Say it with me...

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm sorry but that is silly.....coffee isn't expensive either.....should the government mandate that insurance provide me my morning coffee?.....if you add the cost of contraception into an insurance policy the company is simply going to add the cost of providing contraception to the premium.....whether you're 19 or 60......at 60 I'm already required by the federal government to pay for an insurance policy that provides me with maternity care and dental for my nonexistent minor children.....if you want contraceptives pay for them yourself........
Click to expand...

Does your coffee prevent cysts?
 
Dixie said:
You shouldn't confuse him. Auto insurance is a completely different animal than health insurance.

A better example here would be, should auto insurance be mandated to cover the cost of washing and waxing your car? Would that mandate raise or lower the cost of auto insurance? If your brain is like Drip Drip, of course you realize this would LOWER the cost! So we should actually mandate the auto insurance companies pay for this, and why stop there? We could mandate they pay for new 26" rims, lift kits, body kits, undercarriage lights, sub-woofers, amps, stereos... just think of all the money we could save?

Fucking idiot.
Click to expand...


An even better example, if we're using the auto insurance analogy (which isn't a good one, by the by) is whether the government should set basic minimum acceptable coverage, which is a better example since that's what governments actually do.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
An even better example, if we're using the auto insurance analogy (which isn't a good one, by the by) is whether the government should set basic minimum acceptable coverage, which is a better example since that's what governments actually do.
Click to expand...

There is a slight difference between "basic minimum acceptable" and "everything but the kitchen sink" coverage. In fact, we can do that NOW with insurance... If you want a higher level of coverage, you are free to purchase it at a higher premium! Why does it cost more? Because someone has to pay for all the extra things it covers! That's how business works, the more things you get in the way of benefits, the more costly and expensive it is... unless you live in some fucked up liberal fantasy, where rich people and corporations can be made to suffer by imposing more and more mandates on them.
 
Dixie said:
And I've already said that sometimes birth control pills are used to treat other ailments... you are attempting to score a point on something I have already conceded... now, I can't say I blame you, that's about the only possible way for YOU to appear to be 'winning' an argument with me. Again for the record, I am fully aware that birth control can be used to treat other things, and as I've stated, I have no problem with that.

My problem is with insurance companies being mandated to cover the cost of birth control. The problem I have is, it drives up the cost of premiums for everyone. Unless you are a retarded fuckwit like Drip Drip, then it actually saves them money to pay for your fucking birth control pills, according to him. Not sure how his math works on that, I guess the manufacturers of birth control pills are so happy for people to use their product, maybe they just provide the pills free of charge or something? I'm just really miffed at how the Dripster can come up with this crazy shit.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your statement of "Yes, RARE! If birth control was used more to treat illness and medical problems, it wouldn't be called "birth control pills" it would be called something else, and in rare cases, it would be used as birth control.... but that's not how it is, it's the other way around" was quite the admission that birth control pills are used as medication. It is so rare that only 1.5 million women do so.
 
Dixie said:
There is a slight difference between "basic minimum acceptable" and "everything but the kitchen sink" coverage. In fact, we can do that NOW with insurance... If you want a higher level of coverage, you are free to purchase it at a higher premium! Why does it cost more? Because someone has to pay for all the extra things it covers! That's how business works, the more things you get in the way of benefits, the more costly and expensive it is... unless you live in some fucked up liberal fantasy, where rich people and corporations can be made to suffer by imposing more and more mandates on them.
Click to expand...

So you don't see a problem with the fact that the only thing the conservatives seem to have a problem with is oral contraceptives? And just as an FYI, insurance companies routinely deny coverage of birth control pills, whether they are for preventing pregnancy or treating another medical condition.
 
Rana said:
Does your coffee prevent cysts?
Click to expand...

not all birth control is provided to prevent cysts.......prescriptions for other health needs can be covered without blanket coverage for birth control......we're intelligent enough to figure that out I think......
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
An even better example, if we're using the auto insurance analogy (which isn't a good one, by the by) is whether the government should set basic minimum acceptable coverage, which is a better example since that's what governments actually do.
Click to expand...

all right, then.....the issue is clearly whether birth control should be part of "basic minimum coverage"........should the basic minimum coverage for an 18 year old male include birth control?....or any man, for that matter?......should the basic minimum coverage for a woman past menopause include birth control?.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
not all birth control is provided to prevent cysts.......prescriptions for other health needs can be covered without blanket coverage for birth control......we're intelligent enough to figure that out I think......
Click to expand...

We are also intelligent enough not to make stupid statements like the government paying for coffee, you would think.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
all right, then.....the issue is clearly whether birth control should be part of "basic minimum coverage"........should the basic minimum coverage for an 18 year old male include birth control?....or any man, for that matter?......should the basic minimum coverage for a woman past menopause include birth control?.......
Click to expand...

I thought you said you were smart, you can figure it out. The eighteen year old man may not use it, but at some point he may be glad it is overed for his wife or girlfriend.

You may never use most procedures or medication offered by insurance, but then,again, if you need them, you will be glad they are overed.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
all right, then.....the issue is clearly whether birth control should be part of "basic minimum coverage"........should the basic minimum coverage for an 18 year old male include birth control?....or any man, for that matter?......should the basic minimum coverage for a woman past menopause include birth control?.......
Click to expand...


Basic minimum coverage should cover preventive care services for all people. Those preventive care services differ for different demographic groups. This stuff isn't all that tough.
 
Carlos Spicy Weiner said:
So, do you think auto premiums would be higher or lower if insurance wasn't mandated? I'm not saying that auto shouldn't be mandated, mind, or even that health shouldn't, but I honestly think we wouldn't be getting dicked around by auto insurance providers the way we are now, if it was an open marketplace.
Click to expand...
Absolutely they would be higher. Those covered by insurance would have to pay for all those not covered who have an accident and thus rates would go up. That's the same concept Dixie doesn't get about the universal mandate. By bringing about 30 more million people into the insurance loop it will lower the cost across the board.
 
Dixie said:
There is a slight difference between "basic minimum acceptable" and "everything but the kitchen sink" coverage. In fact, we can do that NOW with insurance... If you want a higher level of coverage, you are free to purchase it at a higher premium! Why does it cost more? Because someone has to pay for all the extra things it covers! That's how business works, the more things you get in the way of benefits, the more costly and expensive it is... unless you live in some fucked up liberal fantasy, where rich people and corporations can be made to suffer by imposing more and more mandates on them.
Click to expand...


Preventive care services are basic minimum coverage.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
not all birth control is provided to prevent cysts.......prescriptions for other health needs can be covered without blanket coverage for birth control......we're intelligent enough to figure that out I think......
Click to expand...
Jesus God that's a stupid response. Whats one of the leading cause of death and disability for young women?

What blows my mind is how you can't comprehend why women percieve you as a mysoginist.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
all right, then.....the issue is clearly whether birth control should be part of "basic minimum coverage"........should the basic minimum coverage for an 18 year old male include birth control?....or any man, for that matter?......should the basic minimum coverage for a woman past menopause include birth control?.......
Click to expand...
You fucking moron. When was the last time a male died or was disabled due to pregnancy?
 
WinterBorn said:
Yeah, your statement of "Yes, RARE! If birth control was used more to treat illness and medical problems, it wouldn't be called "birth control pills" it would be called something else, and in rare cases, it would be used as birth control.... but that's not how it is, it's the other way around" was quite the admission that birth control pills are used as medication. It is so rare that only 1.5 million women do so.
Click to expand...

So you want to run away from the actual argument here, and focus on some superfluous debate over how I worded something? Again... can't say that I blame you for that, you often find yourself chasing your tail when you argue with me, don't you? Well here's my bet... I bet that considerably MORE than 1.5 million women are prescribed birth control for the purpose of birth control! Therefore, it is MUCH MORE COMMON for birth control to be prescribed as a contraception, and not to treat other ailments. Prove me wrong, and I'll admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, you can have a big tall glass of STFU.
 
Derp Derp said:
Absolutely they would be higher. Those covered by insurance would have to pay for all those not covered who have an accident and thus rates would go up. That's the same concept Dixie doesn't get about the universal mandate. By bringing about 30 more million people into the insurance loop it will lower the cost across the board.
Click to expand...

The universal mandate is unconstitutional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top