Home Non Cigar Related

What is Terrorism Worth?

13»

Comments

  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates right of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
    No, you don't seem to get it. This health care legislation will not save any lives. It is not providing health care for anyone, but trying to encourage insurance for everyone. What it will actually do is raise rates on people like me. It also forces people to buy into the insurance companies which you and Phobic and others despise so much. How is this a good thing? You don't get that I don't want people to get screwed over either, but the government taking over the health care system is not going to stop this, it is only going to change who screws them over. I don't want to change the role of the opressor, I want to stop the opression. That is the difference in the solutions I suggested and the legislation that is being put forth by the government in this country. I want more power in the hands of the people to take care of themselves rather than insurance companies **** them over or the government **** them over.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
    No, you don't seem to get it. This health care legislation will not save any lives. It is not providing health care for anyone, but trying to encourage insurance for everyone. What it will actually do is raise rates on people like me. It also forces people to buy into the insurance companies which you and Phobic and others despise so much. How is this a good thing? You don't get that I don't want people to get screwed over either, but the government taking over the health care system is not going to stop this, it is only going to change who screws them over. I don't want to change the role of the opressor, I want to stop the opression. That is the difference in the solutions I suggested and the legislation that is being put forth by the government in this country. I want more power in the hands of the people to take care of themselves rather than insurance companies **** them over or the government **** them over.
    I went back and re-read your "solution".
    You seem to want the government to get rid of any regulations over the insurance companies and allow them even greater freedom as far as selling insurance and being able to reduce or get rid of some of the things they are forced to cover now.
    Then the insurance companies will take the revenues they create from these lessened measures and will pass this on to the consumer. OK, sure.
    Reganomics has been shown to be a massive failure Puro. This is just following a failed trickle down theory of economics. The rich, and companies will take any monies freed up from regulation and will put it right into their pockets, thank you very much.
    Your idea of people taking care of other people out of generousity or sense of fairness, sounds good, but DOES NOT WORK, in reality.
    Unfortunately we are dealing with reality and not theory, and the reality is that greed is more prevelant in American business then is a sense of "what is right" or benevolence. You go on trusting business and CEO's all you like Puro. I believe like a LOT of other people, that big business and their HUGE BONUS payouts to their CEO's and other officers of the company is what the business sector really feels is important, not peoples health or financial welfare.
    Can you prove me wrong?
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    Oh, on a side note, you are right I have heard people say things like "I hope something happens to you so you have to see the bad side of our health care system." and you are correct, it is harsh, but I pretty much ignore people that say things like that. Those people clearly cannot control their emotions enough to have a rational logical conversation. There is no point in even taking people like that seriously because emotions controls their entire being and that is not healthy for their own mental health, or for me to concern myself with. (Not directed at you at all my friend, just a side note because I have heard people say those types of things just as you mentioned.)
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
    No, you don't seem to get it. This health care legislation will not save any lives. It is not providing health care for anyone, but trying to encourage insurance for everyone. What it will actually do is raise rates on people like me. It also forces people to buy into the insurance companies which you and Phobic and others despise so much. How is this a good thing? You don't get that I don't want people to get screwed over either, but the government taking over the health care system is not going to stop this, it is only going to change who screws them over. I don't want to change the role of the opressor, I want to stop the opression. That is the difference in the solutions I suggested and the legislation that is being put forth by the government in this country. I want more power in the hands of the people to take care of themselves rather than insurance companies **** them over or the government **** them over.
    I went back and re-read your "solution".
    You seem to want the government to get rid of any regulations over the insurance companies and allow them even greater freedom as far as selling insurance and being able to reduce or get rid of some of the things they are forced to cover now.
    Then the insurance companies will take the revenues they create from these lessened measures and will pass this on to the consumer. OK, sure.
