# Republicans: Please Define Health Care Reform **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 21, 2010, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777 "2010-01-21T01:17:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/161 "2010-01-21T23:34:36Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > If that’s your attitude, why should anyone else care what you want or do not want? Does anyone owe you consideration? Have you done anything to merit consideration from anyone but your wife and son? > > I try to take your point of view and I arrive at the conclusion that cheaper health care would be good for me and mine, so it’s a good thing. This may be contrary to your ideology, but it’s your ideology, not mine, so it doesn’t matter. OK. Except that my ideology seems to be winning the issue at the moment. So I’m perfectly happy for you to disregard this based on the fact that it’s my ideology, as long as you don’t actually get to force the rest fo the country to cover your medical needs for you. ---
**Author:** ![Sateryn76](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@Sateryn76](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sateryn76)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/162 "2010-01-21T23:34:51Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > A pre-existing condition can be defined as almost anything. Have a wart removed and you have a pre-existing condition. Go for the most minor of operations and it becomes a pre-existing condition and a reason for health insurance companies to deny you access to care that you paid for. > > Sigh. This thread is every bit as depressing as I imagined it would be. I hope Obama finally grows some goddamned balls, tells the Republicans to fuck off with their obstructionist nonsense and creates a bill that lets us join the civilized world on this issue. So - you’re refusing to answer my simple question? Too tricky for you? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/163 "2010-01-21T23:35:16Z")
> [@Sateryn76](#): > > Please answer my question… > > I am not oblivious to the economic issues regarding pre-existing conditions. A lot of the defined conditions are bullshit, and the insurance industry needs to be taken to task. As a fiscal conservative, I have a lot of interest in the government funded catastrophic plans. But let’s not avoid the issue of what an individual’s duty to “the pool” is. > > I keep seeing it hammered that everyone has a duty to take care of everyone else - so then, doesn’t a person with a legitimate pre-existing condition owe a little more to that pool? Sure, I understand that a person with a pre-existing condition does cost more to the insurance company. And I can even understand increasing the cost to some extent (perhaps up to twice as much). But now it’s over ten times as expensive. They are simply pricing it out of people’s reach so those with pre-existing conditions just can’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/164 "2010-01-21T23:35:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I contend that a society which requires people to be responsible for themselves will ultimately be a better society that a society which does not. > > So I reject the idea the good of society is in contention with the good of the individual in this case. In effect, you are rejecting the concept of insurance, which spreads risk around a larger population base. I contend that it is quite possible for me to be **responsible** for my own health (eat well, exercise, get good preventative care), AND at the same time, share the cost of necessary medical services though a country-wide insurance plan. The fact that in doing so, the per-capita costs of health are lower than yours, while the health outcomes are the same or better is a bonus. ETA: Think of it this way. In Canada, we decided some time ago that healthcare was important enough that EVERYONE should be insured. Instead of forcing everyone to buy insurance from many private competing companies, we decided that it would be more efficient to essentially act as our own insurance company. (large organizations do this all the time; the won’t buy insurance for collision on fleet cars for example - why pay money to an insurance company when you can effectively self-insure) As our own insurance company, we can have more control over who is covered (everyone) and what is covered (decided by medical associations and doctors hired by health ministries) ---
**Author:** ![Sateryn76](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@Sateryn76](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sateryn76)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/165 "2010-01-21T23:38:39Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > In effect, you are rejecting the concept of insurance, which spreads risk around a larger population base. > > I contend that it is quite possible for me to be **responsible** for my own health (eat well, exercise, get good preventative care), AND at the same time, share the cost of necessary medical services though a country-wide insurance plan. > > The fact that in doing so, the per-capita costs of health are lower than yours, while the health outcomes are the same or better is a bonus. Not to speak for Bricker, but the difference that you seem to be missing is the \*voluntary \*part. Right now, you could buy your own insurance, get it through an employer, not have insurance, move to UAE, whatever… Insurance is a voluntary system, although the current system is crooked and broken. UHC is an involuntary system, which chokes the free market and forces citizens to act in a way that may be ethically, logically or economically stupid to them. That, to me , is a huge difference… ---
**Author:** ![Sateryn76](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@Sateryn76](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sateryn76)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/166 "2010-01-21T23:41:26Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Sure, I understand that a person with a pre-existing condition does cost more to the insurance company. And I can even understand increasing the cost to some extent (perhaps up to twice as much). But now it’s over ten times as expensive. They are simply pricing it out of people’s reach so those with pre-existing conditions just can’t get it. So, can we agree that while pre-exisiting conditions should be obligated to pay more, the insurance companies need to be regulated to the extent that the premiums are no more than twice the amount? Or something else short of UHC? