It is also the lynchpin for single-payer, government-run healthcare
If insurance companies were to be required to cover people with pre-existing conditions, who would want to pay for insurance when they know it is not necessary, since they can just wait until they need it and buy it then? This would end the insurance industry as we know it.
Insurance actuaries work extremely hard calculating risk, marketability, competitiveness and projected profitability. After all, insurers are a business like any other whose actual purpose is to make a profit. It is a marvelous industry that provides an incredible service to its insured customers by transferring risk to their plans to provide the umbrella of safety when needed for a reasonable (competitive) fee. The competitive part of it is what makes it a real value to those in need of their services.
So this great all-inclusive insurance is called Single Pay. Heard that before? Been hearing that a lot lately? It is what happens directly as a result of wanting Pre-Existing Conditions covered for free. Welcome to the United States of Socialism.
There are plans and ‘proposed plans’ to offer coverage for pre-existing conditions at a premium cost which it should be. But what is being drummed up lately, with even, I am sorry to have to acknowledge, President Trump being taken in, is the acceptance by many Americans reacting to the socialist left and deep state RINO’s appealing drumbeat being whipped up by their supportive comrades in the fake news big media for everyone to be covered for everything with pre-existing conditions.
Again, why would you waste a lot of money on monthly premiums for coverage that is not necessary, because you will have guaranteed coverage if the time arises that you need it? Insurance companies disappear, to perhaps remain in place only as local administrators for the all-knowing all controlling government. Bought any postage stamps lately?
The Poor and the Indigent
But for the grace of God there go we, the poor and the indigent. Therein, does lie a vexing problem with no easy answers. Their plight however, is being exploited by socialist left and deep state RINO’s to take us into single pay. Hospitals and many civic organizations and churches, however, do render some remarkable financial assistance to this most heart wrenching social problem.
Here are some thought-provoking articles on the subject:
THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION: GUARANTEED RENEWABILITY AND EQUITABLE TAX TREATMENT: “Moreover, this market-oriented arrangement would not bring about the negative side effects associated with the regulatory arrangements, such as the deadweight loss of taxation, regulatory capture, or higher unemployment. That said, a transition to this market-oriented arrangement would likely have to be coupled with high-risk-pool coverage for those who already have pre-existing conditions, but the need for these high-risk pools would decline over time.”
THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION: SAFETY, SIMPLICITY, AND TRANSPARENCY: “We ought to focus on protecting people from the risk we know they face—catastrophic medical bills—by deploying our endless talent for innovation through markets rather than our decidedly lesser talent for creating and managing massive regulatory bureaucracies.”
THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION: TOP EXPERTS PRESCRIBE BETTER PATHS FORWARD: “In the end, however, Robert Graboyes’s observation bears emphasis: our national discussion about healthcare has been “mired in a furious, partisan debate over how to distribute fixed stocks of resources” which, no matter how it is decided, can never please all the participants. Indeed, the ongoing debates over such particulars as guaranteed issue, community rating, and even the general subject of covering pre-existing conditions are essentially arguments about how to distribute benefits and burdens assuming a fixed supply of healthcare services. Yet Graboyes also observes that today “residents of the humblest villages in the developing world carry phones more powerful than 1980s supercomputers,” a distributive achievement paradoxically made possible by prioritizing innovation over distribution. To the extent that national healthcare policies focus narrowly on redistributive questions rather than on improvements in healthcare quality, they will fail to fulfill Americans’ healthcare desires. Any decisions we make to protect those facing expensive health conditions must not have the effect of constraining the rate of broader healthcare quality improvements. This may be the best reason of all for replacing an overly prescriptive comprehensive coverage mandate with an alternative approach that fosters the development of a vibrant healthcare market.”
What is most important to keep in mind about this most important topic being exploited today is this:
Remember Saull Alinsky’s reported Doctrine? 8 Steps to Topple a Nation and Create a Socialist State:
“1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people”
Everyone has all too fresh a memory of the deceit and disaster of ObamaCare which was so close to taking us to a really bad place like Canada’s expensive socialistic Health Care system, $5,789 per person annually and very slow wait times. From the American Institute of Medical Services and Education’s article in March 2018, ‘US vs Canadian Healthcare: What Are the Differences?’ “From the time it takes to receive a referral by a GP – to receiving treatment – Canadians wait an average of 21.2 weeks to receive treatment from a specialist. MRI procedures could take up to 10.8 weeks. Some argue that the wait times are far too long.”
ObamaCare absolutely needs a good killing not replacing. No tentacles left whatsoever. We had the best healthcare in the world and we need to get back to a totally free market competitive system that can flourish in technology, services and cost.