Killing Obamacare means pre-existing conditions not covered!!!

Or look at it this way, perhaps lower premiums for preventable pre-existing conditions would be an incentive. In any event, this could've been addressed in standalone legislation and not lumped in with this albatross of a law.

 

Providing the coverage, they should not be able to discriminate. That opens the door for other discriminations.

Higher premiums for that coverage, yes, very much so.

 

Again, IF or COULD. Contact your rep. Campaign against the loss of PE coverage. COVID is not a PE for those who have had insurance previously, only for, once again, those who didn't see it as being necessary.

 

I have insurance as I stated before, but don't use it for every last thing. I pay cash quite often where I can.

Would you rather pay for something and the person is not receiving care, or would you rather pay for it when the person actually receives care?

 

The problem of pre-existing conditions is greatly exaggerated. For starters the current estimate that 100 million people will lose coverage for pre-existing if ACA is found unconstitutional is even more egregiously exaggerated than the hyperbolic estimate of the totally uninsured when Obamacare was first ballyhooed. Secondly, the vast majority of corporate sponsored heath plans, which are the providers for the vast majority of the insured, do not exclude pre-existing conditions, or, at worst, exclude coverage for certain conditions for a short period of time just like Medicare does for supplemental insurance. More to the point, legislating pre-existing conditions is relatively simple compared to all the baggage Obamacare brought with it.

 

Trump didn't write Obamacare...that was the Dems and the insurance companies....if the law is ruled illegal...blame those that wrote the illegal law.

Moreover, it's been Trump and the GOP that has repeatedly tried to pass a legal law that protects pre-existing conditions only to have the Dems block it at every turn, for pure political reasons...the Dems put part of country every chance they get

https://www.tillis.senate.gov/2020/...nditions/31e26a07-6610-4e71-b563-c2532a8b1433

 

thats how things were before the ACA.

 

Obamacare was already ruled Constitutional.

maybe you shouldn't discuss matters you have no idea about.

 

I disagree. There needs to be some skin in the game.

Some fast math: If you earned $70,000 a year, the 2.9% (1/2 you, 1/2 employer) is $2,030. A year. How quickly is the $2,030 burned up for actual health care? The rest of the costs are carried by people who aren't collecting on what they've paid into.

When someone contributes to their own expense, there is a different value placed on that expense. More likely to follow the providers direction, perhaps take better care of themselves in general. Value for dollars spent.

 

not for all the people on Obamacare who will LOSE their coverage for pre-existing conditions if SCOTUS kills the plan

 

no, i asked why they didnt pass any laws before 2010

 

part of it was....it's been challenged again...and the Circuit Court ruled it wasn't.....that's what happens with laws that aren't sound...they often get challenged.

Maybe you shouldn't discuss matters you have no idea about

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/18/health/obamacare-mandate.html

 

I've been saying this for years. About 3 pages of governmental legalese should about cover it.

I actually agree with PEs being covered, but at higher premiums to cover the known costs for a condition. Any number of people will jump on a plan, have an event covered or a PE addressed, and then drop the plan once done.

 

the point is, it is a pre-existing condition, and without laws the insurers could use it to raise costs to consumers

 

the supreme court is not ruling on the legality of Obamacare.

they are deciding if the whole program has to go since the individual mandate was killed and was a big part of the plan.

Maybe you shouldn't discuss matters you have no idea about

 

What it all boils down to, and this is the distinct difference between Liberals and Conservatives, is that Liberals want to control every aspect of our lives from womb to the tomb, and even beyond (death tax).

 

And again, if said PEC is preventable or reversible, wouldn't you use that higher premium as an incentive to address it, knowing you'd save a **** ton of money in the end?

 

the problem is, insurance for most is tied to their jobs, it's when they lose their jobs or retire that the issues start

 

no, Liberals want to protect peoples lives and Conservatives only care about life pre-birth

 

so anyone who played football as a child should pay more in insurance than everyone else?

Anyone that eats a high carb diet should pay more, even though they are following governmental dietary guidelines?

this will be used to control people, it's a slippery slope

 

if we all have the same plan, with the same benefits and regulations, we all save money.

but Conservatives want every American to go it alone.

Democrats believe we should be a united country, Republicans want every man for himself.

 

Not true and not fair with your broadbrush accusation. Liberals are all about the nannystate. Conservatives are all about individual liberty and freedom.

 

Not my problem, and not my responsibility. Just to make it abundantly clear, it isn't my damn job to pay for some methhead's rehab treatment. But this is exactly what the Left wants. Everyone else to pay for some moron's bad choices.

 

no, Conservatives care about "freedumb". They are happy with politicians and the rich having amazing healthcare and the poor and middle class struggling to pay medical bills.

freedom & liberty? more like slavery to debt and shitty medical care.

Democrats believe we should be a united country, Republicans want every man for himself.

 

Democrats are all about Communism. Everyone exactly identical in every way. Problem with that is people are unique, different, and have different needs.
A one-size-fits-all cookie cutter government approach won't work. This is where the private sector has the distinct advantage. Coverage can be tailor-made to fit the individual and his family's needs better than big daddy government.