My 87 year old dad's incredible healthcare

[SammyJr]

Are you aware you just described the French system? A public system that covers the basics well, with optional private insurance on top of that, and small payments (20-50 euros to see a doctor) to prevent abuse/overuse.

Right now, spidey has his fingers in his ears and is yelling "lalalalalalalalala" at the top of his lungs.

 

[Throckmorton]

You can't be denied or charged differently due to pre-existing problems as long as you don't let your insurance lapse. I've covered this time and time again.

GROUP health insurance can deny coverage of preexisting conditions up to 1 year after enrollment, depending on the time period without coverage http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/fshipaa.html

Until "Obamacare" there is no restriction like that on individual health insurance. Insurance companies can charge you whatever they want or not cover you at all. That's what happens on a free market, which presumably is something you support anyway.

Tell me, without big bad government laws requiring it, why in the hell would an insurance company be stupid enough to insure your father who is absolutely not going to make them a profit and will instead be a massive money sink? Think about it for a second. Free market insurance can't make a profit from keeping your father alive with all these expensive machines and surgeries. Do you not realize that?

 

[classy]

Hmmm..... My grandmom had a pacmaker and I am almost positive Medicare paid the whole bill. Now granted we are talking 20 years ago though.

 

[spidey07]

Doing a little googling says 90 percent of people over 65 choose to have some kind of supplemental insurance because medicare doesn't meet their healthcare needs.

See! Government run healthcare is GREAT!

 

[CallMeJoe]

Our resident leftwingers flew to this thread like stink on shit. rofl

So if the left-wingers are the stink, that means you must be...

 

[JSt0rm]

ahahaha thread backfire

 

[soulcougher73]

Doing a little googling says 90 percent of people over 65 choose to have some kind of supplemental insurance because medicare doesn't meet their healthcare needs.

See! Government run healthcare is GREAT!

Take away medicare and see how many of these people over 65 would be able to afford supplemental insurance. Dont look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[dmcowen674]

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick1985
Our resident leftwingers flew to this thread like stink on shit. rofl

So if the left-wingers are the stink, that means you must be...

At least they are admitting what they are these days.

 

[SammyJr]

Doing a little googling says 90 percent of people over 65 choose to have some kind of supplemental insurance because medicare doesn't meet their healthcare needs.

See! Government run healthcare is GREAT!

It is great. It provides baseline coverage and enables people to buy affordable packages to meet their individual needs. Sensible people realize that the public and private sector can and should be symbiotic, as it is for most people on Medicare.

It is only zealots who think that 100% private (or 100% public) is the way to go. You're as bad as a communist.

 

[waggy]

Take away medicare and see how many of these people over 65 would be able to afford supplemental insurance. Dont look a gift horse in the mouth.

and that's the thing spidey just can't understand. either it's political blindness or stupidity i don't know.

 

[theeedude]

This thread is par for the course for small government advocates.

 

[IronWing]

Spidey works in insurance. Trust him.

 

[dmcowen674]

and that's the thing spidey just can't understand. either it's political blindness or stupidity i don't know.

I go with stupidity based on age.

 

[spidey07]

and that's the thing spidey just can't understand. either it's political blindness or stupidity i don't know.

I understand it just fine, yes, healthcare and health insurance costs money and that money has to come from somewhere. Looking into other plans it doesn't seem like comprehensive insurance costs a whole lot more than the supplemental (seems to be about 50% increase). Even medicare itself allows you to pay for extra.

But how much money did seniors pour into the system? How much money are you and I dumping into it? If government insurance were so great, why the huge market and demand for more from the private sector?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The problem is most of the population of the US does not save for retirement that is why SS is neccessary. If you just got rid of SS as it is now most people would just spend that extra money that got each check and not save it in a 401k etc. It would be a lot worse later in life when these people are unable to work without a SS safety net.

Sure if everyone was super responsible with their money then i would agree that getting rid of SS is for the better. But with the eroding middle class and more and more people falling into lower income classes the chances of saving into 401k get slimmer and slimmer.

First of all, let's evaluate SS when it was created. When it was created the withdrawl age was 3 years past the life expectancy of people.

Now we're living 12 years past 65. How the hell does this work? The point of SS was designed not for retirement but people who saved up but end up living up a lot longer than they expected. You don't just chop off your head. Today I can save to live for 100. What happens if some miracle drug comes out and I live to 150? That was what SS was implemented for.

