Chances are that you or someone in your family has experienced something in their… 8


Chances are that you or someone in your family has experienced something in their medical history that an insurance company would consider a pre-existing condition. Until the passage of the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies were free deny individual coverage to anyone with such pre-existing conditions at any price.

The only way for people with pre-existing conditions to get insurance was through group coverage through an employer. Unfortunately the rising cost of insurance over the past several decades resulted in many companies, especially smaller companies cutting back and in many cases not offering insurance. 

That is the system that Republicans desperately want to retain. They want huge for-profit insurers to be able to charge more and more for less and less only to people that aren't likely to cost them anything. They don't care about ordinary lower and middle income families. Think about that when you go to the polls. 

Reshared post from +Steve Yelvington

The $23,800 bug bite. 

Embedded Link

An Entirely Other Day: Bugged
It’s just after midnight and I’m sitting in a hospital room in the pediatric unit next to my ten-year-old son. He’s asleep now, after a hard day of watching TV and playing games on the iPad and tellin…

Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.


Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

8 thoughts on “Chances are that you or someone in your family has experienced something in their…

  • Sam Abuelsamid

    +Walter Lounsbery what system is more inefficient and bureaucratic, private American health insurers that typically spend 15-20% or more of premium dollars on overhead to provide poorer overall health outcomes or single-payer systems that generally spend 3-5%, less overall and have healthier populations?

  • Sam Abuelsamid

    +Walter Lounsbery what system is more inefficient and bureaucratic, private American health insurers that typically spend 15-20% or more of premium dollars on overhead to provide poorer overall health outcomes or single-payer systems that generally spend 3-5%, less overall and have healthier populations?

  • Sam Abuelsamid

    Unfortunately the ACA falls so far short because it is largely the plan originally put forward by Republicans including the former governor of Massachusetts. The real solution that was stopped by Republicans would be a single payer system.  

    For all the criticism from the right of Medicare, it is far more efficient than any private insurance system in the US with about 3% of expenditures going to overhead and the rest to services. The problem with medicare is that it is restricted to the Americans that are most likely to need expensive medical care. If the system were made available to all Americans including healthy younger people, it could actually work as a single payer setup. 

  • Sam Abuelsamid

    Unfortunately the ACA falls so far short because it is largely the plan originally put forward by Republicans including the former governor of Massachusetts. The real solution that was stopped by Republicans would be a single payer system.  

    For all the criticism from the right of Medicare, it is far more efficient than any private insurance system in the US with about 3% of expenditures going to overhead and the rest to services. The problem with medicare is that it is restricted to the Americans that are most likely to need expensive medical care. If the system were made available to all Americans including healthy younger people, it could actually work as a single payer setup.