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 By convincing people to join his side. He doesn't seem capable of that. In the U.S. there is one inconvenient problem; the voters. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 In the U.S. there is one inconvenient problem; the voters. Well, then he should have started further to the left with the plan - medicare for everyone - and settled for the public option. Quote
jbg Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 Well, then he should have started further to the left with the plan - medicare for everyone - and settled for the public option. As Hilary how well that worked out. Seriously, that kind of plan would be called "dead on arrival" or "D.O.A.". This kind of thing does not work well in the U.S. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Smallc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 As Hilary how well that worked out. Seriously, that kind of plan would be called "dead on arrival" or "D.O.A.". This kind of thing does not work well in the U.S. Well, it seems that right now, nothing works well in the US in terms of government getting things done. Quote
Jack Weber Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 He could have made it happen. He was so close to a supermajority, it wasn't even funny. He failed, because he's weak, and despite his speaking ability, is far from persuasive. From that failure on, the Republican lunatic fringe smelled blood, and they've kept him from getting anything done though his entire term....and it's his own damn fault. That's right... If he had any chutzpah (how's that,Jim? ) he would have forced it through when he had most of the people on his side...This would have exposed the loons on the right for what they were/are. This is only 2 years ago and there was alot of crazy stuff being said about how Obama wasn't even an American citizen to he was a Marxist to he was forming some sort of Hitler Youth and he was going to take away everyones guns... Instead,he caved to the insurance cabal and basically gave them a sop... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jack Weber Posted April 7, 2012 Report Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) As Hilary how well that worked out. Seriously, that kind of plan would be called "dead on arrival" or "D.O.A.". This kind of thing does not work well in the U.S. It is truly unfortunate that many folks down there erroneously link giving their hard earned money to insurance companies and "personal freedom"... I'm not trying to get into which system is superior because both have their weaknesses and strengths... But I just never get the giving money to private insurance companies = an act of personal freedom... Personally,I can't stand giving any of my money to those profiteering scumbags for anything... Edited April 7, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.