Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-11-2013, 08:06 PM
Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
Insurance has been around for hundreds of years, most people ultimately buy insurance at one point in their lives, and the definition is so simple it can be summed in 2 short sentences:

From wikipedia: Insurance is the equitable transfer of the risk of a loss, from one entity to another in exchange for payment. It is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss.

Car insurance (comp & coll) covers your car in the event of an accident or natural disaster, because those are RISKS, and we pay a premium (insurance) to manage that risk. Car insurance does NOT cover oil changes, tires and brakes. There is NO RISK with those expense. You KNOW in advance that you're going to incur them. Sure, companies will sell plans that cover them. But they are NOT insurance plans. They are maintenance plans.

Health insurance is no different. Like all insurance, it is a way to manage risk--the risk that maybe you'll be unfortunate and get cancer or get hit by a bus and be faced with major bills. When companies like Blue Cross cover planned, predictable expenses like routine checkups, it is NOT insurance! There is no risk, and the management of risk IS the very definition of insurance. Rather it is a maintenance plan, just like the car maintenance plan that covers oil changes, tires and brakes.

So when you listen to people like Obama and many on this forum say that Obamacare mandates everyone buy "health insurance", you have to ask yourself, "Since they don't even know what health insurance is, can we REALLY rely on their opinion of it?" Obamcare makes it illegal to get health insurance, and it mandates everyone buy a health maintenance plan instead.

Next ask financial advisers if maintenance plans are a good value. Anybody who understands the system will say "No, they're a rip off for suckers. It's stupid to pay a middle-man a premium to cover what is a predictable expense". Heck, Best Buy trains their sales people to always offer "maintenance plans" and provides very generous commissions on them, and they can get in trouble if they don't sell any. Why? Because it's pure profit. It's a sucker plan, where a fool and is his money are soon parted. In another post I provided a spreadsheet proving that health maintenance plans are just as much a rip off and will cost the average man at least $1 million over the course of his life.

Why is this concept so complicated for the self-proclaimed liberals to understand? Why can't get their heads around the difference between health insurance (which has value as it's a service to manage risk) vs. health maintenance plans (where you're paying a middle-man a premium to cover predictable expenses)?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
03-11-2013, 09:13 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
Quote:Why is this concept so complicated for the self-proclaimed liberals to understand?

Because we are not dicks like insurance company executives who would be perfectly happy to let sick people die if it means a bigger bottom line for the company?

Just a guess.

[Image: reality.jpg?imgmax=800]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like Minimalist's post
03-11-2013, 09:17 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 09:13 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
Quote:Why is this concept so complicated for the self-proclaimed liberals to understand?

Because we are not dicks like insurance company executives who would be perfectly happy to let sick people die if it means a bigger bottom line for the company?

Just a guess.

I agree with this reason. Smile

You don't die from not having regular maintenance and check ups on your car.
Ask any doctor though, regular check ups and preventive care can save your life in the long run.

Although I don't really care for the ACA. I am all for universal healthcare.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Losty's post
03-11-2013, 10:06 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
@Minimalist, @LostandInsecure,

Did my whole post go over your head? What did the post have to do with bottom lines or dying? Nothing. I was explaining the difference between insurance vs. a maintenance plan. If you haven't grasped yet the difference between insurance (a service to manage risk) vs. a maintenance plan, how can you possibly comment on what is better? Seriously read the wikipedia page on "Insurance". Get familiar with the concept and what insurance means, and re-read my post. Once you understand what insurance and maintenance plans actually are, THEN we can discuss which one is better.

Quote:Because we are not dicks like insurance company executives who would be perfectly happy to let sick people die if it means a bigger bottom line for the company

Once you understand what insurance is, you should read up on what Obamacare actually does, because it seems you think it's the opposite of what it actually is. Yes, insurance companies ARE run by dicks who are happy to let you die if it boosts their bottom line. But what Obamacare does is force you to put your life in the hands of those dicks. Obamacare makes you beholden to those dicks, and empowers those dicks to decide if you live or die. Before Obamacare you were able to avoid those dicks and could decide for yourself what doctor to see and what treatment you needed. Now with Obamacare those dicks make the decision for you.

