Assurance Quotes

7 Responses to “Q&A: Should we let the government make life & death decisions when they can’t handle Cash for Clunkers?”

1. danielle c says:

   July 18, 2010 at 10:52 pm

   they did handle cash for clunkers. i would rather have public ins then what i have. my husband works 48h a week as a paramedic. they dont provide ins. so i buy it for him. healthy 28 years old non smoker. over $100 a month. and nothing is covered he cant go to dr or anything cause our deductable is $3000. he got in an accident last year and we paid over $5000 cause the $3000 deductable then we have to pay $20% almost made us not able to pay the mortgage. cause after the accident he couldnt work for a couple months. if we had state ins could have gone to the dr for free or close to it. its the rich that complain. not the working poor. what about us. working but cant make ends meet doing all we can. paying our dues. educated people. no kids not collecting welfare………just no daddys money what about us?
2. tonalc2 says:

   July 18, 2010 at 11:48 pm

   What are you talking about? Cash for Clunkers was a success. The only reason it ended before they thought it would was because it was such a success that the funding for it ran out.
3. Yaya says:

   July 19, 2010 at 12:38 am

   Actually, the Cash for Clunkers was a huge success that enabled thousands of Americans to get a $4,500 credit on a new car, even if their old one was worth $500.

   Everyone knows that, except evidently U.

   Perhaps U should get UR info from more than one source….
4. Visee says:

   July 19, 2010 at 1:35 am

   A bit overly dramatic, aren’t we?

   But even allowing for your misguided hyperbole, Cash for Clunkers was a success.

   Like it or not, the government is already making life and death decisions. (military, FDA, capital punishment, FAA, medicare, et al).

   The question is, who would you rather decide whether a treatment of a health condition is covered, an objective trained medical professional, or a corporate “reviewer” whose bonuses, salary, and advancement is based on the number of cases that are denied coverage?
5. curious115 says:

   July 19, 2010 at 1:40 am

   No the insurance company gets to decide.
6. pachl@sbcglobal.net says:

   July 19, 2010 at 2:24 am

   I already know exactly how Universal Health Care will play out in the United States.

   1) Initially there will be euphoria for many people as people start receiving “free” medical care.

   2) Then as the system starts to get overloaded, money is not appropriated correctly, and shortages arise, people will begin to get angry.

   3) Around election time, Democrats will denounce stingy Republicans for the massive failures and deficiencies of the Socialist health care system. They will have teary-eyed ads, promising more, more, more… just vote Democratic!

   (But The Democrats actually will want the system to have chronic problems; if it worked ok, then how could they make further promises? If you have something you have it. The Dems will always hold out “better” health care as a carrot you can never quite reach.)

   4) The Republicans will always want to scrap the nighmarish bureaucracy, and will have a vested interest in seeing it fail. Hence, Socialized health care will be a disaster.

   Now look, we can pointlessly go through the charade that Universal Health Care is even possible in the United States, or we can get smart and change the system in another manner.

   Keep this in mind: the cost of Universal Health Care will be AT LEAST FOUR TIMES the initial estimates. America is the fattest nation on earth. Per capita we take something like eight times the amount of prescription pills, have far more out of wedlock babies, huge problems with drug abuse and alcoholism, diabetes, and dozens of others that simply are not pervasive problems in other countries.

   The cost of health care will be astronomical, believe me.
7. Rocky says:

   July 19, 2010 at 3:10 am

   The government can’t even manage its own freakin’ Cabinet!