Where are you coming up with this "fairness" you seem to insist the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act passed by Congress in 2009 is about? It is insurance. Actually, insurance has to be about fairness, especially regarding the premiums charged. The only mention of that dirty word (to you) I find in the linked article applies to Obama's ideas. By the way, what is your camp (of win win winners) coming up with to complete the Repeal and Replace part of the equation? Business as usual? Because I know you folks fear change and have for over a century now trashed any cooperative governmental health care efforts. Stay well, because if you don't man, well, you might feel a bit bitten by unfairness too. How is that big bite from your income for your late middle age health coverage sitting with the bank acct? Stay tuned, it's only gonna get worse. The bite from your wallet, that is.
The fact that "fairness" drives everything the MEC does, per the reference you found to his ideas, is why I included it in the post title. He thinks socialized home care and assistance with incidental life expenses is "fair." What is our alternative? Move policy in the direction of reducing - to zero, wherever possible - the presence of a thiord party in a consumer / health care provider relationship. And where zero is not possible, encourage competition between such third parties (insurance companies).
Insurance companies do not want risks that might have claims. If they had their way they would never pay a nickle in claims and have all our premiums in their fat pockets. Just the way it is. If they had not abused the stewardship of the policyholders $$ for centuries they would not be the most rigidly regulated industry outside of nuclear power. They are invisible bankers and the only invisible hand operating effectively here is the one guiding their accountants, if they can get away with it. And we don't need their bogus ads on television and radio either.
Then join the pro-maximum freedom crowd and minimize their impact - along with that of the government - as a third party in the relationship between the patient and the care provider.
Where are you coming up with this "fairness" you seem to insist the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act passed by Congress in 2009 is about? It is insurance. Actually, insurance has to be about fairness, especially regarding the premiums charged. The only mention of that dirty word (to you) I find in the linked article applies to Obama's ideas. By the way, what is your camp (of win win winners) coming up with to complete the Repeal and Replace part of the equation? Business as usual? Because I know you folks fear change and have for over a century now trashed any cooperative governmental health care efforts. Stay well, because if you don't man, well, you might feel a bit bitten by unfairness too. How is that big bite from your income for your late middle age health coverage sitting with the bank acct? Stay tuned, it's only gonna get worse. The bite from your wallet, that is.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that "fairness" drives everything the MEC does, per the reference you found to his ideas, is why I included it in the post title. He thinks socialized home care and assistance with incidental life expenses is "fair."
ReplyDeleteWhat is our alternative? Move policy in the direction of reducing - to zero, wherever possible - the presence of a thiord party in a consumer / health care provider relationship. And where zero is not possible, encourage competition between such third parties (insurance companies).
Insurance companies do not want risks that might have claims. If they had their way they would never pay a nickle in claims and have all our premiums in their fat pockets. Just the way it is. If they had not abused the stewardship of the policyholders $$ for centuries they would not be the most rigidly regulated industry outside of nuclear power. They are invisible bankers and the only invisible hand operating effectively here is the one guiding their accountants, if they can get away with it. And we don't need their bogus ads on television and radio either.
ReplyDeleteThen join the pro-maximum freedom crowd and minimize their impact - along with that of the government - as a third party in the relationship between the patient and the care provider.
ReplyDeleteOK, repeal and replace. Good luck and may your God bless....
ReplyDelete