Healthcare Reform Thread II

[Drake Tungsten]

Interesting point. But it does back up my claim that of lacking humanity.

When did rational decision-making become synonymous with a lack of humanity, in your eyes?

[Hauldren Collider]

When rational decision making failed to support his claims.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

I don't see anything rational about people being unable to receive health care.

[Hauldren Collider]

And I don't see anything rational about granting healthcare to everyone, thereby ensuring no one has healthcare in just a few years.

(This is assuming the bill causes the US to default on its debt which seems to be the assumption we've been going with.)

[Elok]

My argument was that there needs to be a balance when corporations lack humanity, and government can provide that balance. Unbalanced - millions of children without access to health care due to preexisting conditions that are no fault of their own; balanced - the government mandates that insurance companies cannot refuse children.

And then fifty asthmatic kids who don't respond to normal treatment drive the cost of premiums through the roof, and everybody suffers until such time as the insurance company tanks. The asthmatic kids move on until they grow up/die or all insurance companies are exhausted. It's better for everyone

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't see anything rational about people being unable to receive health care.

So if I told you that I could insure every person in America, but it would cost $100k annually for each person insured, you'd think that was a good deal?

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Collider: Right, and the facts backing up our complete bankruptcy in the event everyone gets healthcare are?

I'm not disputing they exist. Just provide them.

However, my argument is about balance. No where in this particular argument did I say anything about giving everyone health care. My point is about using the government to back the public against corporations lack of humanity. There, I'm talking about things like preexisting conditions.

But someone not affording said insurance is a different argument, one I'm not currently engaging in. I'm not making any argument regarding a Public Option.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

I don't see anything rational about people being unable to receive health care.

So if I told you that I could insure every person in America, but it would cost $100k annually for each person insured, you'd think that was a good deal?

Well, first, if you told me that, I'd call you a liar.

There are SO many people who's actual costs are minimal.

But I firmly believe that, if people don't have to worry about spending money on health care that can end up being more than their mortgages, they will be far more financially stable, which will in turn strengthen the economy.

[Drake Tungsten]

So you're not interested in any sort of rational cost-benefit analysis being used to judge potential expansions of healthcare insurance. Just wanted to make that clear.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

And then fifty asthmatic kids who don't respond to normal treatment drive the cost of premiums through the roof, and everybody suffers until such time as the insurance company tanks. The asthmatic kids move on until they grow up/die or all insurance companies are exhausted. It's better for everyone

But then 50 kids who contract pnuemonia can go to the hospital and get care immediately, rather than waiting until the very last minute when the situation is critical, having to undergo much more expensive treatment, and possibly leaving the parents and the hospital to soak up the costs.

It works both ways.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

So you're not interested in any sort of rational cost-benefit analysis being used to judge potential expansions of healthcare insurance. Just wanted to make that clear.

You're missing my point. I never said healthcare shouldn't be paid for. I don't want insurance agencies to give away their products.

But you're assuming that this is the line between solvency and insolvency. I believe its the line between massive profits and not-so-massive profits.

[Drake Tungsten]

I never said healthcare shouldn't be paid for. I don't want insurance agencies to give away their products.

I'm pointing out that a rational cost-benefit analysis has to assign some sort of monetary value to a human life and that if the cost of saving that human life exceeds its value, the rational choice is to not incur the cost. My point has absolutely nothing to do with " insurance agencies giving away their products."

[Solomwi]

A corporation's "lack of humanity" seems to be nothing more than its disagreement with you on how to spend its own resources.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

First, I put health care on a different plane than any other type of insurance.

Second, "how they spend their resources" is not equivalent to what I see as the lack of humanity - pushing maximum profits over citizens' wellbeing. And until you can prove to me that when insurance companies deny health care that they are only doing it to fight insolvency, I can't imagine I'll feel much different.

[Solomwi]

First, I put health care on a different plane than any other type of insurance.

Second, "how they spend their resources" is not equivalent to what I see as the lack of humanity - pushing maximum profits over citizens' wellbeing. And until you can prove to me that when insurance companies deny health care that they are only doing it to fight insolvency, I can't imagine I'll feel much different.

So you disagree with how they spend their resources (or, if you prefer to limit it to pre-existing conditions, which contracts they decide to agree to), but are magnanimous enough to spare them your disapproval if they're about to go under? Why is it better for them to get to the brink of insolvency, then start making rational decisions than to make rational decisions all along to avoid even the threat of insolvency? Why should you be able to enforce your idea of what they should do when you aren't a party to the agreement?

By the way, no insurance company denies health care. They either decline to pay for it under an existing contract or decline to enter a contract that obligates them to pay for it. The patient is free to find another way to pay for the same care.