Pre-existing Conditions=Discrimination=Good Thing

One of the complaints about our current healthcare system in the country (I have plenty of mine own) is that insurance companies discriminate. They do this by not allowing individuals with pre-existing conditions to have immediate healthcare coverage. This has led to the President to push for a Public Option (which will lead to universal healthcare and more than likely a single paying system) for government paid (taxpayer paid) insurance plans. This argument has been met with very little resistance on the part of other politicians and individuals. Yes healthcare overhaul has met a lot of resistance but this destructive language against insurance companies for discriminating has not been met with resistance. Why?

Most Americans do not love ture freedom and independence. Americans today hear a President say something that sounds kind and compassionate and they just love it and never give it much thought. But God forbid we actually listen to him and force insurance companies to not be allowed to discriminate on these conditions. This is one of the most anti-freedom statements a person can make. Lets face it, why should I be responsible to pay for or more importantly why should an insurance company not be allowed to choose who they want to insure and not. Since when should government have the right to deny a private company to choose who they work with and don't. The sad thing is that we have come so far left in this country that no one even gives it thought. If a person with pre-existing conditions is given insurance due to government forcing the insurance company to undertake that risk, those costs will simply be spread out throughout the pool of other people who have insurance. In other words, we without pre-existing conditions will be forced to pay for those with those conditions.

A company should be allowed to charge what they want to whom they want if that person is in agreement on receiving health insurance from that company. That company should also be allowed to not insure a person if they feel it is too much of a risk. The Solution is to allow people to pay different amounts for their insurance based on the agreement with that insurance company. If a person who smokes a pack a day, drinks a pack a day, and is 80 pounds over weight comes in and wants insurance, they should be allowed. That company should also be allowed to charge that person what they want including more than the non-drinking, non-smoking, and healthy person. The healthy person does not cost that company as much so they should not be forced to pay as much. This will also motivate people to take care of themselves as it could save them thousands in premiums each year. No more fat police just make people pay for what they cost. When you spread it out, there is no motivation to conserve and in this case be healthy.

If that person is not able to afford insurance just as older people might not be able to afford it because it is more expensive with the obvious more costs, then private companies such as churches should be allowed to help them afford their insurance. There are many other reforms we can make now that can fix many of these problems and in fact make health insurance cheaper. The answer is not a communist-dictator like idea of forcing people to pay and take care of other people whether the person is an individual or a company that would rather not insure them. Where have our freedoms gone? More importantly, where has our common sense gone where people object to this in the first place?