News Focus
News Focus
Post# of 257264
Next 10
Followers 54
Posts 1150
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/12/2005

Re: jbog post# 93262

Friday, 03/26/2010 12:16:00 PM

Friday, March 26, 2010 12:16:00 PM

Post# of 257264
I'll note this universal individual requirement for insurance was the GOP's idea.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=103_cong_bills&docid=f:s1770pcs.txt

http://www.wbur.org/npr/123670612

They created it response to Clinton's requirement that employers were required to provide insurance.

First, coverage that cannot be denied for pre-existing conditions is not equal to retrospective coverage. You'd be forced to pay uncovered bills for your initial visits.

Second, coverage is not immediate. Apply today, you'll wait 30 days for it to kick in. You'd be forced to pay for the uncovered bills in the meantime.

Third, the system now is much more expensive to society. If you opt out of insurance now, health care ethics force doctors to provide you basic care. You pay nothing for that care, while the cost of providing that care is >100% of the cost of providing similar care to an insured person. Under this plan, uninsured individuals have to pay into a fund, reducing the overall cost to society because they are at least paying SOMETHING.

Will people try and game ths system? Sure, just like they try to game the private system now by going to free clinics to diagnose (which have no or antagonistic relationships with insurance companies) then popping on private insurance while lying about pre-existing conditions. If you've ever been around free clinics, they "work with" any uninsured who ends up having some chronic/expensive-to-treat condition in order to figure out a way to get them insured.

Unless otherwise indicated, this is the personal viewpoint of David
Miller and not necessarily that of Biotech Stock Research, LLC.
We're on Twitter at BiotechStockRsr

Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today