.jpg)
Posted on 07/29/2009 3:36:49 AM PDT by MartinaMisc
IMAGINE the sort of car you’d drive if government regulations made it illegal to sell any automobile that didn’t feature 380-horsepower direct-injection V6 engines, computer-controlled electric power steering, eight-speed automatic transmission, four-wheel-drive, automatic climate control, “smart key’’ technology, touch-screen navigation, backup cameras, LED headlights, acoustic glass, surround-sound stereo, and leather seat stitching.
If those were the minimum requirements every car had to meet before it could be sold, would you commute to and from work every day in a Lexus LS 460 or some other luxury vehicle? Well, you might, if the steep price wasn’t an obstacle. But it’s more likely you wouldn’t be driving at all. If the government barred you from buying anything but a high-end car, you’d probably have no choice but to rely on the bus or subway, or to find a job closer to home.
What is true of transportation is true of everything else: Increase the number of amenities that a product or service must include, and more consumers will be unable to pay for that product or service.
That is why one of the simplest strategies for making health insurance more affordable is to reduce the minimum number of benefits that insurers are required to cover.
In every state in the union, legislators and regulators drive up the cost of healthcare by making insurance policies more comprehensive. Rather than allow the free market to determine which medical services health plans will cover, states force consumers to pay for an array of covered benefits they may not need or want. For example, 45 states require insurance policies to include treatment for alcoholism and 34 mandate coverage of drug abuse treatment. Contraceptives are covered in 31 states, as are hairpieces in 10 states, and in-vitro fertilization in 13 states.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
This must be the WH talking point.
Comparing something as intrinsic to one’s health and wellbeing to a consumer product akin to a coach handbag vs. gucci vs. a knockoff is bogus.
"OBEY US! Take this pain pill, lie down, shut up and DIE!"
Lowering the bar for Obama.
They will claim success!
Got cancer?
Get a band-aid.
Need a coronary bypass?
Get a band-aid.
Need a kidney?
Get a band-aid.
Obamacare is a huge success! After all, we can’t afford a Lexus.
Strangely, I do not see the universal mandates for abortion...
I think the general point he was making about how health care insurance plans could be more affordable if they didn’t have so many ‘mandatory’ inclusions is a good one. If you are young and all you want is to insure yourself against a catastrophic illness, you should have that option. If you want to save money by getting a plan that doesn’t cover hair transplants and mandates that you use generics when available, that should be your choice as well. On the other hand, if you want a plan with all the bells and whistles, that should be available too. Let the consumer make the choice, and ensure that there are many options.
The answer is yes; SINCE, not IF, Lexus Healthcare is good enough for THEM, which it is because it is WRITTEN IN THE BILL, then it is good enough for ALL OF US! They can try but they can not have it two ways, if it is good enough for them then Lexus Healthcare is good enough for the masses!
More the question, do we need the Boston Globe?
These policies are and have been available for a long time.
Yes, and they should continue to be IMO. A good ‘catastrophic’ plan that would allow you to go anywhere and choose your doctor in the case of a life threatening illness, whereas you pay out of pocket for routine visits, is a good option.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.