I promise you there are many more services covered at 100% with no deductible for women then there are men, and I get to pay premiums for them. A great way to buy votes from women.
There is no fixing this law. The only fix is to go back to letting people choose their own plans and policies and what they want covered.
Why do you think the Federal Government knows better than I do what I do and don't need/want for my insurance coverage?
Why should they get to take that freedom of choice away from me?
Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk 2
I agree with that logic. I just question why Republicans don't generally think the same way about insurance plans that don't include pre-existing conditions, often don't include medication in some cases (like pre-existing conditions or before a deductible is met), and a healthcare system that doesn't include everybody in general.
I agree that medication coverage should have been part of Medicare all along. I just don't think it's typically Republican politicians who are for extending federal programs in any way. It's usually them who find a reason not to. I know you don't want to hear that and you think I'm being mean. I'm sorry about that. What Bush proposed was unusual for his party IMO. There's a reason he called himself a "compassionate conservative." I realize that statement was made fun of by liberals like crazy, but I think that there was a meaning behind that.
I don't disbelieve you. I am just trying to find out what these services are. That's what the previous links are all about. I am also trying to point out to you that people like me, who live carefully, now have to pay for all those with incredibly high risk (prostitutes) and for problems that are not health related at all (gay "fertility").I promise you there are many more services covered at 100% with no deductible for women then there are men, and I get to pay premiums for them. A great way to buy votes from women.
And Rob, to answer your question, I do understand certain points. It's not that I'm trying to play dumb. It's that there are points that I honestly think are not considered. You say Bush wanted seniors to have access to medication. I agree with that. My main point is that Obama and other Democrats also want people to have more medical access (medications, doctors, etc). Both of them got demonized for approachying reform their way, but they meant well. The Affordable Healthcare Act is not perfect. I do think congress people will continue to make reforms throughout the years. But honestly, I see this being like Medicare. Medicare was once demonized as socialist medicine. Now, people don't want it gone. I think the AHA will be the same way.
Do you really think Obamacare programs cover preexisting conditions without a waiting period? With children yes, adults, no.
I have never heard of a medical plan that made a denial of a claim for Rx medication due to a pre existing condition, if you have please enlighten us.
We should eliminate pre existing conditions for automobile insurance. You simply will not need to purchase insurance until after you actually have an accident. I'm sure that sounds like a great idea to liberals. I've paid into health insurance plans for years, even when I was healthy. Why should I have to help cover the risk pool with higher premiums for those that did not?
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|