The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct. 30, 2008
    Posts
    3,079

    Default

    I have a uterus. Should I be forced to pay for prostate or testicular cancer?

    Seriously? Is this your argument? Because it's just effed up.

    At some point, there is a cost to civilization and chipping in toward health care is a part of that. I'm not saying it's fun. I'm not saying it's fair. It's just a part of life. You can pay those dues to a private insurer or you can pay those dues in your taxes for single payor insurance. But you WILL pay those dues. So will all of us.
    Flip a coin. It's not what side lands that matters, but what side you were hoping for when the coin was still in the air.

    You call it boxed wine. I call it carboardeaux.



  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug. 28, 2006
    Posts
    9,954

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coyoteco View Post
    No. Obamacare is completely different. A private company can do what it wants. The free market can usually keep an industry within certain bounds. If it doesn't the government will be there to all-too-quickly regulate it. There is no one to regulate or control the government, so no, everything under Obamacare is unprecedented and bad.
    If the govenment controls the health care, it controls every aspect of your life, from whether you smoke, what you eat, whether you engage in "dangerous" activities, and ultimately the late-term/post-birth abortions and free birth control for which so many were willing to sacrifice so much, will be subject to the control of that govenment over which you gave near complete control over your life. Scary, scary stuff and no......it has never been done in America and that does not mean we were "behind" other nations, it means that we were far, far superior.
    Of coursse, without voter fraud, Obamacare would not have passed - and that is an indisputable fact.
    Oh my. Someone's been overindulging in the Konservative Kool-aid.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  3. #23

    Default

    BMI is not always an accurate gauge if someone is fat/over weight. I personally know of a 30 year old man with BMI that got flagged by someone sitting behind a computer screen. Problem is this man is a weight lifter with HUGE muscles.

    My fear is they would make it all about a number and not use any common sense. Typical modus operandi.



  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer08 View Post
    BMI is not always an accurate gauge if someone is fat/over weight. I personally know of a 30 year old man with BMI that got flagged by someone sitting behind a computer screen. Problem is this man is a weight lifter with HUGE muscles.

    My fear is they would make it all about a number and not use any common sense. Typical modus operandi.
    Yeah, the military hasn't quite caught up with this. My nephew is a SEAL. Those guys are beasts. Yet they have to sweat and purge and starve before weigh-ins so they don't get flagged for being overweight.
    http://www.tbhsa.com/index.html

    Originally Posted by JSwan
    I love feral children. They taste like chicken.



  5. #25
    Join Date
    May. 11, 2004
    Posts
    2,355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer08 View Post
    BMI is not always an accurate gauge if someone is fat/over weight. I personally know of a 30 year old man with BMI that got flagged by someone sitting behind a computer screen. Problem is this man is a weight lifter with HUGE muscles.

    My fear is they would make it all about a number and not use any common sense. Typical modus operandi.
    I have not done this reciently but several years ago I looked/took three different BMI's and each one came up with something different. One was the one done at the Drs office with a wheel thingy came u that I was at 125 perfect for my size a tad underweight but ok was the general transulation of it. The one military gave their members in their notebook/ trapper keeper type things said I was the perfect weight for my size 5'3" for a 13yo girl ) have not been 13 for over 50yrs... And finally the last one was at a Naval hospital that said I was obese at the same 125lbs..
    So I trust the BMI about as far as I could throw my horse...Which is correct I don't know and I don't care. If one "test" can have me going from the perfect weight of a 13yo girl to almost under weight to obese ....
    Friend of bar .ka



  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep. 13, 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danceronice View Post
    Insurance companies should be permitted to charge whatever they see fit--odds are a smoker will cost them more, they should pay more. Why should other customers who don't smoke subsidize the ones who do?

    Of course, I shouldn't have to pay for pre- and neo-natal care I'll never use, addiction treatment I will also never use, and a crapload of pediatric coverages that are completely useless because I don't have children, and "thanks" to the "Affordable" care act I have to pay for those....
    Just want to make the point that we don't always know what we will need. My cousin, hard worker, no drugs, no drinking. Thinking he would never need addictions treatment either , I am positive. Then his house caught on fire. He was badly burned. Spent almost a yr in a burn unit. Now he IS in need of addiction treatment. You can not spend that long on morphine and not become addicted. Nothing he planned on for sure. Nothing he could prevent. We do not always know what we will need.



  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb. 8, 2008
    Location
    Delaware Valley
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    (1) This isn't new or unique to Obamacare. (2) It's a GREAT idea. (3) A smoker in my state who smokes one pack a day is already spending about $3000 a year on smoking.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct. 28, 2007
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    4,037

    Default

    The us statistics on birth are skewed by the pregnant women who come here to give birth and had no neonatal care and the fact that advances in medicine allow many more unviable pregnancies come to term plus infertility treatments.
    Sure, it's fine to allow people to charge more for smokers.
    Now, how about charging more for those who engage in risky sexual practices, multiple sex partners, stds, unprotected gay sex and multiple abortions, skydiving, motorcycle riding, horse back riding, type II diabetes and rock climbing
    And let's not forget the newly legalized pot smoking (Colorado) - smoking without filters.



  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr. 9, 2008
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    How about adding "riders" (pun intended) to insurance policies for people who participate in dangerous sports, eg., horseback riding.
    Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
    Alfred A. Montapert



  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct. 13, 2010
    Posts
    152

    Default

    Why should paying for health insurance be any different from other types of insurance? Car insurance is based on your driving record, the safety of the car you drive, your age, your sex etc. etc. Home insurance is based on the value of your house, whether you have a pit bull, what kind of neighborhood you live in. If you smoke, if you are morbidly obese, even if you participate in high risk activities, why shouldn't you pay more? It's about taking responsibility for yourself. Smoking kills 1 out of 3 people who do it. It's like playing Russian roulette with two bullets in the chamber. We all have the information now. If you had any idea the amount of money that the end stage COPD patient is spending in the last years of their life you would be astounded.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jan. 28, 2013
    Location
    Southeastern US
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Your nephew is unusual for a SEAL, MyGiantPony. At least from my experience. Most SEALs I met during the war were wiry, smallish guys. Our ship supported their operations in Iraq and I met them during supply trips. They were haggard, scruffy looking, tough, wiry types, mostly. Not glamour, no showing off. They are most effective when you have no clue who they are. There are plenty of loud, brassy types at bars in both Norfolk and San Diego who claim to be SEALs....but they aren't.

    The biggest concern primary care physicians have, my hubby included, is the way the government is set to 'punish' doctors whose patients don't lose weight or control their blood pressure, stop smoking, etc.... The success of the doctor to change behavior will be monitored and they will actually lose money if patients fail to take better care of themselves. This could encourage some doctors to fire patients who don't comply (a doctor can fire a patient or vice versa). What about all those patients who can't find a doctor because their doctors won't get paid by taking them on? Do we want our health care managed that way? Many so called 'difficult' patients are so because of depression, anxiety, or personal circumstances. It doesn't seem ethitcal to drive a potential wedge between them and their doctor by punishing their doctor for not getting results quickly enough.



  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb. 24, 2005
    Posts
    2,211

    Default

    First, you say that it is everyone's responsibility as an adult in a civilized society to share in the health care of others, but then you say that you want to only share in the health care of others who do only that of which you approve. If they smoke, you don't want to share the cost. If they engage in risky sex, you want to share the cost. Your moral values (or what the press tells you to think) determine what you are willing to pay for and that means that you want to impose your moral values on everyone else in society: Tobacco is bad, promiscuous sex is good; Overweight is a personal fault, drug abuse or alcoholism are an illnesses. You just want to give the govenment control over everyone thinking that you can control the government. For some inconceivable reason, you think that giving the government the power to make moral judgments means that your individual moral vision is the one that will be imposed on all other people. History will tell the rational person how wrong you are.
    The person who talked of drinking the koolaid is completely ignorant of what that means and is following the progressive talking point that was intended to confuse people who blindly follow them. Likewise, the person who talked again of Bush rather than facing the fact that Obamacare was passed by the vote of a senator who was elected by clear, and undeniable, fraud. Again, blind following of a talking point.


    3 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Health Insurance Huh?
    By 2DogsFarm in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 2, 2012, 05:38 PM
  2. PSA re health insurance
    By SGray in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Nov. 1, 2012, 10:10 AM
  3. Living with No Health Insurance
    By Isabeau Z Solace in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: Jul. 5, 2011, 01:02 PM
  4. Health Insurance---Update, I got insurance,
    By MunchingonHay in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: Apr. 22, 2011, 10:37 AM
  5. Who do you use for Equine Health Insurance?
    By Equine Adhesive in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jun. 2, 2010, 11:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness