Text 10926, 80 rader
Skriven 2013-10-24 06:03:56 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 10902 av Mark Hofmann (1:261/1304)
Ärende: APODs
=============
Hello Mark,

 LL>> Owning a car is a choice. Driving a car is a choice. Not everybody
 LL>> wants to own, or drive, a car. Owning or driving a car is not a
 LL>> necessity, nor is it a right. A privilege, yes. But not a right.

MH>True - but around here, if you don't have transportation, you will
MH>have major issue finding and getting to work.  Most people travel
MH>25-60 minutes one way to work around here.

Thank God for bicycles!

 LL>> The right to life is not just a right, but an inalienable right.
 LL>> Far different than owning or driving a car. By subsidizing health
 LL>> insurance, government makes the cost of obtaining health insurance
 LL>> much more affordable for many people. Subsidizing health insurance
 LL>> also ensures that insurance companies remain in business.

MH>This was already being done pre-Obamacare.  Anyone can visit any
MH>hospital's ER and get treatment without insurnace.  They can't turn
MH>anyone away.

Having no other option than going to a clinic or to the ER is NOT
access to quality health care.  By the time an individual arrives
at a clinic or ER it may be too late for any treatment to be of
any help, which is why so many thousands of people without health
insurance die needlessly, every year, in this country.

 LL>> Insurance companies are no longer allowed to discriminate
 LL>> against those who have pre-existing conditions (being pregnant
 LL>> is a pre-existing condition). However, the ACA does allow for
 LL>> "wellness fees" - rates that insurance companies can tack on
 LL>> for smoking, obesity, etc., thus making rates unaffordable for
 LL>> many.

MH>I agree with that, but now they are able to discriminate on people's
MH>"additional fees" if they deem them a higher risk due to various
MH>factors.

Of course.  That is how health insurance enhance their profits.

 LL>> While it may be true that not everything should be affordable (or
 LL>> accessible) for all, the same does not apply for health care.

 LL>> Access to quality health care is the first of all human rights,
 LL>> regardless of how rich or poor an individual might be. Without
 LL>> access to quality health care, that individual might as well be
 LL>> dead. And as everybody knows, the dead have no rights.

MH>I would be one of the first people that would love to see healthcare
MH>more affordable.  The problem is, there is nothing about Obamacare
MH>that does this.

Tax credits.  But only for those who make between 100 percent and
400 percent of the federal poverty level.  Which means folks who earn
less than the federal poverty level are screwed.  Especially if the
state they live in has not opted for expanded medicaid.

MH>For instance, why was tort reform not addressed?  Believe it or not,
MH>we have people sueing hospitals because they were told the sex of
MH>their child was wrong before childbirth.

There are many problems with Obamacare that need to be fixed.  But
with the present political climate in Washington, nobody wants to
fix anything.  Better to point fingers at the other guy than to get
together and find solutions for real problems that exist.

 LL>> The entire principle of insurance is to make a profit. How much
 LL>> of a profit depends on how many are excluded from coverage. Or how
 LL>> little is paid to those who have it.

MH>Which is why health insurance companies should be non-profits, like
MH>the hospitals.  Obamacare doesn't address that issue, either.

Of course not.  It's all about money.  Who has it, and who gets it.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)