Changing from Mitt to Newt

techno900 · Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161

swchandler,

No I am not overlooking the insurance premium. Bottom line, if insurance companies are mandated to include specific coverages in their plans, they will raise the premiums to cover their costs, and you and I will pay for all those that want to use contraceptives via our increased premiums. Sorry, I don't like the mandates and I don't like the idea that everyone has to pay higher premiums for something that is elective and is available for free.

Yes, I am on Medicare, but I have contributed to it for over 40 years and continue to do so. Will I take more than my fair share? I don't know, but the majority of folks over 65 do. This is water under the bridge and there is little I can do to change it. Paying for my own coverage to make a point is dumb. Actually, I like the concept of Medicare, and I see the problems and realize that things will have to change to maintain its viability. On the other hand, the concept of "Medicare" or Obama care for EVERYONE just goes beyond comprehension. ONE huge difference between Medicare and Obama care - one is optional and one is mandated.

cardboardhead,

While I am not a genius, I understand the concept that for Obama care to work, we ALL have to contribute more to cover those that need the most services. If an insurance company wishes to insure people under this concept, they can do as they choose. We also have the option of choosing their product or not. With Obama care, we no longer have a choice, we MUST buy the product or "big brother" will be after us. Some of us just don't believe in this concept!

Dan,

You make a good point with the government mandates you listed. However, the things you list are mandated because they have a direct impact on the health and well being and accessibility of those using the facilities, etc. The only one that is out of line to me is the zero-deductible auto-glass coverage. That I haven't hear of it and it make no sense to me. I guess I haven't replaced a car window in some time.

Contraceptives, specifically birth control pills for the most part aren't related to health and safety. That's the difference between your examples and the issue at hand.

I am surprised that Obama care doesn't include coverage for vitamins for everyone too, since a proper diet is now such a big health issue. Maybe it should also require passing a fitness test each year for coverage to kick in? It could also include a body fat evaluation, too high and no coverage. Lots of good ideas for a healthier country and for preventative care, it would save a bundle overall. Plus just think of all the new government jobs that would be created. Let's not forget taxing cookies, ice cream, hamburgers, pizza, fries and candy. Of course I am being facetious, but one has to wonder................

boggsman1 · Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9120 Location: at a computer

Tax the hell out of soda, candy, fast foods, and all the other things that are causing heart disease and cancer deaths to soar . Its getting out of control, and is bankrupting America. Preventative, holistic, nutritional based medicine is the clear solution.

coboardhead · Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303

Calm down Boggsman! Not getting enough pow this year?

IMO, you are right. In 2050 the CDC is estimating that 1 in 3 adults could have type 2 diabetes (1 in 10 now).

Techno...if you don't believe contraceptives have anything to do with health consider an unplanned pregnancy for a woman with type 2 diabetes. You can buy a LOT of pills for those medical costs. "Obamacare" or not, we will all pay for that!

NickB · Joined: 30 Jun 2009 Posts: 510 Location: Alameda, CA

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

"Contraceptives, specifically birth control pills for the most part aren't related to health and safety."

techno900, while it might not change your mind, I would suggest that you read the following commentary in the LAT. As men, we don't always understand the health issues and the risks that women can face.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-potts-the-pill-revisited-20120220,0,4953131.story

boggsman1 · Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9120 Location: at a computer

coboardhead · Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303

Boggsman...Snow is a little thin here but good quality. Open offer...spring ski Silverton Mtn...

swchandler...excellent editorial...it is tough for any of us men to make a real argument on womens' health issues.

techno900 · Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161

coboardhead said:

techno900 · Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161

boggsman1,

I don't know if you were serious or not, but if you are, then you are a big advocate of "big brother" controlling our freedom and liberty. I enjoy some junk food from time to time, but I shouldn't have to pay extra because others lack self-control.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with junk food in moderation. Is it good for you? Emotionally, yes; health wise, no.

coboardhead · Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303

Techno

While I agree that overpopulation is a significant problem, and IMO, ultimately will drive all political decisions.

I don't believe that was Obama's goal.

1. The benefits to contraceptives are well defined.
2. Insurance companies do not like paying for sick babies.
3. Women elected Mr. Obama.