It's not so you can dick around and have enough money up til the day you retire and then you go BAM. Live off the government as a leecher for the rest of your life.

I'm not saying get rid of SS entirely. The concept is fine. Force people to save right? Because people are too dumb?

1) The lockbox principle is necessary: I'm sure anyone who believes in fiscal responsibility whether left or right should see that borrowing through SS funds and repaying it later with general funds is ridiculous. It's deficit spending. It's like a fucking payday advance loan or whatever the hell people do with terrible credit scores.

2) The SS fund is a general pool. If you want people to save, that's fine. It's like forcing everyone to put $1 in their piggy bank every week. Ok, so why can't it be MY piggy bank? My own funds? If you're forcing me to save, how about you let me manage it. You can argue 401ks and stocks are too risky. Fine, make it government bonds or some crap. There's stuff that gets you better than that ~1% ROR that your SS gets, but eliminate risky shit where people go completely broke. A balance, but in the end it needs to be me.

3) Better yet, allow people to opt out entirely and sign a waiver. You screw around? You lose your money? Don't come back and complain. Ever.

I'm not totally against the idea of building a safety net, but when the safety net is used to exploit government spending, that's ridiculous. When my money becomes someone else's money, that's ridiculous. My retirement is MY retirement.

Did you vote for Bush who expanded Medicare with prescription drug benefit?

So are you going to just be entirely retardedly black and white? I mean you're pulling a Bush here right? If you're not against Iraq you're a terrorist? Come on. Let's have a sensible debate here.

I already outlined certain things that make sense like the lockbox principle. Al Gore was right in that sense. But I also believed in Bush's idea of allowing younger folks the choice to opt out of SS which I believe to be a scam. Expansion of Medicare was a double edged sword. On one hand I hate Medicare, but on the other hand we're forced to pay into it. So if I'm forced to pay into it, making it better isn't that bad. Of course there was so much pork in that bill it just drove spending through the roof. So yeah, in the end I think it's a bad idea.

Also you know why this crap needed to be passed? Because Medicare sucked to begin with. Medicare gives us a lifeboat riddled with holes. You need Parts A and B and C to keep it afloat. Part D gives it paddles so you can row yourself to a fucking island. Sure I can just say screw the lifeboat and swim on my own, we've dug ourselves in the hole already. Part D just digs it deeper. It's a lose lose. Once again Medicare needs to die or get phased out because it's just gonna keep dragging us down.

I honestly think our efforts should be working to phase SS and Medicare out. It should be less and less in the budgets. The moeny should go into the people's hands. It's fine if you want to FORCE people to save, just allow them to have control of that money.

I say again. Look up the cost of private insurance for your father with his age and medical problems. Don't post in this thread again until you do.

Apples and oranges. Whether you agree with Spidey or not, at least use the facts on the table.

He's talking about SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE COST. His dad has already paid into Medicare. To tell him to consider the cost of private insurance right now without Medicare is worthless. If you want to compare the costs of the two, take all the money he's put into Medicare so far, allow it to grow at some shitty bank-dictated interest rate or whatever bonds grew at all these years, and look at his lump sum of money now. Does it pay for private insurance?

His dad has no choice but to accept Medicare unless he has a million or two stuffed in his mattress to pay for his own health insurance. We've already paid into it. Whether you like it or not, your money is there. Might as well put it to use right and accept Medicare coverage?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Doing a little googling says 90 percent of people over 65 choose to have some kind of supplemental insurance because medicare doesn't meet their healthcare needs.

See! Government run healthcare is GREAT!

this has been the case forever. and the ones who don't get it just flat out accept shitty coverage. it's like if you had close to no money the day after you retired, the government gave you free hot dogs for the rest of your life. okay, but then some stand opens up with "supplemental food" like a salad and drink. yeah, yo uwould probably buy that because you COULD live off of hot dogs for the rest of your life and sacrifice your health, or you could eat some veggies and have a real meal? lol.

the point is medicare stinks. unfortunately we have to put up with it until someone has the balls to kill it.