Do you understand that? If you really believe what you wrote in that quote above, wouldn't you want the OPPOSITE of Obamacare--something that freed you from the dicks instead of putting your fate in their hands?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 10:38 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 10:06 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @Minimalist, @LostandInsecure,

Did my whole post go over your head? What did the post have to do with bottom lines or dying? Nothing. I was explaining the difference between insurance vs. a maintenance plan. If you haven't grasped yet the difference between insurance (a service to manage risk) vs. a maintenance plan, how can you possibly comment on what is better? Seriously read the wikipedia page on "Insurance". Get familiar with the concept and what insurance means, and re-read my post. Once you understand what insurance and maintenance plans actually are, THEN we can discuss which one is better.

Quote:Because we are not dicks like insurance company executives who would be perfectly happy to let sick people die if it means a bigger bottom line for the company

Once you understand what insurance is, you should read up on what Obamacare actually does, because it seems you think it's the opposite of what it actually is. Yes, insurance companies ARE run by dicks who are happy to let you die if it boosts their bottom line. But what Obamacare does is force you to put your life in the hands of those dicks. Obamacare makes you beholden to those dicks, and empowers those dicks to decide if you live or die. Before Obamacare you were able to avoid those dicks and could decide for yourself what doctor to see and what treatment you needed. Now with Obamacare those dicks make the decision for you.

Do you understand that? If you really believe what you wrote in that quote above, wouldn't you want the OPPOSITE of Obamacare--something that freed you from the dicks instead of putting your fate in their hands?

If you mean dying from something or other because I cannot afford medical care without it then no I don't want the opposite (I hate when people call it Obamacare Obama didn't think of it). There is good and bad in the ACA. Again, what we need is universal healthcare. I am so tired of hearing the bitching to be honest. All I hear about and read about day in and day out is Obamacare this and Obamacare that wah wah wah.
If someone has a better idea that will still save all the people with pre-existing conditions and those who cannot afford health insurance lets hear it.
Also, I think it is silly that you propose to tell me what insurance is or is not by comparing it to car insurance. My insurance covers well checks and preventive care, hell it even covers toothbrushes for my kids. So you can tell me what you think insurance should be, but that doesn't mean that is what it is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Losty's post
03-11-2013, 11:08 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 10:38 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  If you mean dying from something or other because I cannot afford medical care without it then no I don't want the opposite (I hate when people call it Obamacare Obama didn't think of it). There is good and bad in the ACA. Again, what we need is universal healthcare. I am so tired of hearing the bitching to be honest. All I hear about and read about day in and day out is Obamacare this and Obamacare that wah wah wah.

That's because an estimated 5 to 15 million people in the US have recently received cancellation notices from their insurance companies saying they no longer will have health insurance. I'm one of them. I received a notice from Blue Cross that the insurance plan I had, which was a good plan that I liked, and which Obama promised I could keep, is no longer allowed because it's non-ACA compliant, and the only plans that I can get instead cost 5x as much. Leaked memos showed that Obama knew he was lying when he uttered those words, and he knew millions of Americans would LOSE their health insurance under Obamacare.

So, you see, for millions of Americans, Obamacare does mean, as you said "dying from something because I cannot afford medical care [and lost my health insurance due to Obamacare]." Again, it's the opposite of what you think it is. Sure, some people who didn't have insurance before can now get it. But the facts indicate that's only a handful, maybe as few as 1,000 (which is why Obama won't release the numbers), but the number of people LOSING access to health care is estimated to be 5% of the population.

Understand why people are so outraged??

Quote:If someone has a better idea that will still save all the people with pre-existing conditions and those who cannot afford health insurance lets hear it.

I already did. See post #40. It shows how an average person making an average income could get all the health care he needs, even if he's unfortunate and suffers with pre-existing conditions and above-average medical costs. And with this plan, you spend the same amount you would for Obamacare, BUT, even with those above-average medical costs, you'll end up with $3.5 million in your old age to spend however you like. And I know it works, because it's the plan I've been following so far, and I'm now 40 and have enough of a buffer saved up to deal with any eventuality. Thus my biggest gripe is NOT about ME losing insurance, since I'm already set financially. It's that all the young kids starting out now no longer have the options I did to get ahead, and will be beholden to insurance company dicks their whole life.

Quote:Also, I think it is silly that you propose to tell me what insurance is or is not by comparing it to car insurance. My insurance covers well checks and preventive care, hell it even covers toothbrushes for my kids. So you can tell me what you think insurance should be, but that doesn't mean that is what it is.

I am saying what insurance IS. I am using the legal, technical definitions found in dictionaries and encyclopedias. YOU are using the term wrong. I dare you to find one authoritative source that defines 'insurance' as covering routine purchases like toothbrushes. You may call it insurance, but it IS NOT INSURANCE. Insurance is legally and technically defined as a risk management service, explained Wikipedia: Insurance. What you have you may CALL it insurance, and the provider may CALL it insurance, but if you look up the definition of insurance in the dictionary or the encyclopedia, it is NOT insurance. It is something else.

