BoiJen
Posts: 2608
Joined: 3/7/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Archer I'm not against covering folks who have conditions, I'm against calling it insurance and treating it as something entirely different. Every Other Type of Insurance covers you for UNEXPECTED and extraordinary loss. Only when it's Health Insurance do we expect it to cover regular expected doctor visits, and health expenses that are regular and recurring Health insurance companies give us the option of getting them to subsidize our doctor's visits. You pay x amount into the premium monthly and you'll get a y amount off from the doctor's visit cost. Ma'am recently found that one insurance company is willing to insure a person with a pre-existing condition so long as it's dormant. Meaning, they are on a probationary trial of insurance for 1 year. If at any point in time during that year, the person needs treatment for the pre-existing condition, the company may choose to drop the client. If after 1 year, there have been no instances of needing treatment for the pre-existing condition, then the insurance company will take the client on as if they had no previous medical history with the condition. What this means is that individuals who have been in remission from cancer or are carriers of HIV (asymptomatic), for example, may actually be able to afford health insurance at a rate similar to "healthy" individuals. If an individual company can cover this type of plan, why can't our government expect other companies to able to do so as well if it benefits the health status of the nation at large? Just some food for thought.... See you next month. In Leather, boi
_____________________________
Clips of MsKitty doin' stuff to me. Support the fan club, buy a clip today.
|