 

[Throckmorton]

this has been the case forever. and the ones who don't get it just flat out accept shitty coverage. it's like if you had close to no money the day after you retired, the government gave you free hot dogs for the rest of your life. okay, but then some stand opens up with "supplemental food" like a salad and drink. yeah, yo uwould probably buy that because you COULD live off of hot dogs for the rest of your life and sacrifice your health, or you could eat some veggies and have a real meal? lol.

the point is medicare stinks. unfortunately we have to put up with it until someone has the balls to kill it.

You and spidey just don't get it. The alternative to Medicare is no insurance for old people, because they aren't profitable without extremely high rates.

I can guarantee you that if spidey's dad didn't have Medicare, and he went to one of those insurance companies to buy a policy, he'd either get quoted an insanely high rate or laughed out of the door.

Private insurance is NOT charity, it's BUSINESS, and insuring the old and sick is bad business. How can it be so difficult to grasp something so basic? Maybe that lack of basic economic understanding has something to do with why people blindly believe that private everything is better?


I don't know how much more clearly I can say this. PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT

 

[Throckmorton]

First of all, let's evaluate SS when it was created. When it was created the withdrawl age was 3 years past the life expectancy of people.

Now we're living 12 years past 65. How the hell does this work? The point of SS was designed not for retirement but people who saved up but end up living up a lot longer than they expected. You don't just chop off your head. Today I can save to live for 100. What happens if some miracle drug comes out and I live to 150? That was what SS was implemented for.

It's not so you can dick around and have enough money up til the day you retire and then you go BAM. Live off the government as a leecher for the rest of your life.

I'm not saying get rid of SS entirely. The concept is fine. Force people to save right? Because people are too dumb?

1) The lockbox principle is necessary: I'm sure anyone who believes in fiscal responsibility whether left or right should see that borrowing through SS funds and repaying it later with general funds is ridiculous. It's deficit spending. It's like a fucking payday advance loan or whatever the hell people do with terrible credit scores.

2) The SS fund is a general pool. If you want people to save, that's fine. It's like forcing everyone to put $1 in their piggy bank every week. Ok, so why can't it be MY piggy bank? My own funds? If you're forcing me to save, how about you let me manage it. You can argue 401ks and stocks are too risky. Fine, make it government bonds or some crap. There's stuff that gets you better than that ~1% ROR that your SS gets, but eliminate risky shit where people go completely broke. A balance, but in the end it needs to be me.

3) Better yet, allow people to opt out entirely and sign a waiver. You screw around? You lose your money? Don't come back and complain. Ever.

I'm not totally against the idea of building a safety net, but when the safety net is used to exploit government spending, that's ridiculous. When my money becomes someone else's money, that's ridiculous. My retirement is MY retirement.



So are you going to just be entirely retardedly black and white? I mean you're pulling a Bush here right? If you're not against Iraq you're a terrorist? Come on. Let's have a sensible debate here.

I already outlined certain things that make sense like the lockbox principle. Al Gore was right in that sense. But I also believed in Bush's idea of allowing younger folks the choice to opt out of SS which I believe to be a scam. Expansion of Medicare was a double edged sword. On one hand I hate Medicare, but on the other hand we're forced to pay into it. So if I'm forced to pay into it, making it better isn't that bad. Of course there was so much pork in that bill it just drove spending through the roof. So yeah, in the end I think it's a bad idea.

Also you know why this crap needed to be passed? Because Medicare sucked to begin with. Medicare gives us a lifeboat riddled with holes. You need Parts A and B and C to keep it afloat. Part D gives it paddles so you can row yourself to a fucking island. Sure I can just say screw the lifeboat and swim on my own, we've dug ourselves in the hole already. Part D just digs it deeper. It's a lose lose. Once again Medicare needs to die or get phased out because it's just gonna keep dragging us down.

I honestly think our efforts should be working to phase SS and Medicare out. It should be less and less in the budgets. The moeny should go into the people's hands. It's fine if you want to FORCE people to save, just allow them to have control of that money.



Apples and oranges. Whether you agree with Spidey or not, at least use the facts on the table.

He's talking about SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE COST. His dad has already paid into Medicare. To tell him to consider the cost of private insurance right now without Medicare is worthless. If you want to compare the costs of the two, take all the money he's put into Medicare so far, allow it to grow at some shitty bank-dictated interest rate or whatever bonds grew at all these years, and look at his lump sum of money now. Does it pay for private insurance?

