Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Are We Still Discussing The Mandates?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:09 PM
Original message
Why Are We Still Discussing The Mandates?
I support single payer. That being said if you compel insurance companies to insure everybody regardless of their physical condition without a mandate you will literally have people purchasing insurance after they get sick which defeats the whole idea of insurance which is spreading the risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Everyone who gets hit with them hates them
The bullshit "reasoning" doesn't help either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Then Junk Obama's Whole Plan
It would be like buying homeowners insurance after your house went on fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. False comparison.
I am not mandated to have homeowners insurance or even a home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. No, But Those That Provide You With Homeowners Insurance
No, but those who provide homeowners insurance aren't compelled to insure you after your house goes on fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Bullshit argument
If it's insurance, you need a free market. Insurance companies need to compete for your dollar, and they need to compete to entice people who refuse to, or cannot, pay higher prices - that means they need to have downwards price pressure, like in any free market system. If they can raise rates and not run the risk of losing "customers", they're not in a free market and it's not insurance. It's called fascism.

When purchase is compelled, it's not "insurance" any more, it's more like a Monopoly board where you pay cash to a system of for-profit health panels who get paid to limit care each time you pass "go". No exceptions. And I don't have cash or a get out of jail free card. I'll have to take a "chance".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. If An Insurance Company Has To Insure Everyone They Will Just Pass On The Cost
Edited on Fri Apr-16-10 02:49 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
The insurance company will just pass on the risk in the form of higher premiums for everyone.

That's why the better your driving record the less expensive your automobile insurance is, the safer your home is the cheaper your homeowners insurance is, et cetera. Without the pooling of risk insurance wouldn't exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Increasing premiums is NOT passing on risk
Come on now. Surely you're not going to claim that raising prices is passing on risk? It's passing on COSTS, not risk. There is no risk and this is not insurance. How can you make any kind of sensible decision about this if you don't understand the basics?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. What Part Of "If You Force A Company To Insure Everybody" Their Costs Will Go Up ?
What part of "if you insure a company to insure everybod regardless of their status their costs will go up and they will pass if on in the form of higher premiums" don't you understand?


I have a question . What would happen to the preiums of the safe driver if an automobile insurance company was forced to insure everybody regardless of their driving record?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. Is that what
happens in Mass or Hawaii?

Those state have mandated insurance, yes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. You're right...
And I'm at a loss as to why this exceedingly valid point is lost on so many here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I'm Confused
If I understand the Massachusetts plan private insurance companies have to insure everybody regardless of their health status but every Massachusetts resident is required to buy health insurance thus spreading the risk.

Without mandates, the effort to compel insurance companies to insure people regardless of risk falls apart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Is that what
happens in Mass or Hawaii?

Those state have mandated insurance, yes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LetsgoWings13 Donating Member (144 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. the mandates make this bill worth not being for.
all it does it keep the insurance companies making money off my life. yes yes i know there are good things in the bill, but now we are beholden to the INSURANCE COMPANIES!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
13. maybe some people are still convinced by Obama's argument
when he opposed mandates in the primaries.

A lot of people have clearly unconvinced themselves since Obama changed his position, but it's going to take some time for everyone to come over to the currently correct position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC