Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Libloather

I just got a glimpse of what I’m looking at on covered.com It’s not good. It’s about a 100% increase overall.


4 posted on 10/19/2013 12:14:05 PM PDT by Gluteus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gluteus Maximus

It is all very well that some people may be able to now get coverage in their medical expenses, but for that one person covered better than before, ten people (or more) are going to suffer a decline in the amount of coverage, or sharp rise in the costs of whatever coverage they get, or both.

The quality of care delivered to EVERYBODY will decline, by the stress now placed on the system. There will be fewer professionals available to deliver those services, and now greater demand (read competition) for those services. When the scarcity of any commodity becomes a consideration, the price rises, or the delivery declines if the price is not allowed to rise.

And price controls on services delivered (but not on the premiums paid) are a big part of the “efficiencies” that the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010” was supposed to enforce. The other big part is the denial of services, regardless of the promises made, that are a de facto death sentence. Services delayed are services denied.

Mandates are not your friend. One size does not fit all.


23 posted on 10/19/2013 1:08:53 PM PDT by alloysteel (Men may not always be capable of evil, but they are always capble of incompetence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson