4 ms·

I don't follow politics, what are the arguments against allowing insurance companies to make such decisions?

adrusi 14y ago
If people are denied health insurance then they are treated as second class in hospitals that know they wont be able to pay for their care and people die. No matter who you are your right to free business practice is second to people's rights to live.
anonymoushn 14y ago
In the United States, the medical industry is allowed to vary prices significantly based on the method of payment, and the cost of buying care without insurance is much higher than the cost of buying care with insurance. This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. So the argument goes that, given that the taxpayer is already responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone, it would be reasonable to compel everyone to buy prepaid health plans. In order to compel people to buy these, they must be available to everyone, so the government must also prevent insurance companies from refusing to sell prepaid health plans to people who are certain to use them. I use the phrase "prepaid health plan" rather than "insurance," because insurance is purchased to protect against future risk, but a prepaid health plan will cover things that occurred in the past and things that are not risks but certainties. It's a pretty sound argument as long as you don't ask "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?"
- npsimons 14y ago
  "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?" The answer to that is another question: do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death?
  - derleth 14y ago
    > do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death? You know, for some people, the answer to that is "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem."
    - npsimons 14y ago
      "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem." "Oh, you got old and need medical assistance? Sorry, not my problem." "You've been shot? Maybe you shouldn't have looked so suspicious to that cop. Not my problem." "You have cancer from all the pollutants in the air and water that my company produces, but you can't afford health care because we laid you off? Not my problem."
    - jentulman 14y ago
      Then those people wont mind if they're denied treatment after irresponsibly allowing themselves to be hit by a drunk driver.
    - Ygg2 14y ago
      > Actions have consequences. So, assuming I'm born with genetic defect that escalates into brain tumors, I shouldn't have been conceived since the my genes gave me 15% higher chance of developing spontaneous brain tumors. That sounds like a wonderful society. As correct as it sounds (to quantum theorists at least), some consequences, don't have actions, other than "being born" or "happening".
      - derleth 14y ago
        Right. I actually agree with you, but sarcasm doesn't translate well to every reader.
        npsimons 14y ago
- MichaelSalib 14y ago
  This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. Note that this only works for emergency room care. Emergency rooms don't provide cancer treatment or dental surgery or lots of other things we consider to be medical problems. And even for problems that the ER will treat, they will only get you stable: so, if you have a heart attack, they'll stabilize you, but they won't put in stents or do any of the followup care that a good cardiologist would do in the weeks after your heart attack.

If people are denied health insurance then they are treated as second class in hospitals that know they wont be able to pay for their care and people die. No matter who you are your right to free business practice is second to people's rights to live.

anonymoushn 14y ago

In the United States, the medical industry is allowed to vary prices significantly based on the method of payment, and the cost of buying care without insurance is much higher than the cost of buying care with insurance. This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. So the argument goes that, given that the taxpayer is already responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone, it would be reasonable to compel everyone to buy prepaid health plans. In order to compel people to buy these, they must be available to everyone, so the government must also prevent insurance companies from refusing to sell prepaid health plans to people who are certain to use them. I use the phrase "prepaid health plan" rather than "insurance," because insurance is purchased to protect against future risk, but a prepaid health plan will cover things that occurred in the past and things that are not risks but certainties. It's a pretty sound argument as long as you don't ask "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?"

npsimons 14y ago
"Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?" The answer to that is another question: do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death?
- derleth 14y ago
  > do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death? You know, for some people, the answer to that is "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem."
  - npsimons 14y ago
    "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem." "Oh, you got old and need medical assistance? Sorry, not my problem." "You've been shot? Maybe you shouldn't have looked so suspicious to that cop. Not my problem." "You have cancer from all the pollutants in the air and water that my company produces, but you can't afford health care because we laid you off? Not my problem."
  - jentulman 14y ago
    Then those people wont mind if they're denied treatment after irresponsibly allowing themselves to be hit by a drunk driver.
  - Ygg2 14y ago
    > Actions have consequences. So, assuming I'm born with genetic defect that escalates into brain tumors, I shouldn't have been conceived since the my genes gave me 15% higher chance of developing spontaneous brain tumors. That sounds like a wonderful society. As correct as it sounds (to quantum theorists at least), some consequences, don't have actions, other than "being born" or "happening".
    - derleth 14y ago
      Right. I actually agree with you, but sarcasm doesn't translate well to every reader.
      - npsimons 14y ago
MichaelSalib 14y ago
This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. Note that this only works for emergency room care. Emergency rooms don't provide cancer treatment or dental surgery or lots of other things we consider to be medical problems. And even for problems that the ER will treat, they will only get you stable: so, if you have a heart attack, they'll stabilize you, but they won't put in stents or do any of the followup care that a good cardiologist would do in the weeks after your heart attack.