    Reganomics has been shown to be a massive failure Puro. This is just following a failed trickle down theory of economics. The rich, and companies will take any monies freed up from regulation and will put it right into their pockets, thank you very much.
    Your idea of people taking care of other people out of generousity or sense of fairness, sounds good, but DOES NOT WORK, in reality.
    Unfortunately we are dealing with reality and not theory, and the reality is that greed is more prevelant in American business then is a sense of "what is right" or benevolence. You go on trusting business and CEO's all you like Puro. I believe like a LOT of other people, that big business and their HUGE BONUS payouts to their CEO's and other officers of the company is what the business sector really feels is important, not peoples health or financial welfare.
    Can you prove me wrong?
    Yes, I can prove you are wrong, you are wrong in your understanding of what I want the government to do. The government needs to ease regulations to give people more choices and more control over their own health care. Give US the option to buy into any insurance plan in the country. That would open up competition which is always good for the consumer. People start having more choices and insurance companies know that if they don't offer a better product or service, the people will go to somebody who will. Give the people more power and they will take care of themselves.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
    No, you don't seem to get it. This health care legislation will not save any lives. It is not providing health care for anyone, but trying to encourage insurance for everyone. What it will actually do is raise rates on people like me. It also forces people to buy into the insurance companies which you and Phobic and others despise so much. How is this a good thing? You don't get that I don't want people to get screwed over either, but the government taking over the health care system is not going to stop this, it is only going to change who screws them over. I don't want to change the role of the opressor, I want to stop the opression. That is the difference in the solutions I suggested and the legislation that is being put forth by the government in this country. I want more power in the hands of the people to take care of themselves rather than insurance companies **** them over or the government **** them over.
    I went back and re-read your "solution".
    You seem to want the government to get rid of any regulations over the insurance companies and allow them even greater freedom as far as selling insurance and being able to reduce or get rid of some of the things they are forced to cover now.
    Then the insurance companies will take the revenues they create from these lessened measures and will pass this on to the consumer. OK, sure.
    Reganomics has been shown to be a massive failure Puro. This is just following a failed trickle down theory of economics. The rich, and companies will take any monies freed up from regulation and will put it right into their pockets, thank you very much.
    Your idea of people taking care of other people out of generousity or sense of fairness, sounds good, but DOES NOT WORK, in reality.
    Unfortunately we are dealing with reality and not theory, and the reality is that greed is more prevelant in American business then is a sense of "what is right" or benevolence. You go on trusting business and CEO's all you like Puro. I believe like a LOT of other people, that big business and their HUGE BONUS payouts to their CEO's and other officers of the company is what the business sector really feels is important, not peoples health or financial welfare.
    Can you prove me wrong?
    Yes, I can prove you are wrong, you are wrong in your understanding of what I want the government to do. The government needs to ease regulations to give people more choices and more control over their own health care. Give US the option to buy into any insurance plan in the country. That would open up competition which is always good for the consumer. People start having more choices and insurance companies know that if they don't offer a better product or service, the people will go to somebody who will. Give the people more power and they will take care of themselves.
    Sorry Puro, that is a THEORY...not PROOF.
    This theory has been tried on a larger scale in your economy, and many economists say that that was the start of the current financial problems thruout the world. NO proof here Puro.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    The government is doing it's duty then...if it is protecting citizens from insurance company abuse. I have no illusion that we will ever agree on this Puro. I do see your view's and don't disagree with some of them. It is just that we see the solution to the problem as being VERY different. That is not even to say that either would work or would not. Just different solutions to the same problem.
    I agree, but the solution being suggested in a government run health care option violates rights of the people. The solutions I mentioned do not. You say the companies are abusing people, but they are not commiting any illegal abuse or even violating their rights in any way, because nobody has the right to medical coverage. These people are not being denied treatment, they are just being denied coverage to pay for this treatment. This health insurance legislation will not save a single life because someone will receive treatment they wouldn't have otherwise received.
    As you wish, Puro.
    Can you show me where I'm wrong?
    You don't see it when I (or anybody else) do... that is why I just gave up, and said what I said in my last post.

