Dear United States of America,
Welcome to a world where when you pay for insurance and it turns out you will need to use it, they can’t take it back and keep your money.
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Waffle was a weblog that ran for nine years and five days from 2003 to 2012.
The last post has been written and comments will be closed by the end of March 2012.
The author of Waffle, some guy in Sweden, also occasionally writes stmts.net.
(If anything will ever succeed or revive Waffle, it will be announced in this location, and in the feeds.)
Dear United States of America,
Welcome to a world where when you pay for insurance and it turns out you will need to use it, they can’t take it back and keep your money.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Dear United States of America, welcome to 1981.
By Chris · 2010.03.22 21:57
Obviously you know nothing about insurance. In America you can sue if you are denied coverage you pay for.
When government takes over health care and denies you care you cannot sue.
By Foo · 2010.03.23 00:59
Oh, I’m sorry, I was under the impression that you could keep the same provider and the same insurance company you had today, just that they couldn’t wiggle out of their responsibility quite as easily.
Did government “take over health care”? When exactly will you be forced to go with the government plan, in that case? Government-provided health care is available in practically every developed country, including Sweden, and I’ve never heard of this being an issue.
Please provide more details.
By Jesper · 2010.03.23 07:59
And of course you can sue. After you’ve paid your medical bills. Oh, wait …
By Joe McMahon · 2010.03.23 20:48
So it’s exactly the same as yesterday, then?
By Jesper · 2010.03.23 21:11
Jesper,
You said, “Oh, I’m sorry, I was under the impression that you could keep the same provider and the same insurance company you had today, just that they couldn’t wiggle out of their responsibility quite as easily.”
The biggest features of this bill:
If people are satisfied with their provider, they can keep it It would insure over 30 million people currently without coverage One can’t be dropped when they fall ill One can’t be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition Children can remain on their parent’s plans until age 26 Most citizens would be required to buy a health plan
There is a failure on both our government (to more clearly explain what the reforms mean to the average person), but also a large portion of people, like Foo, that don’t want to understand the issues. There are a large group of people in this country that feel that government regulation of the for-profit health insurance businesses equates a takeover. Don’t waste your time trying to wrap your head around it — I have tried and I can’t.
So, unlike every other advanced country in the world, in America you have to buy health care. It is not provided to all by the government. Many employers provide access to their pre-selected health care plan. (For many, they hesitate leaving jobs because they will loose their coverage. Also, our companies face a competitive disadvantage against companies in other countries whose governments provide health care.) For others, there are government funded plans for the poorest of the poor, seniors, and children. But everyone else? They have to buy their care. They are fucked.
However, if one gets seriously ill, the for-profit health insurance businesses can (and often will) drop your coverage. If one has a pre-existing condition, the for-profit health insurance businesses can (and often will) either not extend coverage or make the applicant pay exorbitant premiums. Etc…
You also asked, “Did government ‘take over health care’?”
No. Absolutely not. Regulation? Yes. The oppositions plans were to slash regulation and let the marketplace regulate itself.
It’s fucked up, because under the new law, starting in 2014, people would be forced to pay a for-profit health insurance business for a plan. If they don’t buy a plan, they’d be subject to a penalty. There are a lot of thoughts about this. If people weren’t forced to buy and couldn’t be denied coverage, nobody would buy until they needed coverage. Costs would soar.
But the health care companies are for-profit. They have been dropping people when they get sick and raising premiums by double digits each year — all for profits. The reforms are supposed to lower costs, but we’ll have to see.
However, for almost 100 years politicians here have been trying to reform health care. That this passed is huge. The issue has been made too complex. The solution is simple — government provided health care.
I read a comment about health reform, but I forget where I read it, so I’ll paraphrase. For the next 10-20 years we’ll screw around with trying to tweak these plans, but in the end, we’ll settle on a universal or single payer system like everyone else.
I can only hope. The sooner the better.
Thanks for listening! (I could use an editor.)
Jonathan
By Infodriveway · 2010.03.24 02:28
I hope you do. It’s only the ghost of “socialized medicine” that keeps you from doing the logical, rational thing. And I hope it’s a bit easier now that the ball’s been set in motion.
I knew most of the things you wrote up; I was just posing rhetorical questions to counter “Foo”‘s argument. And I certainly know of the argument about “no one will buy until they have to”. The plan only covers 95% of Americans from what I’ve heard; people who can’t afford a home or hold down a job are still going to be exposed to the closest thing to “death panels” that there ever will be; that is to say hospitals being unable to treat (besides emergency) because there’s no insurance backing that particular person.
There’s only one way to fix that. Actually, there’s two: if you manage to fix poverty instead and get everyone a job, please also tell the rest of the class.
By Jesper · 2010.03.24 07:51