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: Peter Dierks who wrote (10465)	10/14/2009 8:51:12 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

>> The current system of mandated coverages increases the cost. I don't get the attack on the insurance company on this. It seemed strange to me that the company would deny coverage to an infant like that; presumably, he would have been a profitable insured for them. And they DID revise their standards to accommodate the situation. The parents were big government health care proponents and made a deal of it. The child was healthy and could have gotten coverage anywhere, apparently, but at this particular company. When the parents signed up for coverage at this company they knew it was with rigorous standards aimed at cutting costs and that that might mean their children would not qualify for coverage. This was NOT an example of the problem of a person who can't get coverage because of pre-existing conditions, nor was it an example of an insured being dropped after getting sick (which as it turns out, is an exceedingly rare event -- the three biggest insurance companies in the country have averaged 5,000 such instances per year -- combined -- for the last five years, out of something like 80 Million insureds). Just something to stir up the left wing nutcases.