    To you it is OK for a company to *uck people over, and ruin their lives. Just as long as the government doesn't violate anybody's rights.
    Whatever, I no longer care about changing your mind about this. I care more about people's rights being violated, rather then who is doing the violating, you seem to only want to make sure it is the government NOT doing the violating, and that people should be left defenseless against abuses by companies, cause afterall they can always take their business somewhere else. I understand your arguement... I just DON"T AGREE with it.

    As for people not being denied treatment, only insurance, are you serious?
    I know it was stated here in the past, out of anger that you should have to experience some of these medical insurance hardships so that you could see the system for the way it really is.
    I do NOT wish that on you or anybody else, as this is too harsh. I have a feeling thou, that someday you may very well find yourself in a situation where your opinions about the insurance companies and their benevolence will be greatly tested, and if / when it does happen... I truly hope you are completely right in your opinions Puro... you're going to need to be.
    No, you don't seem to get it. This health care legislation will not save any lives. It is not providing health care for anyone, but trying to encourage insurance for everyone. What it will actually do is raise rates on people like me. It also forces people to buy into the insurance companies which you and Phobic and others despise so much. How is this a good thing? You don't get that I don't want people to get screwed over either, but the government taking over the health care system is not going to stop this, it is only going to change who screws them over. I don't want to change the role of the opressor, I want to stop the opression. That is the difference in the solutions I suggested and the legislation that is being put forth by the government in this country. I want more power in the hands of the people to take care of themselves rather than insurance companies **** them over or the government **** them over.
    I went back and re-read your "solution".
    You seem to want the government to get rid of any regulations over the insurance companies and allow them even greater freedom as far as selling insurance and being able to reduce or get rid of some of the things they are forced to cover now.
    Then the insurance companies will take the revenues they create from these lessened measures and will pass this on to the consumer. OK, sure.
    Reganomics has been shown to be a massive failure Puro. This is just following a failed trickle down theory of economics. The rich, and companies will take any monies freed up from regulation and will put it right into their pockets, thank you very much.
    Your idea of people taking care of other people out of generousity or sense of fairness, sounds good, but DOES NOT WORK, in reality.
    Unfortunately we are dealing with reality and not theory, and the reality is that greed is more prevelant in American business then is a sense of "what is right" or benevolence. You go on trusting business and CEO's all you like Puro. I believe like a LOT of other people, that big business and their HUGE BONUS payouts to their CEO's and other officers of the company is what the business sector really feels is important, not peoples health or financial welfare.
    Can you prove me wrong?
    Yes, I can prove you are wrong, you are wrong in your understanding of what I want the government to do. The government needs to ease regulations to give people more choices and more control over their own health care. Give US the option to buy into any insurance plan in the country. That would open up competition which is always good for the consumer. People start having more choices and insurance companies know that if they don't offer a better product or service, the people will go to somebody who will. Give the people more power and they will take care of themselves.
    Sorry Puro, that is a THEORY...not PROOF.
    This theory has been tried on a larger scale in your economy, and many economists say that that was the start of the current financial problems thruout the world. NO proof here Puro.
    It is as much "proof" as you have provided. It is not theory, just look at everything from the basic local gas stations getting into price wars to Wal Mart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot... These have all made things more affordable. Competition is what made this country great. Look at the industrial revolution... Would you say that was a theory that has never been proven? Because that is exactly what it did, created cheaper, easier ways to do things, and created more competition.

    Also, many economists say the exact oposite of what you claim.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    I am back to "as you wish Puro".
    At least I got my exercise this morning, running a few more laps around this circle arguement. I'm done.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    The reason opening up insurance to be purchased across state lines is pointed out great in an article I found with this quote:

    "In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes." "Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits."

    The entire article for anyone interested can be found here.
    http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics6.asp?viewed=1
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    The reason opening up insurance to be purchased across state lines is pointed out great in an article I found with this quote:

    "In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes." "Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits."

    The entire article for anyone interested can be found here.
    http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics6.asp?viewed=1
    Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    How are you supposed to find a new carrier while you are in the process of taking care of your medical condition?

    What do you say to those people who would NOT be eligible to change carriers while they are undergoing a current treatment?

    what do you say to someone who has been cut off from the insurer because the insurer has decided that they will no longer cover that person?

