GOP pushing Blunt amendment: another attack on womens healthcare

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
How about simply that it's stupid for insurance to cover a routine, expected expense like birth control, as you're simply pre-paying the expense via the insurance premiums with a dollop of administrative costs on top. See - you don't even need to cite a religious reason, you can just oppose being forced to do stupid things by Washington.

Because we all know all those recur every month as a part of normal life, right?

I swear, sometimes I think progressives are nothing more than walking appetites for free stuff.

We force mosques to serve bacon. They complain that this infringes on their religious freedom. Democrat response: "What's wrong with bacon? They're trying to ban bacon!

I agree.

People fail to understand that.

Insurance was NOT created for paying for checkups, routine lab testing, drug cost. It was created for UNEXPECTED expenses. Over the years it has morphed into an all you can eat buffet for medical cost of any kind and that is the sole reason medical cost are so high. No longer do you have services that cost $35 , instead you have doctors that charge $100 because they know the insurance companies will not pay that and so for the same service you might pay $40 or you might pay $25 depending on how much weight your insurance company has with the provider. This doesn't work in any other industry except medicine.
-snip-

Ironically though, the "free stuff" is profits for the insurance companies. In order to give a portion of women $25/month worth of "free" birth control pills, they'll be charging everyone $30/month to cover the pill cost plus a profit on top for themselves.

^^These^^

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Lots of men terrified of anything related to vaginas.

No.

Just opposed to paying for the routine maintenance and upkeep of somebody else's.

If you're working, pay your own freight. If you're not, go get on Medicaid or see a free clinic.

Fern
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
...Mandating "free" birth control buys some votes, strains more money out of corporations, and raises the cost of health care...
Are you asserting that contraception is more expensive than pregnancy, childbirth, pediatrics, etc.?
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
14
81
Exactly.


Quite true.


Actually conservatives don't think that at all. However, Republicans (not necessarily the same thing) aren't willing to pay the political price in higher taxes for the things they want.

Then there must not be any true "conservatives" in Congress then?
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
How about simply that it's stupid for insurance to cover a routine, expected expense like birth control, as you're simply pre-paying the expense via the insurance premiums with a dollop of administrative costs on top. See - you don't even need to cite a religious reason, you can just oppose being forced to do stupid things by Washington.

This arguments fizzles if insurance companies regularly cover, say, insulin which is a routine, expected expense for a group of people. There are lots of preventative care insurance companies engage in - most likely because it is less expensive to do so than to deal with worse scenarios, and that is how the Industry has operated. (They'd rather fill your Lipitor than pay for an open-heart surgery)

So that's where we are now. We treat Health insurance differently from other insurances, and people expect certain coverages when they sign up for one. Many people fail to see why health insurance market is different from all the other markets.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
This arguments fizzles if insurance companies regularly cover, say, insulin which is a routine, expected expense for a group of people. -snip-

I don't think it "fizzles". Once you were found to need insulin trying to get a new policy was all but impossible if only because of the costs. Your insulin was, at that time, not 'insured' and you were going to pay for it in your premiums.

Fern
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
14
81
I don't think it "fizzles". Once you were found to need insulin trying to get a new policy was all but impossible if only because of the costs. Your insulin was, at that time, not 'insured' and you were going to pay for it in your premiums.

Fern

Not once the Affordable Health Care Act is fully implemented.