Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-19-2019 2:58 PM
27 online now:
Faith, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume:
Total: 851,610 Year: 6,647/19,786 Month: 1,188/1,581 Week: 10/393 Day: 10/30 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
456
...
13NextFF
Author Topic:   Baby Denied Health Care Coverage For Being "Too Fat"
Modulous
Member (Idle past 239 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 31 of 184 (530227)
10-12-2009 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 5:17 PM


No, actually it is their money. The insurance companies have agreed to pay for certain classes of expenses, not to provide the customer's money back to them. The fact that they pay for the service is another issue, the companies don't have pools of "customer money" or one big pot that belongs to "the customers". They have obligations they must fulfill from their own resources, and a stream of income in exchange for those obligations.

Yes I understand the concept that giving money to someone means that the someone assumes ownership of it However, the point remains - they take the money that their customers give them and they invest that money. They do not need to make money on underwriting versus payouts in order to increase the amount of capital they have. How much money do you think one can make by owning a 20% stake in all of the companies on the london stock exchange?

But making things illegal does not remove the concept of moral hazard in finance.

And making stealing illegal does not stop theft.

Agreed. And any shopkeeper will tell you that it is a good idea not to make it easy to steal from them...thus they don't just let the customers declare what they have bought and trust them to pay the correct amount.

The goal of a free market is regulate profits by legislation? Really?

Got that mixed up with you saying that the goal of insurance providers wasn't profit.

Well - the goal of insurance providers is not necessarily to make profit, though some do and for some that is their goal. If making an underwriting profit is the priority - then significant problems come up in realizing the goal of insurance, the mechanism.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 5:17 PM Phage0070 has not yet responded

  
jacortina
Member (Idle past 3218 days)
Posts: 64
Joined: 08-07-2009


Message 32 of 184 (530237)
10-12-2009 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 5:01 PM


Hmm, that sounds like a monopoly. Don't we have laws against that?

No, we don't. The health insurance companies have SPECIFICALLY been exempted from anti-trust laws.

A bill to repeal it has been introduced:
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200909/091709a.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 5:01 PM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 6:38 PM jacortina has not yet responded

    
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 184 (530243)
10-12-2009 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Jazzns
10-12-2009 5:29 PM


Jazzns writes:

Its a representation. IT doesn't change the fact that the PEOPLE want it regardless of if Congress does or does not.


How nice that you seem to know what people really want, despite what their representatives say. Perhaps you are advocating a dictatorship of the telepathic?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 5:29 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

  
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 184 (530246)
10-12-2009 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Jazzns
10-12-2009 5:31 PM


Jazzns writes:

And keeping my little girl alive and healthy completely drained my family's savings. We planned for her expenses years in advance. If I had happened to be poorer, she may not be alive today.

You are a fucking monster.


So your superior scenario would be draining someone else's savings to pay for your sickly child? I am still waiting for your justification for "My kid is sick, give me your stuff."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 5:31 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 8:50 PM Phage0070 has not yet responded
 Message 39 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 8:51 PM Phage0070 has not yet responded

  
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 184 (530247)
10-12-2009 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by jacortina
10-12-2009 6:21 PM


Seems like a good bill.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by jacortina, posted 10-12-2009 6:21 PM jacortina has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1032 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 36 of 184 (530273)
10-12-2009 8:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jazzns
10-12-2009 11:23 AM


By the numbers, Alex is in the 99th percentile for height and weight for babies his age.

My problem is with the above. This child is 99th percentile for height AND weight. Isn't this ratio typically proportionate? Without seeing a picture of the child, all I envision is a big baby, not necessarily a fat or obese one.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 11:23 AM Jazzns has not yet responded

    
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1032 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 37 of 184 (530275)
10-12-2009 8:41 PM


Update
Per the Denver Post:

A Colorado insurance company is changing its attitude about fat babies.

Rocky Mountain Health Plans said Monday that it will no longer consider obesity a "pre-existing condition" barring coverage for hefty infants. The change comes after the insurer turned down a Grand Junction 4-month-old who weighs about 17 pounds. The insurer deemed little Alex Lange obese and said the infant didn't qualify for coverage.

The infant's father works at NBC affiliate KKCO-TV in Grand Junction and news accounts about the boy's rejection made national headlines.

The insurer said Monday it would change its policy for babies that are healthy but fat. The company attributed the boy's rejection for health coverage to "a flaw in our underwriting system."