    You keep talking about all of this as thou it is a MONETARY issue and not a medical or humanity issue.

    You assume that EVERYONE in the US has the same opportunty as you do to find, purchase and benefit from medical insurance. NOT everyone is in the same position as you are Puro. It is for the people who are NOT as fortunate as you who need this coverage. I guess if YOU are not experiencing any problems with the current system, then nobody is. Or at least nobody you give a sh it about.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    The reason opening up insurance to be purchased across state lines is pointed out great in an article I found with this quote:

    "In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes." "Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits."

    The entire article for anyone interested can be found here.
    http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics6.asp?viewed=1
    Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    How are you supposed to find a new carrier while you are in the process of taking care of your medical condition?

    What do you say to those people who would NOT be eligible to change carriers while they are undergoing a current treatment?

    what do you say to someone who has been cut off from the insurer because the insurer has decided that they will no longer cover that person?

    You keep talking about all of this as thou it is a MONETARY issue and not a medical or humanity issue.

    You assume that EVERYONE in the US has the same opportunty as you do to find, purchase and benefit from medical insurance. NOT everyone is in the same position as you are Puro. It is for the people who are NOT as fortunate as you who need this coverage. I guess if YOU are not experiencing any problems with the current system, then nobody is. Or at least nobody you give a sh it about.
    Ok, then tell me how the current legislation is going to fix that problem... It is going to mandate that people purchase insurance coverage... How will that help? If you do not have insurance, you will be fined. How does that help people who do not have coverage? The new legislation says companies cannot denie people with pre-existing conditions, but they still have to purchase the insurance... How will that help the people you speak of? All that will do is cost the companies more money which will cause them to raise rates on everyone. And for your information, I do not have insurance on my wife or son because I can't afford it. If we had more options and prices come down a little I could. How will this legislation help? It will force me to pay for coverage I can't afford or be fined around $700 a year. Well at that rate it would be cheaper for me to pay the fine, then go to the Dr. if I need to and just not pay the bill... Which is what much of the country does right now. Please tell me how the current legislation will fix these problems you speak of.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    The reason opening up insurance to be purchased across state lines is pointed out great in an article I found with this quote:

    "In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes." "Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits."

    The entire article for anyone interested can be found here.
    http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics6.asp?viewed=1
    Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    How are you supposed to find a new carrier while you are in the process of taking care of your medical condition?

    What do you say to those people who would NOT be eligible to change carriers while they are undergoing a current treatment?

    what do you say to someone who has been cut off from the insurer because the insurer has decided that they will no longer cover that person?

    You keep talking about all of this as thou it is a MONETARY issue and not a medical or humanity issue.

    You assume that EVERYONE in the US has the same opportunty as you do to find, purchase and benefit from medical insurance. NOT everyone is in the same position as you are Puro. It is for the people who are NOT as fortunate as you who need this coverage. I guess if YOU are not experiencing any problems with the current system, then nobody is. Or at least nobody you give a sh it about.
    Ok, then tell me how the current legislation is going to fix that problem... It is going to mandate that people purchase insurance coverage... How will that help? If you do not have insurance, you will be fined. How does that help people who do not have coverage? The new legislation says companies cannot denie people with pre-existing conditions, but they still have to purchase the insurance... How will that help the people you speak of? All that will do is cost the companies more money which will cause them to raise rates on everyone. And for your information, I do not have insurance on my wife or son because I can't afford it. If we had more options and prices come down a little I could. How will this legislation help? It will force me to pay for coverage I can't afford or be fined around $700 a year. Well at that rate it would be cheaper for me to pay the fine, then go to the Dr. if I need to and just not pay the bill... Which is what much of the country does right now. Please tell me how the current legislation will fix these problems you speak of.
    I do not know your system completley Puro, and I only comment on the pro's of having an all inclusive system then an exclusion tpe of one.

    That said, I honestly send out my best wishes now and for the future for your family Puro.

    It must be the difference in the culture's, as I don't know of a single Canadian that would prefer the situation you find yourself in, and prefer to be in, then for someone to try ANYTHING to change that situation.

