Because conservatives in the legislature have made governing the state impossible. They're people like you, who believe in "personal responsibility".
Except for two years (95-96) the California State Assembly has been in Democratic hands since the 1970 election. The Senate has been in Democratic hands continuously since 1970.
climbing_vine
Well-known
Except for two years (95-96) the California State Assembly has been in Democratic hands since the 1970 election. The Senate has been in Democratic hands continuously since 1970.
As usual, correct only in a literal sense. Most aspects of budget management in California require a 2/3s vote, so the legislature has been a stalemate essentially for generations--with the real power accruing in the referendum system.
wgerrard
Veteran
I do not want, or need, my insurance to cover $3,000 events. Yes, I will be happy.
My out-of-pocket max is $5,000, so your example of the $80,000 bill would cost $5,000.
Then you have financial resources that most Americans do not, and will not, have.
In other words, your entire argument boils down to this: If other people had the "personal responsibility" to have as much money as I do, all this bother about health reform would go away.
Keep exposing the right for what it really is. People need to know.
climbing_vine
Well-known
I do not want, or need, my insurance to cover $3,000 events. Yes, I will be happy.
My out-of-pocket max is $5,000, so your example of the $80,000 bill would cost $5,000.
Are you still here? I thought you might've buggered off when you couldn't explain why you thought health insurance would magically have cut-throat competition in a national market when it is precisely the opposite in the state markets.
Brad Bireley
Well-known
Yes, it is silly. Until you can demonstrate that there are a meaningful number of these people out there, it's a red herring that is only raised as a thinly-veiled version of "screw all y'all, especially if you're not the same race as me."
I think I'll go grab my thesis which is indirectly about why Republicans hate anyone who says the same things that Jesus said in Matthew 5-7, and enjoy a tasty bowl of the venison stew from a deer that I harvested, dressed, and butchered in order to avoid supporting factory farming.
Whoa, sorry, did I just blow up your convenient bull**** pigeonhole? Sorry!
Why do you have to get so angry? I'm sorry but I didn't say I hated anyone.
gb hill
Veteran
Yes, it is silly. Until you can demonstrate that there are a meaningful number of these people out there, it's a red herring that is only raised as a thinly-veiled version of "screw all y'all, especially if you're not the same race as me."
I think I'll go grab my thesis which is indirectly about why Republicans hate anyone who says the same things that Jesus said in Matthew 5-7, and enjoy a tasty bowl of the venison stew from a deer that I harvested, dressed, and butchered in order to avoid supporting factory farming.
Whoa, sorry, did I just blow up your convenient bull**** pigeonhole? Sorry!
...and you should read vs.9 in your thesis which says...blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Don't sound too much like your a peacemaker the way your calling everyone names around here.
Then you have financial resources that most Americans do not, and will not, have.
In other words, your entire argument boils down to this: If other people had the "personal responsibility" to have as much money as I do, all this bother about health reform would go away.
Keep exposing the right for what it really is. People need to know.
Not hardly. I simply have chosen a deductible that makes sense for me. Other people may choose differently, especially if they had more choices, which would be the result if people could actually do interstate commerce to buy health insurance.
Also, any $5,000 I have to spend comes out of a health savings account. Which actually draws interest and is deductible like an IRA.
You should look into it.
wgerrard
Veteran
You know, the northern half of Alaska is pretty big, and empty. And it's got all that oil. I propose that we give free land to all the righties so they can go there, be personally responsible, avoid being forced to do anything, live without Evil Government, and watch as competition works its wonders and turns the place into a Jeffersonian utopia of hardy yeoman farmers who don't need no stinkin' help from anyone..
Of course, we'd need to build a border protection fence along its southern border, but that's a good conservative idea, anyway.
Of course, we'd need to build a border protection fence along its southern border, but that's a good conservative idea, anyway.
climbing_vine
Well-known
...and you should read vs.9 in your thesis which says...blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Don't sound too much like your a peacemaker the way your calling everyone names around here.
Sound advice; unlike many here, I'm willing to admit that I've fallen short, etc etc.
Are you still here? I thought you might've buggered off when you couldn't explain why you thought health insurance would magically have cut-throat competition in a national market when it is precisely the opposite in the state markets.