We can debate the merits of this plan which you erroneously call "insurance", but it's pointless until you get your head around these concepts and understand what it is that you're talking about. As long as you keep misstating it, referring to it as insurance (ie risk management), when in fact there is no risk, it just shows you're confused. Like I said, you guys can't get your head around the definition of insurance, even though wikipedia and every encyclopedia explains it in plain english.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
03-11-2013, 11:20 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 11:08 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:38 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  If you mean dying from something or other because I cannot afford medical care without it then no I don't want the opposite (I hate when people call it Obamacare Obama didn't think of it). There is good and bad in the ACA. Again, what we need is universal healthcare. I am so tired of hearing the bitching to be honest. All I hear about and read about day in and day out is Obamacare this and Obamacare that wah wah wah.

That's because an estimated 5 to 15 million people in the US have recently received cancellation notices from their insurance companies saying they no longer will have health insurance. I'm one of them. I received a notice from Blue Cross that the insurance plan I had, which was a good plan that I liked, and which Obama promised I could keep, is no longer allowed because it's non-ACA compliant, and the only plans that I can get instead cost 5x as much. Leaked memos showed that Obama knew he was lying when he uttered those words, and he knew millions of Americans would LOSE their health insurance under Obamacare.

So, you see, for millions of Americans, Obamacare does mean, as you said "dying from something because I cannot afford medical care [and lost my health insurance due to Obamacare]." Again, it's the opposite of what you think it is. Sure, some people who didn't have insurance before can now get it. But the facts indicate that's only a handful, maybe as few as 1,000 (which is why Obama won't release the numbers), but the number of people LOSING access to health care is estimated to be 5% of the population.

Understand why people are so outraged??

Quote:If someone has a better idea that will still save all the people with pre-existing conditions and those who cannot afford health insurance lets hear it.

I already did. See post #40. It shows how an average person making an average income could get all the health care he needs, even if he's unfortunate and suffers with pre-existing conditions and above-average medical costs. And with this plan, you spend the same amount you would for Obamacare, BUT, even with those above-average medical costs, you'll end up with $3.5 million in your old age to spend however you like. And I know it works, because it's the plan I've been following so far, and I'm now 40 and have enough of a buffer saved up to deal with any eventuality. Thus my biggest gripe is NOT about ME losing insurance, since I'm already set financially. It's that all the young kids starting out now no longer have the options I did to get ahead, and will be beholden to insurance company dicks their whole life.

Quote:Also, I think it is silly that you propose to tell me what insurance is or is not by comparing it to car insurance. My insurance covers well checks and preventive care, hell it even covers toothbrushes for my kids. So you can tell me what you think insurance should be, but that doesn't mean that is what it is.

I am saying what insurance IS. I am using the legal, technical definitions found in dictionaries and encyclopedias. YOU are using the term wrong. I dare you to find one authoritative source that defines 'insurance' as covering routine purchases like toothbrushes. You may call it insurance, but it IS NOT INSURANCE. Insurance is legally and technically defined as a risk management service, explained Wikipedia: Insurance. What you have you may CALL it insurance, and the provider may CALL it insurance, but if you look up the definition of insurance in the dictionary or the encyclopedia, it is NOT insurance. It is something else.

We can debate the merits of this plan which you erroneously call "insurance", but it's pointless until you get your head around these concepts and understand what it is that you're talking about. As long as you keep misstating it, referring to it as insurance (ie risk management), when in fact there is no risk, it just shows you're confused. Like I said, you guys can't get your head around the definition of insurance, even though wikipedia and every encyclopedia explains it in plain english.

Maybe you should go to healthcare.gov, I bet you could get a cheaper plan with better coverage anyways Wink

What you should try to get around your head is that the definition is freaking irrelevant. I call it insurance because my insurance agency calls it insurance. Not confused, I just don't care about your silly little technicalities. All that matters to me is that I have the plan and I like what is covered under it. You can call it whatever you like, love, it makes no difference to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 11:34 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 11:08 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:38 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  If you mean dying from something or other because I cannot afford medical care without it then no I don't want the opposite (I hate when people call it Obamacare Obama didn't think of it). There is good and bad in the ACA. Again, what we need is universal healthcare. I am so tired of hearing the bitching to be honest. All I hear about and read about day in and day out is Obamacare this and Obamacare that wah wah wah.