    I guess as a Canadian, we don't see our system as creating weak people who refuse to take care of themselves. Instead we see our system as a sign of our strength as a nation and our caring for our fellow Canadians.

    I am NOT making any sort of comment here about the position of the people of the US. Please don't misunderstand. I am just trying to put some context to my comments and why I honestly cannot understand your position, from, I guess an emotional standpoint, rather then from an intellectual one. By that I mean I understand what you are saying, but my life experiences have never put me in your position so I can't even imagine how you feel or how you come to those feelings about at least this situation.

    Whatever happens in the future over this issue Puro, I really do hope all work's out well medically for your's and EVERY family in the US. To do nothing about the current situation just seems like such a roll of the dice for for both the health and financial well being of so many millions of The American people, it's mind boggling.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    [Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    this kinda struck me.

    first off, I have read and understand every line in my insurance. (much like i read and understood every line in my mortgage) I made sure i did before i gave my money to an insurance company. if i didnt understand something, i asked my agent. thats his job.
    file this under "personal responsibility"

    insurance companies offer the buyers a service. they spell out the service in the policy. they also are there to answer any questions about their service. i have yet to come across an insurance agent (health, life, disability, home owners, or car) that will not answer you when you ask them a question.
    buyer beware. the facts are there. there are no rights being violated because the buyer signed the policy accepting the terms of the policy. it is not the problem of the insurance company if you refuse to understand or read your policy.

    you cannot force people to understand the policy.
    therefore the government makes it, via mandate, that x, y, or z must be covered no matter what, preexisting conditions but be accepted, and coverage cannot be dropped.

    all of these things force the price up. this makes it even harder to have insurance. however, this recent bill that went through the senate did all of those things. to "fix" this, it mandated that you must have insurance or pay a fine, or maybe even go to jail. (forcing anyone to buy a product, no matter how much it is viewed as "important" is a violation of rights. it violates your right to keep what you own and have earned by your own hands)
    after a while, im sure, people will start to *** about how expensive insurance is. the government will haul the presidents of the insurance companies in front of congress, blame them, their greed, and capitalism (though capitalism isnt involved here) for all the problems, and prices, and like a good Fascist, regulate them even more. this is the way of a slow moving tyranny.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    laker1963:
    PuroFreak:
    The reason opening up insurance to be purchased across state lines is pointed out great in an article I found with this quote:

    "In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes." "Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits."

    The entire article for anyone interested can be found here.
    http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics6.asp?viewed=1
    Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    How are you supposed to find a new carrier while you are in the process of taking care of your medical condition?

    What do you say to those people who would NOT be eligible to change carriers while they are undergoing a current treatment?

    what do you say to someone who has been cut off from the insurer because the insurer has decided that they will no longer cover that person?

    You keep talking about all of this as thou it is a MONETARY issue and not a medical or humanity issue.

    You assume that EVERYONE in the US has the same opportunty as you do to find, purchase and benefit from medical insurance. NOT everyone is in the same position as you are Puro. It is for the people who are NOT as fortunate as you who need this coverage. I guess if YOU are not experiencing any problems with the current system, then nobody is. Or at least nobody you give a sh it about.
    Ok, then tell me how the current legislation is going to fix that problem... It is going to mandate that people purchase insurance coverage... How will that help? If you do not have insurance, you will be fined. How does that help people who do not have coverage? The new legislation says companies cannot denie people with pre-existing conditions, but they still have to purchase the insurance... How will that help the people you speak of? All that will do is cost the companies more money which will cause them to raise rates on everyone. And for your information, I do not have insurance on my wife or son because I can't afford it. If we had more options and prices come down a little I could. How will this legislation help? It will force me to pay for coverage I can't afford or be fined around $700 a year. Well at that rate it would be cheaper for me to pay the fine, then go to the Dr. if I need to and just not pay the bill... Which is what much of the country does right now. Please tell me how the current legislation will fix these problems you speak of.
    I do not know your system completley Puro, and I only comment on the pro's of having an all inclusive system then an exclusion tpe of one.

    That said, I honestly send out my best wishes now and for the future for your family Puro.

