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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (3855)	1/13/2008 10:54:24 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

'the article says 'guaranteed issue' is one of the big reasons insurers don't want to be active in those states.' So an insurance company that is building a successful and profitable business in insuring a specific high risk pool (and providing them with better service and coverage) should be required to service other people for whom they have no expertise. Should a brain surgeon be required to do heart surgery if I show up demanding it? Why would anyone want a state law guaranteeing that patients could demand whatever health services they desire from whatever doctor regardless of their expertise? If you think this is a straw man argument, then go back and examine why yours is too for the same reasons. The next logical question is what is the difference between guaranteed issue and rape? It appears it is more acceptable to victimize insurance companies.