Friday, September 11, 2009

No American Should Have to Choose Between Health Insurance and Protein Powder or Alcohol


As an example of how affordable basic medical insurance plans can be, there are various individual and family Blue Cross Blue Shield plans available in Michigan (rates in other states will vary) starting at $173.18 per month for the Individual Care Blue Plus plan, $52.82 per month for the Flexible Blue II plan, and $49.30 per month for the Young Adult Blue plan.

Of course, the rates for these plans vary based on age, number of family members covered, deductibles, co-pays, procedures and services covered, annual out-of-pocket maximums, etc., and the rates above are the minimum monthly premiums. But for many Americans, maybe that is all they need is the most basic coverage available. As I have pointed out before, basic medical insurance is currently available right now for millions of Americans at about the same monthly cost of a cell phone.


At 9/11/2009 8:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No one should ever be forced to pay for health insurance. The blonde kid says he doesn't want to pay the price that his employer would take out of his paycheck. Shouldn't that be entirely up to the blonde kid (regardless of reason)?

The fact that, in all likelihood, the rest of us would be stuck with the medical bills if he drank himself into the emergency room is NOT his fault. That's our fault!

All of the people in this video are making a decision based on their calculated risk. I bet none of them have life insurance either. However, if one were to step off a curb at the wrong time, the buriel could be covered by the taxpayers. Does that represent enough of an undue burden that we should force these guys to pay for health insurance AND life insurance?

On the other extreme, should Bill Gates have to pay health insurance premiums? How about Warren Buffet? Even worse, what if these two chose a "Public Option"? Do the rest of us workers pay for their medical care just we do their Social Security benefits?

People exercising the liberty of making their own decisions and accepting their own risks are not an undue burden on society. Unfortuntely, the undue burden seems to be an increasingly instrusive and authoritan central government.

At 9/11/2009 10:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We as a society based upon christian values have decided that we will not leave people on the street to die. As a result someone has to pay for the care of the folks cited. As a result insurance mandates are needed unless we repeal the emergency coverage requirement.
The issue is that society is assuming some of the risks that these folks are taking.
As to Bill Gates etc we could do just like in auto insurance as an alternative deposit some amount with the state and self insure. Typically for auto insurance its 40k.

At 9/11/2009 11:31 AM, Anonymous Benny The Libertarian said...

Yeah, but in real life, a family of four pays about $1,000 a month in Los Angeles for health insurance.
A big problem is that we keep old people alive and lawyers sue everybody.
Oddly, the charge that Obama wanted "death bureaucrats" was the one part of his plan that would have appealed to me, if it had been true.
We should pull the plug quickly and aggressively on the terminally ill and aged. No one wants to say it.
Also, all medical disputes should be compelled into binding arbitration, No lawyers.
Right now, I have to buy insurance in a system in which keeps elderly alive, and dfeeds lawyers--but I have to pay for it through premiums.
Remember that Shaivo lady in Florida, the brain dead one with the tubes keeping her "alive." The Republicans made hay with that--in fact, she should have been buried decades before she was. We paid for it.
Unhappily, polticial deadlock means no progress on this issue.
10 years from now we still will keep people alive (who should be given a comfortable death quickly), and lawyers wil infest everything.
And a family of four will pay $2k a month for coverage.

At 9/11/2009 12:15 PM, Blogger like such as said...

Benny the Libertarian said: "We should pull the plug quickly and aggressively on the terminally ill and aged."

The problem that seems to arise whenever "society" tries to do anything is that the values of some dictate the options of everyone else.

I don't agree that "we" should pull the plug, but not because I think taxpayers should have to continue to keep people alive. To say that "we" should pull the plug on these seems to indicate that "we" should keep those on life support. The only thing that "we" should do is to stop speaking and thinking as though we belong to a homogeneous collective.

If "I" am concerned about the well-being of the aged or terminally ill, "I" should work hard to give them enough charity to survive. I shouldn't change the pronoun to "we" just so I can force other people to pay for it.

From Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson:

When "A" and "B" get together to solve "X's" problem, they inevitably turn to "C" to pay for it.

"It is C, the Forgotten Man, who is always called upon to stanch the politician's bleeding heart by paying for his vicarious generosity."

At 9/11/2009 2:15 PM, Anonymous Benny The Libertarian said...

Dear Like:
I say "we," as this decision has to be made as a society.
Really, do you want freelancers pulling the plug at will?
Do you want the "pull the plug" decision made by an entity that is justifiably concerned with profits?
No, there has to be state-sanctioned guidelines--it is a matter of life, and in our society a life-ending decision -- such as capital punishment -- has to be made along state guidelines.
But those guidelines should allow aggressive and early termination in the case of elderly and terminally ill, or in a case of a Shiavo (get the R-Party on board somehow).
In Kaiser Permanente, they pull the plug quickly. It can be done. In Europe, they pull the plug. They also spend one-half what we do on medical care, with like results.
Remember, Europe is composed of democracies, and the voters there are keeping national health insurance, despite the hysterical screaming of our pundits, who insist they know better.
In America, the lawyers and right-to-lifers, and you-must-try-to-live-as long-as-possible crowd delay death for weeks, even months. We pay for it, through premiums or taxes. I don't want to.
I want euthanasia applied early and aggressively, or I at least want to right to buy insurance in a pool of people who all agree never to use lawyers and to agree to euthanasia when a death panel says so.

At 9/11/2009 2:23 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Well if hospitals refuse FEDERAL money can they then refuse to treat who don't pay?

At 9/12/2009 5:05 PM, Blogger Indigo Red said...

Anyone can have the same health insurance plans the federal gov't employee has. They are covered by WellPoint which owns Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Anthem, Luminus, WellChoice and many other brand name insurance carriers.

I'm not associated with the health care industry or insurance companies. I'm not selling anything. I'm asking people to just look at the truth so easily accessible.

Go HERE, put in your zipcode, and you'll have hundreds of plans to choose from. Call the 800 number and an independent insurance broker will call you back within the hour.

I'm 55 yrs old, live in SoCAL with a pre-existing musculoskeletal condition, and was offerred a policy for $169.00 a month that covered the pre-exist without further examination. I wasn't pressured to buy anything and I didn't. I just wanted the information. The truth is out there.


Post a Comment

<< Home