    It must be the difference in the culture's, as I don't know of a single Canadian that would prefer the situation you find yourself in, and prefer to be in, then for someone to try ANYTHING to change that situation.

    I guess as a Canadian, we don't see our system as creating weak people who refuse to take care of themselves. Instead we see our system as a sign of our strength as a nation and our caring for our fellow Canadians.

    I am NOT making any sort of comment here about the position of the people of the US. Please don't misunderstand. I am just trying to put some context to my comments and why I honestly cannot understand your position, from, I guess an emotional standpoint, rather then from an intellectual one. By that I mean I understand what you are saying, but my life experiences have never put me in your position so I can't even imagine how you feel or how you come to those feelings about at least this situation.

    Whatever happens in the future over this issue Puro, I really do hope all work's out well medically for your's and EVERY family in the US. To do nothing about the current situation just seems like such a roll of the dice for for both the health and financial well being of so many millions of The American people, it's mind boggling.
    I do understand your opinion on the subject, but that is one of the major differences in our countries. Our country was set up so the government doesn't have all the power. The people do, or are supposed to at least. That is why our nation became one of the most powerful in the world in such a short time. My problem is people changing a formula that has worked for hundreds of years... President Obama made a comment not long after he was elected that really summed up my view of how the left in this country sees things.

    “Lets come together to remake this great nation”

    It is different cultures and views of the world, thats all. In the end, I too wish you and your family all the best. Even your cat... I've always liked that picture. lol
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    kuzi16:
    laker1963:
    [Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    this kinda struck me.

    first off, I have read and understand every line in my insurance. (much like i read and understood every line in my mortgage) I made sure i did before i gave my money to an insurance company. if i didnt understand something, i asked my agent. thats his job.
    file this under "personal responsibility"

    insurance companies offer the buyers a service. they spell out the service in the policy. they also are there to answer any questions about their service. i have yet to come across an insurance agent (health, life, disability, home owners, or car) that will not answer you when you ask them a question.
    buyer beware. the facts are there. there are no rights being violated because the buyer signed the policy accepting the terms of the policy. it is not the problem of the insurance company if you refuse to understand or read your policy.

    you cannot force people to understand the policy.
    therefore the government makes it, via mandate, that x, y, or z must be covered no matter what, preexisting conditions but be accepted, and coverage cannot be dropped.

    all of these things force the price up. this makes it even harder to have insurance. however, this recent bill that went through the senate did all of those things. to "fix" this, it mandated that you must have insurance or pay a fine, or maybe even go to jail. (forcing anyone to buy a product, no matter how much it is viewed as "important" is a violation of rights. it violates your right to keep what you own and have earned by your own hands)
    after a while, im sure, people will start to *** about how expensive insurance is. the government will haul the presidents of the insurance companies in front of congress, blame them, their greed, and capitalism (though capitalism isnt involved here) for all the problems, and prices, and like a good Fascist, regulate them even more. this is the way of a slow moving tyranny.
    Um, are you saying your policy tells you every sickness, condition, disease and prescription it will cover that you may or may not ever need? Also under what conditions you may utilize these benefits?
    I call bullshit. What about new services, drugs, proceedures etc. Or are you stuck with what you got the day you got it.

    Kuzi, you sure will go a LONG way to support an opinion.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,806 ✭✭✭
    If you look at our last several years of economy, torture of "enemy combatants", wars under lies and bad information, continuing a greater gap between rich and poor, continuing decline of our health care as compared to other nations, continued decline of respect globally, sinking value of the dollar....seems like remaking the nation a little bit isnt so bad of an idea.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    kuzi16:
    laker1963:
    [Puro, have you read and understood every single line of your insurance policy?