That's because an estimated 5 to 15 million people in the US have recently received cancellation notices from their insurance companies saying they no longer will have health insurance. I'm one of them. I received a notice from Blue Cross that the insurance plan I had, which was a good plan that I liked, and which Obama promised I could keep, is no longer allowed because it's non-ACA compliant, and the only plans that I can get instead cost 5x as much. Leaked memos showed that Obama knew he was lying when he uttered those words, and he knew millions of Americans would LOSE their health insurance under Obamacare.

So, you see, for millions of Americans, Obamacare does mean, as you said "dying from something because I cannot afford medical care [and lost my health insurance due to Obamacare]." Again, it's the opposite of what you think it is. Sure, some people who didn't have insurance before can now get it. But the facts indicate that's only a handful, maybe as few as 1,000 (which is why Obama won't release the numbers), but the number of people LOSING access to health care is estimated to be 5% of the population.

Understand why people are so outraged??

Quote:If someone has a better idea that will still save all the people with pre-existing conditions and those who cannot afford health insurance lets hear it.

I already did. See post #40. It shows how an average person making an average income could get all the health care he needs, even if he's unfortunate and suffers with pre-existing conditions and above-average medical costs. And with this plan, you spend the same amount you would for Obamacare, BUT, even with those above-average medical costs, you'll end up with $3.5 million in your old age to spend however you like. And I know it works, because it's the plan I've been following so far, and I'm now 40 and have enough of a buffer saved up to deal with any eventuality. Thus my biggest gripe is NOT about ME losing insurance, since I'm already set financially. It's that all the young kids starting out now no longer have the options I did to get ahead, and will be beholden to insurance company dicks their whole life.

Quote:Also, I think it is silly that you propose to tell me what insurance is or is not by comparing it to car insurance. My insurance covers well checks and preventive care, hell it even covers toothbrushes for my kids. So you can tell me what you think insurance should be, but that doesn't mean that is what it is.

I am saying what insurance IS. I am using the legal, technical definitions found in dictionaries and encyclopedias. YOU are using the term wrong. I dare you to find one authoritative source that defines 'insurance' as covering routine purchases like toothbrushes. You may call it insurance, but it IS NOT INSURANCE. Insurance is legally and technically defined as a risk management service, explained Wikipedia: Insurance. What you have you may CALL it insurance, and the provider may CALL it insurance, but if you look up the definition of insurance in the dictionary or the encyclopedia, it is NOT insurance. It is something else.

We can debate the merits of this plan which you erroneously call "insurance", but it's pointless until you get your head around these concepts and understand what it is that you're talking about. As long as you keep misstating it, referring to it as insurance (ie risk management), when in fact there is no risk, it just shows you're confused. Like I said, you guys can't get your head around the definition of insurance, even though wikipedia and every encyclopedia explains it in plain english.

The ACA is an abomination, but one thing that could be done right away to improve it is to restore insurance plans that are true insurance and not comprehensive plans.

The ACA is nothing more than a generation wealth transfer program. The way that the insurance companies pay for covering people with pre-existing conditions and provide all the required mandated coverage is to charge young people for a product they do not need and do not use. If you allow people to only buy the insurance they actually need, the ACA falls apart. This is why the libs will never allow people to buy insurance only anymore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 11:44 PM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 11:58 PM by ridethespiral.)
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
Because I am not a fucking car Frank!

Insurance is damn near the most convoluted purchase one makes. It is exorbitantly expensive. Our entire system is only viable for people skilled enough/lucky enough/or sheep enough to have a 40hr per week job with good benefits (and that also means that you are stuck with what your greedy corporate overlords in HR decide you get) that take advantage of bulk purchasing to lower rates. When you ensure a vehicle and then stick it in a garage for 5 years because you move to the city it can be insured once more but if you loose your job and lapse for even a month with medical insurance your next insurer will shaft you so hard at any opportunity to deny you coverage that it's mind boggling.

How about because if you get cancer your insurer might decided that the radiation is too expensive so you need to pick between it and chemo. Not to mention fucked up rules about when you can see a doctor, sick vs. well visits (I had to have a sick visit in order to switch doctors).

Because if you don't buy insurance treatments for cancer or lifetime prescriptions will have you shit broke with a reverse mortgage before you even get to retirement...and even if you do have it you'll probably have to load up your credit card and then fight a court battle to get covered.