    
Izanagi
Member (Idle past 3351 days)
Posts: 263
Joined: 09-15-2009


(1)
Message 38 of 184 (530281)
10-12-2009 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 6:37 PM


So your superior scenario would be draining someone else's savings to pay for your sickly child? I am still waiting for your justification for "My kid is sick, give me your stuff."

That's not the point, You are not getting all the money from someone else. You are getting the money from many people. This transfer the burden from one to many thereby easing the burden on the one and slightly increasing the burden on the many.

Think about it this way: If someone needs a million dollar live-saving operation, all you would need is for 300 million Americans to give 1/300th of a penny for that person to get that operation. You save the person and the burden on any single American is 1/300th of a penny. That's the trade-off - 1/300th of a penny and I'm sure you've thrown away a few pennies in your lifetime. No one is advocating taking all of it from one person, but if you have ever argued Americans stick together, then this is the ultimate expression of that argument.

Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given.


It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole
This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 6:37 PM Phage0070 has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2046 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


(1)
Message 39 of 184 (530283)
10-12-2009 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 6:37 PM


How Very Sad You Are......
So your superior scenario would be draining someone else's savings to pay for your sickly child? I am still waiting for your justification for "My kid is sick, give me your stuff."

Not someone else's, just yours. I support holding a national referendum on health care and everyone who votes no will be taxed extra to pay for cosmetic surgery for illegal aliens. They will get a free coupon at the border. Those same people will also be forced to donate a kidney if they have 2 and their blood once a month. Those same people will also be except from any fire department or emergency response. 911 will be disabled on their phones so they can call their own private companies to help them.

I was a little upset at your responses until I thought about it for a minute. You are part of a dying and irrelevant minority in America. The "everyone for himself" crowd. You are pathetic and I feel sorry for someone who can care so little for his fellow human being.

I challenge anyone to have the same opinion about our health care system after the very first second of watching their baby on the monitor. I challenge anyone who believes like this idiot to be the one to explain to a mom that she cannot have her child because society is unwilling to regard her child with the same value as lifeless property.


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 6:37 PM Phage0070 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-13-2009 12:02 AM Jazzns has responded

  
Izanagi
Member (Idle past 3351 days)
Posts: 263
Joined: 09-15-2009


(1)
Message 40 of 184 (530290)
10-12-2009 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 5:21 PM


A public service I can support, but having it as the *only* option is not.

But that's the way most things are set up in the US. We have public schools, but you can send your children to private schools. We have private universities, but you can send your children to public universities. We have police, but you can hire a security company. We have public transportation, but you have the option of driving your car. No one has advocated abolishing insurance companies. Certainly the public option should not be the sole provider but when you are talking about the basic health of every American and the life of every American, why would you deny your fellow Americans? Isn't the basic form of Christian charity to love your neighbor?

The ugly truth is not that we have limited resources. That's a fact of life and why we rely on a free market. The ugly truth is that we are willing to let other people suffer and die simply because we can say that there isn't enough. That is not good enough. If we can allow that, then why not have people pay for firefighting insurance so that whenever your house is on fire, perhaps the fire department will save your house. After all, water is a limited resource in many areas. Or maybe security insurance so that people who have it will receive police protection but those that don't will not. Would that be acceptable? Americans should help each other by providing for each other's basic survival, shouldn't they? But that's the ugly truth. Americans would just as soon step on you as help you up.

That there are areas in the US that have conditions on par to the poorest countries is something to be ashamed of. That we can allow our fellow citizens die just so we can save a few more pennies, is something to be ashamed of. That we can see starving children on the streets looking in dumpsters for food is something to be ashamed of. That we can allow our so-called heroes, police and firefighters and all those citizens who risked their lives after the attacks of 9/11, be denied treatment for the debilitating conditions that they acquired in service of their fellow Americans is something to be ashamed of. That we can allow our men and women in uniform to return from serving our country in combat, be honorably discharged, and be summarily forgotten is something to be ashamed of.

Many Americans talk about being faithful to Christ and his teachings, but when it comes time to put their words into action, they balk and make excuses like "limited resources" and "it's not my problem." How Christian of them.

