Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Johannes Pilch who wrote (156338)	6/28/2001 3:35:25 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Health insurers have ratcheted down on coverage of numerous outlier diagnoses over the last ten years. Leaving more and more people out of their definition of coverage throws more and more people into the taxpayer supported health care facilities who are obliged to treat by law even if they will not get reimbursed. THAT is transfer of risk to government! I also said nothing about getting coverage when you are sick. I said indivisuals cannot get coverage if they HAVE BEEN SICK in the past. Yes, of course you are right that insurance is a business and they are certainly some of the most profitable businesses there are. (In fact one of the things they most hate is seeing information leak out about just how profitable they are.)I didn't say they are obligated to cover everyone. If that were true then we would only need one insurance company, right? But they adjust their premium rates all the time to reflect their analysis of the risk involved in providing coverage. So the key is the definition of SICK thay choose to apply. What was your condition? Is it likely to appear again? will it get worse? etc. Just how sick do people have to be to be denied coverage--forever--by all insurers? The bar is getting lower and lower. How much information are they entitled to have about you to make up their minds? Did you notice that your president just this week says he opposes allowing health insurance companies to have information about your DNA? If they had that information, they could decide to deny you coverage because you MIGHT get sick in the future. Even GWB knows a line must be drawn. BTW, if out of your anti-"socialist" anti-government convictions you demand less and less governement and more "free-market" economy then you will eventually have corporations AS your government. And dude, that's exactly where we are headed now.

To: Johannes Pilch who wrote (156338)	6/28/2001 3:54:46 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769670

"Where is the logic that compels us to accept that health insurance firms have a moral obligation to insure individuals who are sick?" Mr. Pilch, do you know any person on this planet that is 100% absolutely healthy? Insurance companies are like gambling casinos....they simply rig the odds in their favor. Most civilized nations, I think, require hospitals to give emergency care to someone who comes in needing help. As we know, ER care is very expensive and if the patient can't pay as many of them can't, we all pay. It would no doubt be cheaper for us all to have some sort of universal coverage which would allow all to get primary care before their problems developed into emergencies.I "Well then perhaps there is a better way to solve this problem than by committing the wrong of forcing businesses to make decisions that are not profitable. Perhaps we can instead use government funds to help more Americans get off their fat arses and exercise and stop eating so friggin’ much." A better way would be to allow us to only eat Brit food......I guarantee we wouldn't eat so much then....:-) And btw, I believe tobacco use ultimately causes more deaths than another cause.