    The problems with your arguement about changing insurers is that most people do NOT know they are NOT covered for a certain medical condition, disease, or in some cases prescriptions UNTIL they need the service.
    this kinda struck me.

    first off, I have read and understand every line in my insurance. (much like i read and understood every line in my mortgage) I made sure i did before i gave my money to an insurance company. if i didnt understand something, i asked my agent. thats his job.
    file this under "personal responsibility"

    insurance companies offer the buyers a service. they spell out the service in the policy. they also are there to answer any questions about their service. i have yet to come across an insurance agent (health, life, disability, home owners, or car) that will not answer you when you ask them a question.
    buyer beware. the facts are there. there are no rights being violated because the buyer signed the policy accepting the terms of the policy. it is not the problem of the insurance company if you refuse to understand or read your policy.

    you cannot force people to understand the policy.
    therefore the government makes it, via mandate, that x, y, or z must be covered no matter what, preexisting conditions but be accepted, and coverage cannot be dropped.

    all of these things force the price up. this makes it even harder to have insurance. however, this recent bill that went through the senate did all of those things. to "fix" this, it mandated that you must have insurance or pay a fine, or maybe even go to jail. (forcing anyone to buy a product, no matter how much it is viewed as "important" is a violation of rights. it violates your right to keep what you own and have earned by your own hands)
    after a while, im sure, people will start to *** about how expensive insurance is. the government will haul the presidents of the insurance companies in front of congress, blame them, their greed, and capitalism (though capitalism isnt involved here) for all the problems, and prices, and like a good Fascist, regulate them even more. this is the way of a slow moving tyranny.
    Um, are you saying your policy tells you every sickness, condition, disease and prescription it will cover that you may or may not ever need? Also under what conditions you may utilize these benefits?
    I call bullshit. What about new services, drugs, proceedures etc. Or are you stuck with what you got the day you got it.

    Kuzi, you sure will go a LONG way to support an opinion.
    no, i am saying i know generally what it does and what it does not. i never said it covered everything.

    it does not spell out every disease, or condition. but it does spell out types of conditions and how they are covered. big things like cancer, broken legs, or muscle injury are not expressly set out in that no treatment is forced on you by the insurance company. However, the accompanying Doctor office and Specialist visits, prescriptions, hospital visits, lab work, surgery (in and out patient), physical, and mental therapy that could be needed for most anything are all discussed in my policy. that covers all of what i am most likely to need as a 29 year old in good health.
    i can walk into my doctor, with ANY illness, and i know i am covered and will not be dropped until i hit my financial life expectancy of my policy.

    as far as new services, i was told by my agent that people should update their insurance by calling their agent every few years to discuss this. often times this change in policy goes with a change in life/lifestyle. since my wife just got a new job we will be back in his office soon. (along with life insurance as well.)

    Edit: just talked to my agent. no need to update the services. as long as the doctor accepts the insurance company, any service he offers will be covered. the above paragraph was correct about life and home insurance.
    one more correction: EVERYTHING is covered in one form or another until i hit my financial life expectancy of my policy. then i will no longer be covered for anything.


    my policy also discusses conditions that need to be met before they drop me from coverage. I accepted them when i signed it. i will reassess when i go to change my health insurance.



  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    ... also, if i go to my insurance companies website i can easily obtain a list of what drugs and services are accepted under my policy, and other policies offered by them. i can also get this list by calling them. Another list i can get is a list of Doctors that accept the insurance.

    AND

    if you get sick and you are covered by insurance, YOU ARE COVERED. there is no list of diseases that is not covered. if you are ALREADY sick, and you get insurance without telling them, and get caught, you will be dropped. insurance will not cover preexisting conditions without full disclosure.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,806 ✭✭✭
    I was told by my agent not to sign any contract until I got a better signing bonus and unrestricted free agency after my final year.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    kuzi16:
    ... also, if i go to my insurance companies website i can easily obtain a list of what drugs and services are accepted under my policy, and other policies offered by them. i can also get this list by calling them. Another list i can get is a list of Doctors that accept the insurance.

    AND

    if you get sick and you are covered by insurance, YOU ARE COVERED. there is no list of diseases that is not covered. if you are ALREADY sick, and you get insurance without telling them, and get caught, you will be dropped. insurance will not cover preexisting conditions without full disclosure.
    I too have read my policy, I know what it does and does not cover, also I check updates on the website regularly. Actually doing some research on my insurance companies website I found how I could get a $75 gift card to Target for filling out a survey. Had to do some digging, but it paid off!
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    PuroFreak:
    kuzi16:
    ... also, if i go to my insurance companies website i can easily obtain a list of what drugs and services are accepted under my policy, and other policies offered by them. i can also get this list by calling them. Another list i can get is a list of Doctors that accept the insurance.

