It's a right to have ACCESS to healthcare. It is NOT a right to HAVE healthcare*. There's nothing constitutional about the fed.gov getting into the healthcare business or mandating that everyone has healthcare coverage on the backs of others. It's. Just. That. Simple.
I believe that people should be treated as individuals and not as a group when it comes to something like health insurance. Health insurance isn’t health care. You pay for both, but you get treated by health care providers. Insurance providers are people who want your money in exchange for agreeing to pay for some of your bills. Agreements are complicated because the people who sell insurance don’t want to pay all of your bills because they also have to make money. If you include the government, how will this help anything or anybody? (It doesn’t and it never will)
You missed the third reason: If the provider has a "loss" on an raised sticker price they still can write it off as a loss against their profit reported to the IRS, resulting in an incentive to make charges as high as possible knowing they won't get reimbursed for the whole thing.The medical providers know this is going to happen so they raise the "sticker price" (e.g., that charged to someone without insurance) for two reasons. First, the higher the charge the more is left after the insurance company negotiates their reduction. Second, those with no insurance help pick up some of the profit margin lost because of the insurance company's lower negotiate rates.
You missed the third reason: If the provider has a "loss" on an raised sticker price they still can write it off as a loss against their profit reported to the IRS, resulting in an incentive to make charges as high as possible knowing they won't get reimbursed for the whole thing.
I understand your point. It’s not “insurance” at that point. It’s welfare.The entire idea behind insurance is risk pools. Not about risk for each unique individual.
And should a person become so unfortunate as to be struck down a major illness (which can easily be beyond that person's control - e.g., cancer, etc.), that person might have a little different viewpoint on this topic.
One scenario (that has happened many times). Person comes down with cancer. Then they get laid off due to plant closing or whatever. Now they cannot get insurance because no one wants to take on a insuree with a major medical condition. They get no assistance with their medical bills. And since those without insurance help subsidize those with insurance (see below), this person is broke in short order.
You see, when someone looks at their benefits statements they find that the medical provider drastically reduced their charge. The insurance company pays a small amount, your deductible/copay pays a small amount.
The medical providers know this is going to happen so they raise the "sticker price" (e.g., that charged to someone without insurance) for two reasons. First, the higher the charge the more is left after the insurance company negotiates their reduction. Second, those with no insurance help pick up some of the profit margin lost because of the insurance company's lower negotiate rates.
I understand your point. It’s not “insurance” at that point. It’s welfare.
Remember when time to vote: Get off your butts and vote for Cruz.
Ah, unless you 'want' to be disarmed in an evolving socialist state, similar to california.
HehI’ll just leave this here.
https://katrinapierson.com/beto-orourke-just-showed-everyone-how-to-lose-an-election-in-texas/
I had no idea that Ted Cruz had such an long list of accomplishments to his credit. This is not an endorsement of him, but if this list from Young Conservatives is totally valid, Cruz is a certainly a competent, worthy presidential candidate. The public should be made aware of this information that even I had little idea of. However, not all of our readers would be interested in or happy about every one of these items. Still they do indicate an exceptionally active, competent person consistently dedicated to the rule of law and the defense of American principles.
No wonder there are rumors going around that if Cruz does not get the Republican nomination he would alternatively love to be the next appointed Supreme Court justice. He appears to be quite worthy of such a high legal appointment...
Full article: https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/blogs/ted-cruzs-astonishing-credentials