Official Health Care Reform Celebration Thread

DNC Rakes In Over $2 Million Since Bill’s Passage

A DNC source emails that the committee has pulled in over $2 million in online contributions since the bill passed on Sunday.

 

You do understand that a lot of people get sick because of heredity, enviroment( which a lot of times their unaware),and contagious germs from other people). I had a friend die of a staph infection at the age of 26. The nerve of you idiots.

 

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/al5asS_qjd4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/al5asS_qjd4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

Being a healthy young adult who eats properly and exercises doesn't prevent you from getting in an accident or getting sick. I presume as a healthy young adult you can't pay for catastrophic care say if you get in a car wreck (the leading cause of death among young adults) all out of your pocket so at that point if you have insurance someone else in the pool. If you don't have insurance, as some of the young and presumably healthy posters here have said, then the tax payers pick up your hospital tab under the current system.

 

Wow, you totally missed his point. His argument had nothing to do with the coverage mandate. Perhaps you're not aware, but this disaster of a bill contains provisions that limit the spread between the most expensive and least expensive policies insurance companies are allowed to sell. So now, even though the actual cost of insuring a young, healthy person is far less than insuring an old or sick person, ins companies have to charge the young person more than they should be paying so that the old/sick person can pay less. It's not "insurance" anymore, it's just straight up wealth redistribution. The most hilarious part is that it redistributes wealth away from the poorest demographic and gives it to the richest demographic.

 

Considering he didn't mention anything about the spread between policies I think I got his point.

 

This confuses me.
ALL insurance is redistribution of wealth. All of it.
-You take money from a large group as payment for insurance against some risk.
-You "redistribute" the money to a smaller group of people who actually suffer that risk.

The wealth of the many is redistributed to the few unfortunate. Auto insurance, flood insurance.... it doesn't matter. All insurance insurance is at it's core socialist.

 

Can you make a graph to help explain your point? I think some solid statistical analysis of wealth distribution would help greatly.

 

Wow, this is perhaps the most moronic argument I've ever seen. Brilliant job improperly equivocating risk hedging with wealth redistribution. If I could reach through the monitor and slap you for being so stupid, I would.

Insurance at its core is not socialist. You pay a rate that represents the insurance companies best actuarial guess of how much and how often it will have to pay out on someone with your risk profile, plus a small profit. The price paid for insurance is very closely related to it value. There is no wealth redistribution because value given = value received.

Under ObamaCrap, insurance companies can no longer charge you a fair rate based on your risk profile. Instead, you will pay less than you should if you are old/sick, and more than you should if you are young/healthy. Because you are colossally stupid, I will spell this out for you again: People have always purchased insurance to hedge against their own risks. Obama's socialist plan requires purchasing insurance to subsidize other people's risks.

How would you feel if your car insurance rate was jacked up because your neighbor had a wreck, or if insurance companies were mandated to charge you the same price as teenage drivers?

 

Informed criticism of this bill is that it's a poison pill for seniors because of the ability for insurers to charge them 3 times the rate of younger people, pay an excise tax, or get a hardship exemption (meaning no coverage)

 

You don't appear to understand the idea behind insurance.

Insurance at its core is based on spreading losses rather than forcing parties to bear their own costs because of uncertainty. As a consequence, some parties pay more than what their actual costs would have been - some pay less - that's the price you pay for being unable to judge uncertainty.

If you consider not bearing your own costs to be "socialist", (I don't, "socialism" as used by the right has very little intellectual consistency and is basically a codeword for anything republicans don't like) - then by all means it is socialist

 

As long as insurance is funded off of a pool you are subsidizing someone's risk. What you are describing is more akin to a savings plan where you get back what you put in. The point of insurance is that in the event of a catastrophe you can get back more than what you put in by tapping the resources of the whole pool.

Obviously risk is determined and you are charged premiums based on that risk but insurance companies still have to charge enough to cover the total pool. So even as someone with low risk you are still paying in more than what might just be needed to cover your own risk and a profit since the insurance needs to keep the pool solvent.

Actually that happens already as frequency of accidents for a region is considered in determining insurance rates for a particular region.

 

Exactly, this is the reason that people in Webster (Harris County) pay more for insurance than people in Dickinson (Galveston County), despite being less than five miles apart.

 

Anyone heard what France's Nicolas Sarkozy had to say about our healthcare reform? It's a nice window into what the international community thinks:

While you can leave it to the French to point out the singular advantage their country might have over the United States, his points are still quite biting and direct. I like it.

 

who gives a crap about what the French think

 

Sarkozy's all big and bad until someone gives him a mean look.

 

Not saying his comments aren't worthwhile, but France has 20% of the population that the U.S. has. There are over 4X more insured people in the U.S. than there are in France.

 

He also resorts to stupid hyperbole with the credit card before admission nonsense.