    AND

    if you get sick and you are covered by insurance, YOU ARE COVERED. there is no list of diseases that is not covered. if you are ALREADY sick, and you get insurance without telling them, and get caught, you will be dropped. insurance will not cover preexisting conditions without full disclosure.
    I too have read my policy, I know what it does and does not cover, also I check updates on the website regularly. Actually doing some research on my insurance companies website I found how I could get a $75 gift card to Target for filling out a survey. Had to do some digging, but it paid off!
    Too funny. Ewwww, look a Gift Card !!!! LMAO
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    Laker, just give it up bud. They will continue to defend the private insurers. When or if they ever get denied or dropped and join millions of others they will maybe understand.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    phobicsquirrel:
    Laker, just give it up bud. They will continue to defend the private insurers. When or if they ever get denied or dropped and join millions of others they will maybe understand.
    You know Pheebs, I have come to the same conclusion, but it wasn't all the back and forth with this fact or that opinion. It was actually that giftcard comment that did it for me. I haven't laughed so hard in such a long time.

    It reminded me of the squirrel in the Disney movie "Over the hedge" where the Racoon uses a Laser Pointer to control the squirrel because he just can't resist the laser's light.

    Ewwww, look a giftcard... and once again all is well with the world. Just too bloody funny.
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    laker1963:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Laker, just give it up bud. They will continue to defend the private insurers. When or if they ever get denied or dropped and join millions of others they will maybe understand.
    You know Pheebs, I have come to the same conclusion, but it wasn't all the back and forth with this fact or that opinion. It was actually that giftcard comment that did it for me. I haven't laughed so hard in such a long time.

    It reminded me of the squirrel in the Disney movie "Over the hedge" where the Racoon uses a Laser Pointer to control the squirrel because he just can't resist the laser's light.

    Ewwww, look a giftcard... and once again all is well with the world. Just too bloody funny.
    GOD, I think I cracked up so many times over that movie but only due to the squirrel.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    phobicsquirrel:
    laker1963:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Laker, just give it up bud. They will continue to defend the private insurers. When or if they ever get denied or dropped and join millions of others they will maybe understand.
    You know Pheebs, I have come to the same conclusion, but it wasn't all the back and forth with this fact or that opinion. It was actually that giftcard comment that did it for me. I haven't laughed so hard in such a long time.

    It reminded me of the squirrel in the Disney movie "Over the hedge" where the Racoon uses a Laser Pointer to control the squirrel because he just can't resist the laser's light.

    Ewwww, look a giftcard... and once again all is well with the world. Just too bloody funny.
    GOD, I think I cracked up so many times over that movie but only due to the squirrel.
    Hey fella's LOOK!!! I FOUND MY NUTS !!!!!
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,806 ✭✭✭
    laker1963:
    phobicsquirrel:
    Laker, just give it up bud. They will continue to defend the private insurers. When or if they ever get denied or dropped and join millions of others they will maybe understand.
    You know Pheebs, I have come to the same conclusion, but it wasn't all the back and forth with this fact or that opinion. It was actually that giftcard comment that did it for me. I haven't laughed so hard in such a long time.

    It reminded me of the squirrel in the Disney movie "Over the hedge" where the Racoon uses a Laser Pointer to control the squirrel because he just can't resist the laser's light.

    Ewwww, look a giftcard... and once again all is well with the world. Just too bloody funny.
    LOL!!! Made me think of a movie scene where a guy is about hit a a bigger guy and gives the ol "look up there, a blimp!" the guy looks---and gets hit in the groin when he least expects it. "I hate my insurance, here I am with illnesses that they wont co....HOLY $HIT A TARGET GIFT CARD!!!!"
Sign In or Register to comment.