You explained it yourself. If the market is open for all comers, what's going to happen? If an insurance company servicing the 2.5 M population of Arkansas, had an opportunity to serve ten times that number in Texas, and more elsewhere, they would go for the additional market. The shareholders would be happy to see their investments increase in value from such additional activity.
gb hill
Veteran
Sound advice; unlike many here, I'm willing to admit that I've fallen short, etc etc.
I respect that of you. None of us are perfect & we tend to get heated up.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
I do not want, or need, my insurance to cover $3,000 events. Yes, I will be happy.
My out-of-pocket max is $5,000, so your example of the $80,000 bill would cost $5,000.
Good luck with that.
Of course, the insurance company could find some loophole to deny you coverage altogether. They do it all the time. The practice even has a name: recission. A recent congressional investigation found nearly 20,000 recissions from three large insurers over five years saved the companies $300-million in medical claims.
John Rountree
Nothing is what I want
As for the drill here, drill now, argument... Do any of you really think that oil drawn from US waters or the interior will be sold only to Americans? The oil found anywhere is destined for the world market. If Japan wants to pay more, they will get the oil, not the US. It doesn't matter where it comes from, it all feeds the world market.
I've had luck with that, thank you.
How many claims were non-recission? Just curious.
How many claims were non-recission? Just curious.
Good luck with that.
Of course, the insurance company could find some loophole to deny you coverage altogether. They do it all the time. The practice even has a name: recission. A recent congressional investigation found nearly 20,000 recissions from three large insurers over five years saved the companies $300-million in medical claims.
climbing_vine
Well-known
You explained it yourself. If the market is open for all comers, what's going to happen? If an insurance company servicing the 2.5 M population of Arkansas, had an opportunity to serve ten times that number in Texas, and more elsewhere, they would go for the additional market. The shareholders would be happy to see their investments increase in value from such additional activity.
You're still avoiding the question with unsupported assertions. Why didn't it work that way within states? Why didn't health insurance companies in Toledo, Youngstown, Akron and Canton expand into the much larger market of Cincinnati, leaving us with five competitors all offering top-notch service at low prices?
Figure out why this is, and you'll find out for yourself (I've already told you, but it sticks more when you learn it on your own) why the "across state lines" thing is a canard for the gullible. No offense. We're all gullible in different areas, nobody can know everything.
gb hill
Veteran
Good luck with that.
Of course, the insurance company could find some loophole to deny you coverage altogether. They do it all the time. The practice even has a name: recission. A recent congressional investigation found nearly 20,000 recissions from three large insurers over five years saved the companies $300-million in medical claims.
This is why we need a fix to the current solution instead of a taxation of government run health care. The insurance companies only get away with what is allowed to them.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
I've had luck with that, thank you.
How many claims were non-recission? Just curious.
I don't know the answer. But what would it matter? The fact that denials of any legitimate claims for coverage take place is pretty damning, let alone 20,000 in 5 years among only three companies.
Brian, perhaps it has? I don't know the situation in Ohio, nobody can know everything. I know that I have an individual HSA policy that I got for a very reasonable price. But I will always, ALWAYS, want additional choices to be available to me.
Let me put it to you this way, what if you could not order a camera mail order from New York, due to a law that prevented you from doing so?
Let me put it to you this way, what if you could not order a camera mail order from New York, due to a law that prevented you from doing so?
climbing_vine
Well-known
Brian, perhaps it has? I don't know the situation in Ohio, nobody can know everything. I know that I have an individual HSA policy that I got for a very reasonable price. But I will always, ALWAYS, want additional choices to be available to me.
Let me put it to you this way, what if you could not order a camera mail order from New York, due to a law that prevented you from doing so?
It'd most likely be non-sensical and should be gotten rid of... but it would be irrelevant to solving the film-is-disappearing crisis, if you'll allow me to stretch the metaphor. Film is disappearing and processing increasingly expensive because digital is perceived to be easier, cheaper, and more reliable. Not because of a lack of competition.
I don't know the answer. But what would it matter? The fact that denials of any legitimate claims for coverage take place is pretty damning, let alone 20,000 in 5 years among only three companies.
Well first, I have no idea if those are valid statistics. Even if true, is this a valid reason to junk the entire system and have the government run it, when the government has shown complete incompetence running any sort of program, for decades? Or would it be better to directly address recission?
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.