We are doomed

[Anonymous]

In the interest of full disclosure, and so as not to be labeled a sock puppet, I am the PP with the Labcorp bill.

I do take offense to Nancy Pelosi saying this bill is as ground breaking as Social Security and Medicare. I sure hope not. Both of those programs are financial messes (whether truly a mess or just a mess the way the federal government has managed them, I'll leave that debate alone). If so, I'd call this bill back breaking, not ground breaking.

I wouldn't mind paying more, really, if I thought it was going to work to straighten out a clearly broken system (see my post above). I am not convinced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I'm not a troll. Why is it that whenever someone expresses a different opinion they're considered a troll or afraid of change etc. It's only fair to say that this bill is tik expensive and that it's benefits are being exaggerated by the proponents. But voicing those concerns makes you a troll or a baiter.

it wasn't your opposition to the bill. You wrote like a hateful, bigoted jackass. Whenever people do THAT they get called a troll.

[Anonymous]

16:26 here, OP. I'm still waiting to hear how my father falls into the categories you so clearly defined.

[Anonymous]

Op. Why was my initial post bigoted? I don't feel that my hard earned money should go to people that do not deserve it. Or do you deny that there are people like that (also include illegal immigrants that do not pay taxes). Why won't people accept the realities.

To the other poster: while I sympathize with your father's condition I understand the conpany's position. Your dad will drive up costs for all their customers and they should have the right be forced to carry him. I know people who have lost their car insurance due to their risk factor (accidents).

[Anonymous]

Just to clarify,the 21:21 post was by me, the OP.

[Anonymous]

OP, your hard earned money ALREADY goes to cover the health care of illegal immigrants. Every time one shows up at the ER or gets into an accident or really incurs any medical bill they cannot pay, YOU pay. This bill does not change that.

[Anonymous]

To the other poster: while I sympathize with your father's condition I understand the conpany's position. Your dad will drive up costs for all their customers and they should have the right be forced to carry him. I know people who have lost their car insurance due to their risk factor (accidents).
[Report Post]

Why would it drive up the cost of all the other customers? The president of that insurance company earned $240 million dollars the year he dropped my father. Maybe, just maybe, they could care a little bit more about health care and less about making a profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Listen limousine liberals, this healthcare bill is going to affect the most productive in society and and send wealth down to the laziest members of our society. As someone who lives in the District and sees these people daily with their 6 kids etc I'm just so mad! It's unfair that I have to work 10hr days to provide a certain lifestyle and then see so much of it taken away and given to people who hate America, hate education, embrace violence and refuse to work. Take the metro sometime it's appalling the way these youths speak, and you can tell their just going to join the government rolls. There, getting off soapbox.

Oh honey, those people already have health insurance -- it's called Medicaid. This healthcare bill is going to help people with low-paying jobs who work hard but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid and they still can't afford medical insurance.

So you would deny hardworking people health insurance because you're mad at people who already have Medicaid? Home health aides, waiters, store clerks -- what do you have against them?

Please do some actual reading about this so you know the facts.

[Anonymous]

The CEO of the company doesn't owe your father anything. His job is to increase profits of the company for the owners of the company (the shareholders). Keeping customers like your father that raise rates will force other customers to leave for cheaper plans and lower profits. It's simple economics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op. Why was my initial post bigoted? I don't feel that my hard earned money should go to people that do not deserve it. Or do you deny that there are people like that (also include illegal immigrants that do not pay taxes). Why won't people accept the realities.

To the other poster: while I sympathize with your father's condition I understand the conpany's position. Your dad will drive up costs for all their customers and they should have the right be forced to carry him. I know people who have lost their car insurance due to their risk factor (accidents).

Well if you believed your original post was so reasonable, you would have continued with responses that use the same tone. But you have changed your tone so clearly you understand something was wrong with it.

Had you written the above as your original post, perhaps I would have just pointed out that you already pay for the undeserving people. Your premiums are higher because they have to cover the indigent care that hospitals provide. Or in other cases, the government pays for it, which means you pay for it. So the difference between this bill and the current reality is that today the tax on you is not explicit. But it is there just the same.

[Anonymous]

Did they take the enormous profit incentives which ultimately turn the system into a huge mess out? Run it like a non-profit with accountability and funded by annually renewable grants based on past results. Take out the skewed financial incentives for insurance companies and medical service providers. And apply that to education as well.

[Anonymous]

Healthcare reform in its current form is the medical equivalent of cash for clunkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that it's here, I can't wait to see how it improves the system. I sure hope it somehow fixes the problem I just identified in a bill I got from Labcorp - $1300 for bloodwork that insurance wouldn't cover until I filled out a secondary insurance/medicare questionnaire (4 times it took for BCBS to actually start paying up). Did I mention these were HSG and other fertility bloodwork? BCBS had all the info it needed to know I didn't have secondary insurance or medicare.

Anyway, when insurance wasn't covering me, Labcorp billed me $1300. When BCBS stepped in, the charge dropped to $130.00 (yes, 10cents on the dollar), and I had only to pay $23. How is someone not on insurance supposed to pay for that?

Let's say Labcorp was out of plan for me. Then I'd have to pay the $1300, then submit it to BCBS. BCBS would then pay the $107 (130-23) and I'd be on the hook for the remaining $1193. My calendar year deductible would only reflect the $107. What a rip off.

Will the new law help this one? It seems so broken.

PP -- I'm not expert but I don't think the new law is going to solve problems like you describe. Single payer insurance might have simplified things, but that was a non-starter.

[Anonymous]

The CEO of the company doesn't owe your father anything. His job is to increase profits of the company for the owners of the company (the shareholders). Keeping customers like your father that raise rates will force other customers to leave for cheaper plans and lower profits. It's simple economics.

Actually, he does. My father paid his insurance premiums every month on time for 30 years. He paid to be covered in the event of an illness. The insurance company failed to follow through on its end of the bargain.

Starting today the law is on my father's side. From now on, it will be illegal for them to cancel policies of people who get sick, it will be illegal to dump customers by raising rates by crazy percentages, and it will be illegal for employers with more than 50 employees to not offer health insurance to their employees. It will also be illegal to decline someone based on a preexisting condition. So, at the end of the day, we come out on top and the unethical CEO is on the wrong side of the law.

[Anonymous]

I actually agree with the op in some ways but I think it she/he is a bit harsh. I do not want to work for those that do not. I think the working poor should be helped, and those that sit on the ass all day should not.