Awful... Insurance companies have way too much power!

Well, this kinda speaks for itself. This is a big problem in the United States, one that I really wish someone would try to rectofy. Howard Dean would have tried if he had become President, but unfortunately, rarely do the ones with all the intellect and talent get into higher office.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...Insurance.aspx

If only the government would hit these companies with some strict federal guidelines that included caps on the premiums chargable, we could spread the cost around most effectively. Yeah, I realize that's Socialist, but I think that's the right (and only effective) way to do this. Denmark is a great example of a system like that done right.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Why is it always Denmark that's offered as the example we should emulate?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Why is it always Denmark that's offered as the example we should emulate?

Hmmm . . . Good question. For me, it's because Denmark is the one that's most easily identified as having this system, and most easily identified as having successfully implemented it without hurting people.

Or maybe Denmark is just that cool. Who knows? To me, all that really matters is that they're doing it and it works.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

While I usually don't agree with any socialist fix to a problem, the health care situation has gotten way out of hand. My premiums keep rising while the level of care keeps declining. Add a kid to the mix and you can see a huge percentage of your paycheck just going to insurance. I'm not sure if the blame lies with the insurance companies, the government or what. The government doesn't seem like a viable alternative to fix the health care problem because, well, name one thing the government does well and econimically?? That being said however, it seems that the government does need to step in and do something before the middle class becomes unable to afford any kind of health care.

Denmark, or most any other country, are poor examples because of their relativley small size and homogenous populations. Denmark doesn't have millions of illegal aliens bankrupting its health care system. It also doesn't have the huge inner city crime ridden slums bankrupting the health care system with gunshot victims and the other trappings of urban decay.

Howard Dean has high intellect??? Gimme a break!

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

The man DOES hold a Medical Degree, Wesker. As easy as it may be to blow off an undergrad degree, getting a doctorate from a major univerisity, prestigious private medical schools especially, isn't quite so simple.

I was speaking idiomatically.

There are lots of educated people who are loons. Dean has proved himself to be such on numerous occasions.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Wesker

There are lots of educated people who are loons. Dean has proved himself to be such on numerous occasions.

How so? All of Howard Dean's ideas are sound, and have been proven effective in his state governing. I can't find anything that he's done wrong (although I'm sure there are instances, as nobody is perfect). He was a great governor and would have been a great President.

His only mistake was letting that moron Al Sharpton get to him. You know what, though? People lying about my actions on national television like Sharpton did to Dean would piss me off, too. Sharpton played the race card and made Dean look bad directly from the lies and Dean's predictable reaction to said lies. The Democrats were afraid to nominate someone with fire and passion and went with that pussy John Kerry, thinking a mellow dude could take out the hawkish Bush. Clearly, they were wrong on that. Dean, I think, could have beaten Bush at his own game.

Most amazing jew boots

I disagree with Dean politically, but thats not the problem. Even many democrats are tired of Howard because he has chronic foot in mouth disease. He says too many off the cuff remarks without thinking of the consequences of what he says. A few that I remember are "We CAN'T win the war in Iraq" (emph mine), "Republicans have never done an honest days work in their lives", "The only way Republicans can get minorites in their audience is to have the hired help show up",....and the screaming, lets not forget the screaming.
Dean was governor of Vermont..hardly a bell weather as to how he'd do running the country. Under his leadership the DNC is having alot of trouble raising funds, so he's not even doing his current job very well.

Most amazing jew boots

Quote:

Even many democrats are tired of Howard because he has chronic foot in mouth disease. He says too many off the cuff remarks without thinking of the consequences of what he says. A few that I remember are "We CAN'T win the war in Iraq" (emph mine), "Republicans have never done an honest days work in their lives", "The only way Republicans can get minorites in their audience is to have the hired help show up",....and the screaming, lets not forget the screaming.
Dean was governor of Vermont..hardly a bell weather as to how he'd do running

It's called speaking frankly and I'd rather politicians speak like this than the double speak, politically correct, spin doctored, passive voiced garbage we usually get.
Way to miss the point altogethor anyway Wesker. Let's ignore the isue all togethor, it's obviouly nonsense anyway right I mean one of the proponents shouts.

Health insurance is bullshit anyway, you pay someone a lot of money just so that if you need help you wont pay much money? What the hell! And if it's allegedly in your interest to have insurance then how do these companies keep making massive profits?

Quote:

It also doesn't have the huge inner city crime ridden slums bankrupting the health care system with gunshot victims and the other trappings of urban decay.

Gee how'd that happen? Maybe you shoudl look at some other things Denmark does while you're at it.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Not exactly the issue that was initially presented but what do you guys think about this?

ht tp://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1992/1992rcs2-321/1992rcs2-321 .html
(Take out the spaces, I'm not allowed to post urls yet...)

It's basically explaining that insurance companies have the right to discriminate based on age, gender and marriage status. To me, a male, it does seem unfair. Is it truely okay to generalize that all males are worse drivers due to the statistics generated by other male drivers?
Using this logic, it seems logical to do things like (this is just a stereotypical example and is not meant to be offensive to anyone): Since it is statistically shown that asians smarter, they should instantly be given preference in university selections or since it is statistically shown that certain races are more prone to crime, we should instantly suspect members of that race in that area.

To me a more fair look at insurance would be equal initial rates and the drivers be given rates based on their records, merits and their driving. (Such as a sit-in driving session)

I dunno, I thought i'd just bring it up.

There's nowhere I can't reach.