Monday, August 31, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
What, no petting zoo?
Well, I have officially survived another year. I plan to spend some time reflecting on this past year and post my conclusions later.
Nootch
Nootch
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Health Care Reform
So I keep hearing people say that if the current health care reform bills are passed that you will no longer be able to enroll in a private health insurance program unless it is part of a government exchange, or the public health insurance option. I thought this preposterous, so I started reading the bill for myself to see what the hell was going on. Then I found this:
SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
7(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
This is directly from H.R. 3200 as introduced in the house. So when Obama says we can keep our current coverage, does he mean we have freedom of choice to pursue health insurance? Or does that mean we can keep our current plan, but if we want a new one we must go through the government?
I am all for health care reform. I am in favor of a public option. The national health insurance exchange sounds like a good idea to me too. However, the above statements are very confusing. So I need some feedback. What is your opinion of the above referenced section? Am I missing the point somehow?
SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
7(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
This is directly from H.R. 3200 as introduced in the house. So when Obama says we can keep our current coverage, does he mean we have freedom of choice to pursue health insurance? Or does that mean we can keep our current plan, but if we want a new one we must go through the government?
I am all for health care reform. I am in favor of a public option. The national health insurance exchange sounds like a good idea to me too. However, the above statements are very confusing. So I need some feedback. What is your opinion of the above referenced section? Am I missing the point somehow?
Monday, August 17, 2009
Wiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!!!!!
Quick update on my Wii Fit progress: today's weight = 177lbs. Down 28lbs from January. Nootch
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Interesting Notion
A friend of mine from school yesterday pointed out a very interesting bit of information. In her opinion, insurance companies are evil. I laughed and agreed, saying that any system in which accountants make medical decisions is bound to be screwed beyond all reason. She quickly corrected me to say that insurance companies are, in fact, EVIL.
Her logic:
Insurance companies routinely deny coverage to people with easily controlled illnesses due to the possibility that the patient will develop a more significant illness in the future. In doing so they cause the denied patient suffering. By doing this, they increase their profit margin.
So insurance companies cause suffering for the sake of monetary gain.
Evil ain't it?
Her logic:
Insurance companies routinely deny coverage to people with easily controlled illnesses due to the possibility that the patient will develop a more significant illness in the future. In doing so they cause the denied patient suffering. By doing this, they increase their profit margin.
So insurance companies cause suffering for the sake of monetary gain.
Evil ain't it?
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)