That's the ugly truth that I see.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 5:21 PM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Modulous, posted 10-12-2009 10:02 PM Izanagi has responded
 Message 43 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-12-2009 10:19 PM Izanagi has not yet responded
 Message 44 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 10:28 PM Izanagi has responded
 Message 60 by Kitsune, posted 10-13-2009 2:45 AM Izanagi has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 239 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 41 of 184 (530300)
10-12-2009 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Izanagi
10-12-2009 9:23 PM


If we can allow that, then why not have people pay for firefighting insurance so that whenever your house is on fire, perhaps the fire department will save your house.

Actually - that was pretty much how modern insurance started

Quoth wiki:

quote:
Fire Insurance has over 200 years of history in America. Famous fires include the Chicago fire of 1871 and the San Francisco earthquake and resulting fire of 1906. The early fire marks of Benjamin Franklin's time can still be seen on some Philadelphia buildings as well as in other older American cities. Subscribers paid fire fighting companies in advance for fire protection and in exchange would receive a fire mark to attach to their building. The payments for the fire marks supported the fire fighting companies. If the protected building were to suffer a fire, only their fire fighting company would attend the call to extinguish the fire. Even if competitor fire companies were closer to the fire they would not do anything to prevent further damage or extinguish the fire. This brought the fire mark system into disrepute. Municipal and rural fire departments support by local taxation became the more popular solution.

As ever, Ben Franklin saw the future and got into that racket first.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 9:23 PM Izanagi has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 10:11 PM Modulous has responded
 Message 46 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 10:59 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
Izanagi
Member (Idle past 3351 days)
Posts: 263
Joined: 09-15-2009


Message 42 of 184 (530302)
10-12-2009 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Modulous
10-12-2009 10:02 PM


Well, Ben Franklin was pretty intelligent. But I think if the fire departments today were run like the health insurance companies, then there would be a claims department that would try to find ways of justifying not putting out a fire and old houses would have a higher risk of fire and therefore wouldn't be insured.

Isn't it good our fire departments aren't run like insurance companies?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Modulous, posted 10-12-2009 10:02 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Modulous, posted 10-13-2009 11:41 AM Izanagi has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3719
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 43 of 184 (530304)
10-12-2009 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Izanagi
10-12-2009 9:23 PM


And the biggest public insurance program is...
A public service I can support, but having it as the *only* option is not.

But that's the way most things are set up in the US. We have public schools, but you can send your children to private schools. ...

Wonderful message (it got POTM'ed), but you forgot the largest public (insurance?) service of them all - The U.S. Department of Defense (and related things).

The public health insurance money figure being bandied around seems to be something like $900 billion over 10 years. But we are now (please correct me if I'm wrong) currently spending $500 billion A YEAR on defense and defense related programs. And I think much to all of that is before you add on the financial costs of the current wars.

Nick $100 billion a year off that bloated defense budget (which should be cut regardless) and you have the health program paid for.

Moose


Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.

"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 9:23 PM Izanagi has not yet responded

    
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 184 (530306)
10-12-2009 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Izanagi
10-12-2009 9:23 PM


Izanagi writes:

Many Americans talk about being faithful to Christ and his teachings, but when it comes time to put their words into action, they balk and make excuses like "limited resources" and "it's not my problem." How Christian of them.


I'm not Christian. If you are basing your ideas on what public policy should be off of the teachings of your religion, then you should reconsider the role of the government.

Our government is not set up to find "good things" to go and fund. It has very specific duties, and should have good reason behind the assignment of each one. So far I have heard a lot about why having healthcare for everyone is a great thing and something to be proud of, but nothing about why taxing people to pay for it is a good idea.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 9:23 PM Izanagi has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Jazzns, posted 10-12-2009 10:58 PM Phage0070 has responded
 Message 48 by Izanagi, posted 10-12-2009 11:25 PM Phage0070 has responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2046 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 45 of 184 (530308)
10-12-2009 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Phage0070
10-12-2009 10:28 PM


So far I have heard a lot about why having healthcare for everyone is a great thing and something to be proud of, but nothing about why taxing people to pay for it is a good idea.

Because if it is worthwhile to do, it is worthwhile to tax for it. Unlike the Republican method of paying for things that are otherwise completely useless (like tax cuts for wealthy people, border fences, and war) which is to pretend like you have money and spend it anyway.

At least when progressives tax you Phage, you will be getting something for it. Don't worry though, we don't expect your thanks. Your careless indignation and -50 approval rating are thanks enough.


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 10:28 PM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Phage0070, posted 10-12-2009 11:05 PM Jazzns has responded

  
Prev12
3
456
...
13NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019