His dad has no choice but to accept Medicare unless he has a million or two stuffed in his mattress to pay for his own health insurance. We've already paid into it. Whether you like it or not, your money is there. Might as well put it to use right and accept Medicare coverage?

You completely missed the point of my post, which is that without Medicare, spidey's father wouldn't be insured, because no insurance company is that stupid. PRIVATE INSURANCE IS FOR PROFIT. AN 87 YEAR OLD WITH HEART PROBLEMS IS NOT PROFITABLE TO INSURE EXCEPT AT AN INSANELY HIGH RATE THAT OUTWEIGHS THE PAYOUTS.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

You completely missed the point of my post, which is that without Medicare, spidey's father wouldn't be insured, because no insurance company is that stupid. PRIVATE INSURANCE IS FOR PROFIT. AN 87 YEAR OLD WITH HEART PROBLEMS IS NOT PROFITABLE TO INSURE EXCEPT AT AN INSANELY HIGH RATE THAT OUTWEIGHS THE PAYOUTS.

Yeah but why is that a point? He's already paid into Medicare, so unless he gets back all that he's paid into Medicare, how is that even a fair comparison? The fact is yes, private insurance is a ripoff at 87 years old. I agree with you about that. But to say Medicare sucks doesn't mean you tell him to get off it and go with private insurance and see if he can afford it. It's just a lame comparison.

Spidey's point was that Medicare doesn't cover everything and yet we want this level of coverage extended to all Americans? Rather than to refute that, all people post is "well it would cost more to replace your medicare with private insurance." Well OBVIOUSLY.... because Medicare coverage is already guaranteed because he's paid a buttload into it already.

 

[spidey07]

You completely missed the point of my post, which is that without Medicare, spidey's father wouldn't be insured, because no insurance company is that stupid. PRIVATE INSURANCE IS FOR PROFIT. AN 87 YEAR OLD WITH HEART PROBLEMS IS NOT PROFITABLE TO INSURE EXCEPT AT AN INSANELY HIGH RATE THAT OUTWEIGHS THE PAYOUTS.

So you're admitting that medicare is wasteful government spending? If it's not profitable that means it's paying out more than it's taking in and is unsustainable.

 

[spidey07]

Yeah but why is that a point? He's already paid into Medicare, so unless he gets back all that he's paid into Medicare, how is that even a fair comparison? The fact is yes, private insurance is a ripoff at 87 years old. I agree with you about that. But to say Medicare sucks doesn't mean you tell him to get off it and go with private insurance and see if he can afford it. It's just a lame comparison.

Spidey's point was that Medicare doesn't cover everything and yet we want this level of coverage extended to all Americans? Rather than to refute that, all people post is "well it would cost more to replace your medicare with private insurance." Well OBVIOUSLY.... because Medicare coverage is already guaranteed because he's paid a buttload into it already.

Thank you for understanding the point of my OP. It was more to point out the inadequacies of government run insurance/healthcare.

 

[IronWing]

So you're admitting that medicare is wasteful government spending? If it's not profitable that means it's paying out more than it's taking in and is unsustainable.

Government doesn't have to make a profit, it isn't a business. Capitalism is a horrible model upon which to base a government.

 

[IronWing]

Thank you for understanding the point of my OP. It was more to point out the inadequacies of government run insurance/healthcare.

As opposed to private insurance which is incapable of providing coverage for people who actually need it such as the elderly and the chronically ill?

 

[Throckmorton]

Yeah but why is that a point? He's already paid into Medicare, so unless he gets back all that he's paid into Medicare, how is that even a fair comparison? The fact is yes, private insurance is a ripoff at 87 years old. I agree with you about that. But to say Medicare sucks doesn't mean you tell him to get off it and go with private insurance and see if he can afford it. It's just a lame comparison.

Spidey's point was that Medicare doesn't cover everything and yet we want this level of coverage extended to all Americans? Rather than to refute that, all people post is "well it would cost more to replace your medicare with private insurance." Well OBVIOUSLY.... because Medicare coverage is already guaranteed because he's paid a buttload into it already.

I'm NOT telling him to go off Medicare, I'm telling spidey that without Medicare his father wouldn't be insured.

 

[Throckmorton]

So you're admitting that medicare is wasteful government spending? If it's not profitable that means it's paying out more than it's taking in and is unsustainable.

Yes, Medicare is wasteful spending if spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep your father alive is wasteful spending.