Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedons
I mirrored back what you had said to me.
|
how about providing a rational argument instead of a sarcastic anecdote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedons
It is absurd to expect or require an insurance company to issue a policy to to cover a pre-existing condition. That is "not insurance". Insurance companies with their slush funds are a bunch of filthy whores grouped right up there next to politicians and tort lawyers.
|
it is absurd within the framework of our current for-profit system, because reducing expenditure is as good as getting paid. but
that paradigm is absurd within the framework of a country who wants to compete in a world that's passing it by. the question is not whether insurers should accept pre-existing conditions but whether we as a country would willingly blunt the mettle of our workforce by forcing those with pre-existing conditions to deal and either be unable to work as a result or so hopelessly in debt that their work is fruitless.
like jcp said, why is it not equally absurd to you that health is treated as a commodity?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedons
If healthcare costs are going to be reasonable and managed, a good place to start would be tort reform. Why isn't one of the primary things that has driven up the cost of healthcare being addressed in healthcare proposals?
|
who will oversee and make decisions on this tort reform, and how will it be implemented? the tort issue is itself a symptom of the same health-as-commodity problem. tort reform is a retroactive bandage; the root of the problem is left unaddressed
edit- sput hit on that up top, ego. definite boogieman at work