Mandatory Insurance

[12string]

So instead of a not for profit option,we are just going to mandate everyone purchase a plan that will increase the bottom line for shareholders.I can foresee one more way the taxpayer will be subsidizing corporate welfare that I have yet to see mentioned.Currently there are about 34 million people receiving food stamps in the U.S.How many more will need this assistance when they are forced to spend food money buying mandatory insurance.

[whathehell]

1. Did he not say that those who couldn't afford it will be subsidized?

[mmonk]

2. That does not change the facts.

[whathehell]

12. To what "facts" are you referring?

[armyowalgreens]

3. Then what we essentially have is government subsidization of private insurance interests.

[OwnedByFerrets]

11. Bingo!

[mmonk]

16. Yes. Taxpayers will be subsidizing the most expensive system

in the world.

[whathehell]

22. So, it's not perfect,

But it does eliminate two of private insurance's biggest flaws-- Pre-existing conditions and Recission...and, regardless of who gets paid, people will be COVERED - - it's a lot better than what we've had for the past sixty years.

It's rare, if not impossible, to get COMPLETE reform immediately.

[armyowalgreens]

23. It's not impossible. We simply let them off the hook.

[blueworld]

6. For "catastrophic" coverage...

So if I develop a boil on my ass, I'll have to pay several hundred dollars out of pocket to have it lanced & medicated. Then, if I develop blood-poisoning because I can't afford to see a doctor at all, they'll "subsidize" my catastrophic coverage so my heirs won't be completely bankrupt if I die. This was McCain's brilliant idea.

I agree with those who are disgusted this morning.

[Donnachaidh]

7. STILL doesn't take the lipstick off the pig

Mandated insurance -- I wonder if the insurance companies knew what a payday they had coming when they contributed to his campaign?

The Government just put each and every individual in this country on the *Company Store* workforce. Welcome to the new feudal system folks. :puke:

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. I'll bet they did.

I wonder if the insurance companies knew what a payday they had coming when they contributed to his campaign?

Which IS why they CONTRIBUTED to HIS campaign.

[bluethruandthru]

9. But will those subsidies (our tax dollars) be given to private

insurance companies? If that's the case, then this is just a big giveaway for the insurance companies and I don't understand how anyone can support it. If, however, subsidies are used to provide insurance through the not-for-profit public option...that's a different story.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

17. Our government will be taking more money out of its coffers and feeding it to the

private insurance companies.

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. I am beyond disgusted this morning

[hfojvt]

14. any particular reason why?

Or did you just join to add to the chorus singing 'Democrats suck'?

[Ruby the Liberal]

15. Mandate without a mandatory public option

Thats why. He said he will veto anything that is not deficit neutral, so there are lines in the sand. I wanted a stronger push for the public option.

Fortunately, one of my Senators is on the HELP committee and is a strong advocate of PO. I hope he gets in there and fights for it.

[RoccoR5955]

5. It sounds like more corporate welfare to me

Now he bails out the insurance industry. Whether they needed it or not. As far as those too poor to afford coverage, and get it subsidized by a government program, that is REAL corporate welfare.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

18. That's exactly what it is.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

8. The insurance companies are going to get

what they paid for. They bribed the elected officials fair and square and now it's payback time. We the people got a tight screwy thing right up the arse.

[Faryn Balyncd]

10. K&R.......There should be NO MANDATE unless EVERY AMERICAN IS FREE TO CHOOSE the public plan....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6506609&mesg_id=6506609

[OneBlueSky]

13. a collateral issue is this business of not denying coverage for pre-existing conditions . . .

an admirable goal, to be sure, but without some kind of price controls, insurance companies can charge whatever they wish to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions . . . "We'll certainly offer coverage to people with pre-existig conditions -- at four or five grand a month" . . .

any plan that leaves the insurance companies (and their partners in crime, the pharmaceutical companies) essentially in charge of healthcare is doomed to failure . . . their ONLY objective -- by law -- is to maximize shareholder value . . . not to provide quality healthcare . . . not to provide universal healthcare . . . and certainly not to provide affordable healthcare . . . in the grand scheme of things, none of these matter one whit to these mega-corporations . . . their goal is, and will continue to be, maximizing income (premiums) while minimizing expenditures (benefit payouts) . . . and that will lead us right back to Square One sooner rather than later as the whole system starts collapsing at the altar or corporate profits . . .

universal single payer coverage administered by the government is the ONLY sensible and workable reform . . . as long as the insurance companies are in control, they'll milk the system (and us) for every last dime they can get their greedy little hands on . . .

[JVS]

19. I said it before in the primaries, and I'll say it again.

Simply telling everyone to buy insurance is not a solution to the healthcare problem.

[johnaries]

20. Don't you have Health Insurance? So, if you get sick I'm

supposed to cover your bills even though I've been paying steadily and you haven't? Sure, rates are ridiculous now, but the whole point is to make Health Insurance affordable, and to supply Insurance for those who can't afford it.

Even if we had a single-payer system, you would still be paying for through increased taxes. The only way to get Universal coverage is through a mandate: either by a mandate law or by mandated taxes.

I'm sorry if you don't like the Real World and you expect the world to give you everything you want, but these are the facts. This is reality.

Time for everyone to grow up and accept responsibility.

I agree that Insurance companies are currently out of control, but that is mainly what this bill is trying to address. To halt Insurance company abuses. If it does not, then I agree that we should not have a mandate. But if it does, then a mandate is a necessary part of making it work and the only way to acheive Universal Health Care. Again, either through higher taxes or through mandated participation.

I would be willing to pay higher taxes in lieu of premiums. But many would not. And in this scenario, at least I have a choice of options whereas under mandated taxes none of us would. I can't argue which is better, but I can see that the latter would be much more attractive to most Americans.

[Mixopterus]

25. Well

That depends if the premiums become highly regulated or not. Unless the insurances companies undergo some serious regulation and *gasp* PROFIT CAPS, then they will simply keep their premiums as they are, or even increase them as people would have no choice, and laugh all the way to the bank.

In other words, this form of "health care reform" has the real potential to spoil the very notion of such for decades to come.

[Mixopterus]

24. Good god

This is starting to look more and more like some sort of twisted neo-manorialism, except instead of being tied to the land with a noble who may at least have religion and a feudal contract to ward off his darker urges, we are tied to a corporation with no such trappings and whose only duty is to make more profit off of us.