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/167 "2010-01-21T23:43:35Z")
Is car insurance completely voluntary where you are? Can you drive around legally with no insurance whatsoever? This encapsulates a difference in the culture and ethos of our two countries. I understand that a large number of Americans are VERY opposed to being “told what to do” by the government. They want to do it their own way, even if this is detrimental to themselves and others. It’s a cultural, “individual before society” thing. It’s a “you can’t make me, I’ll do it the way I want to” thing. This is one of the many reasons why I don’t think you’ll ever solve this problem, and why you’ll continue to hemorrhage money into a medical system that does not work very efficiently. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/168 "2010-01-21T23:51:39Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > **Bricker** , since you believe my adult daughter should be responsible for her health care just like you are responsible for yours, does that mean you also are without insurance? If you do have insurance, do you feel that’s the best way to be responsible for your health care? If so, then would you agree that my daughter should also have insurance? If so, where should she get it from, since insurance companies refuse to sell it to her? The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) provides that a plan can look back only 6 months for a condition that was present before the start of coverage in a group health plan. So a preexisting condition exclusion can exist only if medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received during the 6 months prior to enrollment in the plan. Now, you said: > [@](#): > > For the record, she is not a minor, she is employed (by a small business that does not provide insurance), she does not use drugs, she has no chronic illness, nor is she physically or mentally disabled. She simply has “pre-existing conditions” that have not been a health factor since she was a child, but for which insurance companies have decided are too risky to provide individual health insurance. If she were to get a job with a company that offered her insurance, the HIPPA provision I mention above would insulate her from denial based on her preexisting condition. So that’s what I think she should do. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/169 "2010-01-21T23:57:37Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > A pre-existing condition can be defined as almost anything. Have a wart removed and you have a pre-existing condition. Go for the most minor of operations and it becomes a pre-existing condition and a reason for health insurance companies to deny you access to care that you paid for. > > Sigh. This thread is every bit as depressing as I imagined it would be. I hope Obama finally grows some goddamned balls, tells the Republicans to fuck off with their obstructionist nonsense and creates a bill that lets us join the civilized world on this issue. Have a wart removed and it’s a preexisting condition for six months, maximum. Is that what you meant to say? Or did you sort of shade it a little, to make it sound worse than it really is? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/170 "2010-01-21T23:59:31Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > In effect, you are rejecting the concept of insurance, which spreads risk around a larger population base. > > I contend that it is quite possible for me to be **responsible** for my own health (eat well, exercise, get good preventative care), AND at the same time, share the cost of necessary medical services though a country-wide insurance plan. Not at all. I’m rejecting being forced into a particular set of insurance choices. I have no problem with voluntarily choosing to share the risk with a group of similarly situated individuals. ---
**Author:** ![ManiacMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b782af/32.png) [@ManiacMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ManiacMan)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/171 "2010-01-22T00:04:26Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > That isn’t what happened with the Credit Card industry. > > Look, if costs are say 20% less (I’m making that number up, I’m not an insurance company) in South Dakota and you are able to sell across state lines what is going to happen? Every company will move there. Why? Because 20% off your operating costs means 20% to your profit margin. Every company that does not move to South Dakota must compete against a company that has lower costs. They will either move or be priced out of existence. > > For the consumer, it doesn’t matter, they have to take what they can get. So whatever shitty regulations South Dakota has become the new baseline. > > This has happened before, the exact same thing happened to Credit Cards. Credit cards are a…little different aren’t they? Those companies make money hand over fist…right? The profit margin for health insurance companies is something like 3%. I dont see how you can compare the two… ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/172 "2010-01-22T00:50:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Have a wart removed and it’s a preexisting condition for six months, maximum. > > Is that what you meant to say? > > Or did you sort of shade it a little, to make it sound worse than it really is? Which means that you could win your case, if you spent about as much on a lawyer as you would have on your care. Assuming, of course, that you haven’t signed away your right to a lawyer when you signed your policy. