Skip to content

Insurance is a product, offered by a business and purchased by consumers.

March 22, 2010

Insurance companies should not be forced by the government to cover specific items.

Insurance should cover treatments that prevent death and disability.  Not IVF.  Not Viagra.  Nothing cosmetic.

I include the government funded health care in Canada as “insurance”.  Why should I have to pay for what other people chose to get?  Why should people who choose to not try IVF pay for the procedure for other couples?  Being infertile is not a sickness.  It is a condition but it does not need to be treated to insure the health of the infertile individual.

And Viagra?  No one needs Viagra.  They may want it and they might like to have it but no one will die if they are denied access to it.

This health care bill in the US has my head positively spinning.

How can the government force a company to insure someone who is already sick?  WTF?!  That’s like getting home insurance after your house is already on fire.

Since when can the US government tell people that they HAVE to buy a product?

I am thankful for those states which are already prepared to challenge the federal government for constitutional violations of states’ rights.  That plus the reconciliation process are the only defenses we have against this bill until a couple of elections pass.

One Comment leave one →
  1. March 28, 2010 3:42 pm

    I and most of my country find it extraordinary that so many Americans seem to be opposed to some kind of universal health care.

    Over here (in the UK) some things like cosmetic surgery are not provided for free. We have an organisation that researches into which treatments are value for money, and those are the treatments that our taxes are spent on, universally and for free. As a result our life expectancy is higher than the American life expectancy, but the amount of money spent per person on health care from all sources is far lower than that spent per person in the US.

    I’m happy that my taxes should be spent on paying to treat people who were born with an illness or on treating people who would never be able to afford to pay for it privately if they had to. I just can’t understand how on something as basically humanitarian as hospital treatment anyone who is a ‘have’ is happy to live in a country where there are ‘have-nots’.

    But I digress, you make an interesting point about the insurance companies. I’m assuming that the legislation is being drafted to include private insurance companies in the whole process because (even though to me it makes sense) if you simply collected taxes and had the government run a universal health service, Americans would all die of apoplexy at what they perceive to be some terrible reds under the bed, commie system of government.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: