Comments on: Earth to GOP: Define health-care “rationing”…rationally, please

By: MikeS

MikeS — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:11:16 +0000

Me too.

By: funny

funny — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:34:26 +0000

@ MikeS: E pur si muove! Don't know what that means? Look it up. I rest my case.

By: MikeS

MikeS — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:06:34 +0000

With that blanket party bashing, you’ve got one less reader. If you want to have constructive debate that’s fine, but simply saying things like “How did the Republican Party become the party of jerks, fools, and scoundrels?” does nothing to help the debate. I am a Republican and I’m not a jerk, fool or scoundrel. Neither side right now is having a constructive debate, all they want to do is beat the other side. Seem like you have fallen into the same kind of argument. Like I said, you’ve now got one less reader.

By: Miss M

Miss M — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:11 +0000

I’m fortunate enough to be covered by an employers plan now but I have had the dis-pleasure of shopping for an individual policy. I did get the policy, but they excluded many things (which I hadn’t sought treatment for in years) plus charged 3 times the quoted rate. If they are excluding so many items from coverage, why do they also have to charge more? We already have a bureaucrat deciding whether you get treatment or not, only they work for the insurance company and have the profit motive behind their decisions.

By: Barb

Barb — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:20:27 +0000

The regulators have so many rules on health insurance companies here, we have only 2-3 to pick from. Legislators think they are helping the insurance buying public by telling companies what they can’t do, but they are really hurting competition with all the rules. Companies leave the state and the few left can charge high rates and cherry pick who they want. It’s a horrible state to buy individual coverage. The fallback is the state risk pool with the higher rates. So, its better in AZ with the exclusions.

By: funny

funny — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:09:20 +0000

@ Barb” {gasp!} That’s dreadful! And here we thought Minnesota was a civilized place to live!!

By: Barb

Barb — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:01:53 +0000

At least in AZ they take you but exempt certain conditions. Here in MN they can no longer do that so they just deny you completely. The choice left is to go on the MN comprehensive plan and pay a 25% higher premium. Which is worse? Barb in MN

By: funny

funny — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:56:21 +0000

@ frugalscholar: The bizarre thing is that Goldwater almost looks liberal compared to the wacko fundamentalists in charge of the party now. He’d have been abhorred to see the degree of influence they’ve achieved and the crazed ideas they’ve inflicted on the country. While he was billed as “Mr. Conservative” for campaigning (pro and con) purposes, in real life he was more like a Libertarian. And to say those folks make the current faction in power look wacko is SAYIN’ something!

By: frugalscholar

frugalscholar — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:16:27 +0000

You go, girl. This is another “What’s the matter with Kansas” moment, I think, when the “common people” (like me) are being manipulated by the convergence of interests of the AMA, insurance companies, and lawyers. They are, I am sure, just sitting back and smirking–along with their well-paid lobbyists–at what has been unleashed.

Not sure about your paean to Barry Goldwater, however.