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/173 "2010-01-22T00:51:44Z")
Lotta cold hearted right wingers, IMO. The whole “FU, I’ve got mine” thing is despicable. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/174 "2010-01-22T00:56:04Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > Lotta cold hearted right wingers, IMO. > > The whole “FU, I’ve got mine” thing is despicable. After reading this thread THAT"S what you come away with? Amazing. ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/175 "2010-01-22T01:03:03Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > After reading this thread THAT"S what you come away with? Amazing. Explain to me how this isn’t true for some people in this thread? People are absolutely unwilling to accept anything that might be for the greater good if they don’t do it themselves. Perhaps if people would stop thinking about themselves and their ideologies, we could make some meaningful progress. :smack: What was I thinking? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/176 "2010-01-22T01:13:07Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > Explain to me how this isn’t true for some people in this thread? > > People are absolutely unwilling to accept anything that might be for the greater good if they don’t do it themselves. Perhaps if people would stop thinking about themselves and their ideologies, we could make some meaningful progress. > > :smack: What was I thinking? But as I alluded to earlier, what if someone believes that the greater good is better served by not overhauling our healthcare system so much? What if someone believes that it makes for a better society if people are expected to take care of themselves and their loved ones. Can you even entertain, or fathom, an alternate point of view here? I intend no snark here, seriously, but can you even contemplate why I, **Bricker** , and other’s might feel that might make for a better society, even though it is anathema to your way of thinking? I can argue your side of the fence. Can you do the same? It’s a serious, non-rhetorical question. Can you? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/177 "2010-01-22T01:32:48Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > What if someone believes that it makes for a better society if people are expected to take care of themselves and their loved ones. Someone can certainly believe that all that they want. Objective evidence, however, shows that you currently pay WAY too much as a % of GDP for healthcare that does not cover a large number of people. Your health outcomes do not reflect this greater amount of spending. These are facts. Your current situation does not seem to be “better society” where people take care of themselves. I’ve heard from people who would LIKE TO take care of themselves and get reasonably priced medical insurance, but are unable to do so. I’ve heard from people who THOUGHT they had looked after themselves and loved ones, only to be told their health insurance was cancelled. IT IS NOT WORKING. People are unable to take care of themselves and their loved ones under the current system. ETA the point of the thread as I remember is to look for ways that Republicans have suggested fixing the system. Some posters have provided some ideas. Others though have just said “people should look after themselves and their loved ones” as though people are not ALREADY TRYING TO DO THAT in the current system. It smacks of “let them eat cake” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/178 "2010-01-22T01:35:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK. > > Except that my ideology seems to be winning the issue at the moment. So I’m perfectly happy for you to disregard this based on the fact that it’s my ideology, as long as you don’t actually get to force the rest fo the country to cover your medical needs for you. That depends on how you define ‘winning the issue’. Your ideology results in the mess your country finds itself in right now, whereas mine does not. But you didn’t answer my question. Why should others act in your interest? At all? You expect to benefit from the shared services you and your neighbours have paid for, I’m sure; why? ---
**Author:** ![tacoloco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tacoloco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tacoloco)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/179 "2010-01-22T01:40:40Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But as I alluded to earlier, what if someone believes that the greater good is better served by not overhauling our healthcare system so much? What if someone believes that it makes for a better society if people are expected to take care of themselves and their loved ones. Can you even entertain, or fathom, an alternate point of view here? I intend no snark here, seriously, but can you even contemplate why I, **Bricker** , and other’s might feel that might make for a better society, even though it is anathema to your way of thinking? > > I can argue your side of the fence. Can you do the same? It’s a serious, non-rhetorical question. Can you? Oh, I have no doubt you think that. But it has been my experience that precious few people who oppose UHC or a national health system oppose it on an ideological basis, not on a greater good basis. And that ideology often comes down to “I don’t want to spend my money helping” whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2010, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777/180 "2010-01-22T01:47:37Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > Because as nearly as this American Dem can tell the Republican response is that of George W. Bush’s let them go to the emergency room when they’re sick variety. > > Thank you. Less than that actually. Your healthcare is your business, not the government’s. The government should have nothing to do with it beyond a regulatory capacity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-please-define-health-care-reform/525777.md?page=10)