Is U.S. Healthcare More About Money Than a Calling to Help Others?
insurance and coverage issues
- This article is posted in:
"Now, maybe I have a simplistic mind, but frankly I don't understand why health care and insurance companies keep appearing in the same sentences." (Fisher, W. Truthout 10/25/09) Here’s the bureaucratic process at its “best”
Insurers are in the cat-bird seat for now In the debate about health care reform, it was emphazized that to cover the under- and uninsured, the healthy escape from the risk pool; this raises the per capita cost of coverage of those who are left. Rate increases are bubbling up all over the country; people are being pressured into buying increasingly expensive health insurance that there is good reason to believe wouldn't be there when it is really needed.
To restrain greedy private insurers.... A predictable result of the absence of a Public Option is the veritable shell game we are about to see perpetrated by private insurers. Do you blame them? After all, their 'medical business' (as opposed to the 'business of medicine'--health care) is threatened by reform
President Obama champions three goals for reform: 1) "increasing security and stability" and "shared responsibility" for coverage for those having insurance, for the uninsured, 2) giving all “quality, affordable choices,” and the sticky widget, 3) "slowing the growth of health care costs." His plan would strike at the sinister 'heart' of private insurers and their sickening stratagem of: denying coverage because of "preexisting conditions, dropping or reducing coverage when an enrollee becomes i
With the story: "Democrats consider dropping insurance ban on pre-existing conditions," we learned that kids under 19 years of age wouldn't be denied coverage for preexisting conditions. Why? Because everyone over 19 will be denied coverage! The following is a particularly poignant blog extract: January 25, 20102:04:30 PM EST, Fredrick H (a triple doctor) comments:
What do the following three (3) statements, decrying a co-op plan instead of a public health insurance option have in common? 1. Cooperatives "lack the scale and authority to negotiate lower rates with drug companies and other providers, collect wide data on outcomes, or effect major change in the system." Reich RB. "Why We Need a Public Health-Care Plan (Former Secretary of Labor and professor at the University of California)
Is having a uterus a pre-existing condition? If you are an insurance company, then maybe. Outrageous? Yes, but the problem is not "women," per se. Rather, it is the whole issue of differential (as opposed to deferential) treatment and discriminatory charging—you get charged more the more likely you are to use services. Clearly, women live to older ages and are more likely to use medical services than their male counterparts.
I feel they picked my pocket! Consider what happened to me....