How about because without reform we continue to go about providing emergency room care for the poor, forced to use the ER as their only source of care, the same hospitals billing your insurance $32 for a box of tissues. It has been proven in studies that caring for chronic patients early and outside of the ER saves millions and millions of dollars.

Or how about because I'm genetically predisposed to give a shit about other human beings rather than watch them starve while some eat up whole herds. Because I don't want to live in a fucked up Ayn-Rand-ian distopia and I understand that The Affordable Care Act is a step closer to that goal even if it is still a giant fucking blowjob for big pharma/ins/medical.

Ohh and BTW your favorite country Switzerland has, you guessed it, the same type of compulsory, part private, part corporate healthcare!

PS. Obama didn't lie, private insurers eliminated or changed those plans. Would you rather have had the "big bawd gubbermint" force those sovereign and holy corporations to offer the same plans?

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like ridethespiral's post
03-11-2013, 11:54 PM
RE: Why can't liberals get their around the concept of "insurance"?
(03-11-2013 11:20 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 11:08 PM)frankksj Wrote:  That's because an estimated 5 to 15 million people in the US have recently received cancellation notices from their insurance companies saying they no longer will have health insurance. I'm one of them. I received a notice from Blue Cross that the insurance plan I had, which was a good plan that I liked, and which Obama promised I could keep, is no longer allowed because it's non-ACA compliant, and the only plans that I can get instead cost 5x as much. Leaked memos showed that Obama knew he was lying when he uttered those words, and he knew millions of Americans would LOSE their health insurance under Obamacare.

So, you see, for millions of Americans, Obamacare does mean, as you said "dying from something because I cannot afford medical care [and lost my health insurance due to Obamacare]." Again, it's the opposite of what you think it is. Sure, some people who didn't have insurance before can now get it. But the facts indicate that's only a handful, maybe as few as 1,000 (which is why Obama won't release the numbers), but the number of people LOSING access to health care is estimated to be 5% of the population.

Understand why people are so outraged??


I already did. See post #40. It shows how an average person making an average income could get all the health care he needs, even if he's unfortunate and suffers with pre-existing conditions and above-average medical costs. And with this plan, you spend the same amount you would for Obamacare, BUT, even with those above-average medical costs, you'll end up with $3.5 million in your old age to spend however you like. And I know it works, because it's the plan I've been following so far, and I'm now 40 and have enough of a buffer saved up to deal with any eventuality. Thus my biggest gripe is NOT about ME losing insurance, since I'm already set financially. It's that all the young kids starting out now no longer have the options I did to get ahead, and will be beholden to insurance company dicks their whole life.


I am saying what insurance IS. I am using the legal, technical definitions found in dictionaries and encyclopedias. YOU are using the term wrong. I dare you to find one authoritative source that defines 'insurance' as covering routine purchases like toothbrushes. You may call it insurance, but it IS NOT INSURANCE. Insurance is legally and technically defined as a risk management service, explained Wikipedia: Insurance. What you have you may CALL it insurance, and the provider may CALL it insurance, but if you look up the definition of insurance in the dictionary or the encyclopedia, it is NOT insurance. It is something else.

We can debate the merits of this plan which you erroneously call "insurance", but it's pointless until you get your head around these concepts and understand what it is that you're talking about. As long as you keep misstating it, referring to it as insurance (ie risk management), when in fact there is no risk, it just shows you're confused. Like I said, you guys can't get your head around the definition of insurance, even though wikipedia and every encyclopedia explains it in plain english.

Maybe you should go to healthcare.gov, I bet you could get a cheaper plan with better coverage anyways Wink

What you should try to get around your head is that the definition is freaking irrelevant. I call it insurance because my insurance agency calls it insurance. Not confused, I just don't care about your silly little technicalities. All that matters to me is that I have the plan and I like what is covered under it. You can call it whatever you like, love, it makes no difference to me.

Hah! I've tried logging in a couple dozen times just to see what was there. I already have insurance through my work, but wanted to see what was on the exchange. I've created a login, but despite many times trying to log in to see what plans were available, I have not been able to do more than enter in my account login info which presents me a blank web page.

Now that one can preview plans on the site without logging in, the plan closest to my work plan costs 40% more than the monthly premium I and my company pays per employee, and the out of pockets costs are much more than my current plan. This is from the same company that provides my plan at work, which happens to be a non-profit coop and not an ævil rapacious for profit insurance company. My insurance provider has already indicated that the plan I get at work will see potential significant rate increases due mostly to the ACA. I sure hope it isn't 40%.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: