Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Seems to me that the answer is to revamp the system so that coverage isn't tied to employment. Of course, to do so would require Obama to look into something McCain proposed -- tax credit for the purchase of a health insurance policy.
You're missing the point. Previous insurer received premiums to cover a defined set of risks over a defined period of time. Paying premiums at one point in your life doesn't mean you're always entitled to coverage.
The answer is to disconnect health insurance from employment, offer a tax credit that makes it more affordable, and then let the patient purchase the coverage that they need/want.
After all, if a person chooses not to purchase coverage because they want to try and save money, that ought to be their choice, too.
|
the insurer is not obligated to continue coverage, and the reality is they don't. having thousands of individual policies is not as cost effective as insuring a group of people.
that's the idea behind the insurance marketplace, the government sponsored plan or the co-op.
health insurance has been gradually disconnected from employment for a few decades, which has resulted in more and more people being uninsured.
the issue with people not being insured is they become a burden when they get ill, they go to public facilities to get treatment, which of course isn't free, it is a cost that is borne by a few (here it's property owners).
the system should mandate coverage imo.